Concentrated on the History of Russian Political Culture embedded in the global context,
Also check these bibliographies =
War and Revolution (2) Energy & Politics (3) Some Films of Use (4) Political culture table (5) GLOS  (6) ETC
The metaphor "BONEYARD" comes from the game dominoes
in which players select pipped tiles from a shuffled and face-down array called the boneyard.
Metaphorical reference to the graveyard might be agreeable to the historian

Table of Contents

  1. Primary Sources (many primary-source anthologies [>prm.sbk] are registered in GLOS)
  2. Secondary Sources -- [ID]

Here are suggestions about how to locate a bibliographical entry
in the UO KNIGHT Library electronic catalog
and in just about any library's electronic card catalog

Let's start with the most annoying feature of SAC bibliographies. They are saturated with three-stroke coded tags
Codes are often defined but are nonetheless a constant source of mystery to the uninitiated

Truth is, these coded flags are of great use =
*--In honor of Paul Lutus, the first code to master is "F/", which means "FIND" [ID]. For example =
*--Entries on World War One = F/WW1/ [ Origins of = F/WW1a/ | Course of = F/WW1b/ | Consequences of = F/WW1c/ ]
*--Entries on WW1 Western Front, F/ | On Eastern Front, F/ | On Southern Front,  F/ | On domestic or home fronts, F/
*--Entries on war and revolution = F/wrx&REV/ here and in the bibliography devoted to revolution
*--Entries on energy and politics = F/nrg/ here and in the bibliography devoted to energy and politics
*--Some frequently cited titles, EG=reference works, anthologies, and leading academic journals, are given three-stroke acronyms and are linked to GLOS
*--Many titles here in bbl.BYD are given more elaborate acronyms which follow a pipe and a right angle-bracket ["|>"], then the author's last name, then a period, and then a capitalized keyword from the publication title, EG= |>Rogan.FALL

SAC bibliographic entries are generally in English. Some entries include transliterated Russian text

Many bibliographical entries here -- particularly entries of primary documentation -- follow a standard KIMBALL FILES data-template which supplies systematic information beyond that ordinarily found in standard bibliographical entries. That data-template might include all or some of the following fields =

<>FamilyName,GivenName SecondGivenName (or patronymic for Russians)|>Coded Abbreviation for names
| a{ Birth Date, sometimes with the year indicated by the last three numbers, EG= 1862 becomes 862
Months = ja fe mr ap my je jy au se oc no de. Days always in two strokes, EG= je02
}b{ = Birth Place
}c{ = Death Place
}d{ = Death Cause
}e{ = Death Date
}n{ = ETC| Here certain categorical or subject codes are used to identify major concerns of the "author", EG= the three-stroke coded tags above
}o{ = Major brief ID
}f{ = Parents
}g{ = Siblings
}h{ = Nationality (IE=ethnicity)
}i{ = Religion
}j{ = Economic Status
}k{ = Social estate [soslovie]= dxv (clergy) dvr (aristocracy) kpq (merchantry) mww (petty urbanites) krx (peasantry)
}l{ = Education
}m{ = Career [Official associations, appointment, jobs]
}p{ = Voluntary Associations
}q{ = Chronology
}r{ = Bibliography of titles BY person on top line | Naturally, in a bibliography this is the major subfield
}s{ = Bibliography of titles ABOUT person on top line
}t{ = Places searched with no results ABOUT person on top line
}8{ = ETC}

Primary Sources

<>Akcakam,Taner|>Akçakam,T et al.,eds|_Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials|>JaI| ((8x11 prm.sbk ARM lwx.prs wrx.crm wrx&REV))

<>Angell,Norman| a{}n{WW1a psx vs.wrx}o{
*:|_The_Great Illusion: A Study of the Relation of Military Power of Nations to their Economic and Social Advantage|>Angell.GREAT| ((E-TXT))
*1914au01:The [London] Times| "Dominance of Russia or Germany" and " 'Scholars' protest against war with Germany"| ((W&P,1:3-4))

<>Amalrik,Andrei| a{938}e{980}n{CWX dsn R&A}o{
*1970:|_Will the Soviet Union Survive until 1984
*1978:LND,Overseas Publication Interchange|_SSSR i zapad v odnoi lodke|
*1982:NYC|_Notes of a Revolutionary| ((hv8959.s65a4513))

<>Andreevskii,Ivan Efim|>AniIE| a{}n{}o{ |pst re.edc,prz pbl.hlt to help others,particularly the bdn
*1853:AIS#6| “Russkii narod i gosudarstvo” [rvw of Leshkov kng stt&pbl]
*1872:SPB|_Politseiskoe pravoΣ| 2vv| ((prm plc.lwx| (74:ed#2) freedom of qastnoi iniciativy [cvc.rgt] sodeistvo stt&pbl when prv.pzn’s strength not sufficient))
*1880:RSt#27:403-422| “Khod rasprostraneniia politicheskikh znanii v Rossii v 1855-1880 gg”| ((65:GU.cnp new powers, now existed 15y, & here are results =

  1. W/few exceptions RUS period.tpg has moderated plt tone
  2. Main plt trends, cnx & progressive, have been popularized
  3. Contest between these two still not given sufficient freedom, so results paltry, often taking form of pznal rancor
  4. SPB & MVA jrn~ lord over gbx bcs cnp more stifling there
  5. Weak gbx jrn~ stunt dev. of plt.knowledge even in SPB &MVA, create impression of episodic & accidental plt.clt
  6. gzt~ very weak; most esteemed & widely crc have sbx of no more than 25K
  7. svt jrn~ have only 100s of sbx, but they show slight beginnings of plt.clt
  8. Still, progressive plt.clt has played a role in support of stt.rfm~
  9. Almost no lwx.sud cases vs-jrn, mainly apx ddd; so this promises eventual growth of plt.jrn~
  10. jrn are succeeding, even with pathological developments; these best left to free press to correct [409-12] unv play role too, free unv bgn to show this promise with GvnAV as MNP || AniIE’s initial emphasis is edc for qin. “No takie sveduwwie lyudi stol’ je neobxodimy i na popriwwax deyatel’nosti organov samoupravleniya i soyuznogo stroya deistvuyuwwix parallel’no s pravitel’stvennymi organiami i razdelyayuwwimi s nimi trudy po dostijeniyu gosudarstvennyx celei.” Not just “parallel’no” but stt&pbl learning “vzaimodeistviya” [415 cvc.pbl] INX fdr cvc.pbl “...interesy gosudarstva mogut byt’ dostigaemy tol’ko pri suwwestvovanii samostoyatel’nogo mestnogo samoupravleniya, znayuwwogo mestnye potrebnosti, -- sami pravitel’stva, svoeyu gosudarstvennoyu vlastiyu, stali sozdavat’ v toi ili drugoi forme samoupravlyayuwwiesya politiqeskie tela, kotorym stali vveryat’ tu ili druguyu otrasl’ mestnogo upravleniya, ili i vse upravlenie mestnosti”. AniIE uses wrd “obshchina” in generic sense of community| Only with Zmv have we moved in this direction. Earlier slf.gvt was based on sSs principle [EG:dvr.mtg], or quickly decayed [EG: grd.dmx] Somehow vlg.sxd survived, then 1861 promises of enhancement; then Zmv| Zmv were given very narrow and limited ddd| 1st mtg~ of Zmv were too ambitious, but they tell much abt RUS plt.clt = Study Zmv mtg documents [and the VEO’s valuable Zemskii ezhegodnik] & see original instant understanding about the need for 2 things = scl~ & “sanitarnoe delo” [418] And what about grd.dmx? They too || Don’t forget “deyatel’nost’ organov soyuznogo stroya”, a mass of companies, union, associations have grown rapidly. Look just as rrd obx~, thier rpt~ not just ekn but plt too, plt.clt must grow for these to thrive. Ditto bnk~, stk.cmp~, slf-hlp mutual obx~| Finally svt.obx~, uqenye obx~, nauqnye obx~ in avc fields = EG:ekn, lwx [421] CONCLUSIONS = (1) P-1 dreamt of 3 things, and we are doing them = (a) tgt plt.scs (b) crc plt pbc~ (c) practical ddd of stt, obwwiny & soyuzy (2) A-2 rfm~ are strengthening all three of these (3) [cvc.pbl] See a great deal of sodeistvie ix vzaimnomu drug na druga vliyaniyu i vzaimnoi pomowwi” (4) Spread of plt.clt certain, but successes limited, so far (5) Further progress only w/real success of A-2’s rfm~, development of stt, obwwiny & soyuzy, “i torjestvo izstarinnyx politiqeskix naqal Russkoi zemli” [!? 422] (6) A-2 rfm~ are assured success & pbl will develop according to its natural cnx principles, but no one should be shocked at occasional setbacks bcs “politiqeskie istiny mogut delat’sya vse bol’wim i bol’wim dostoyaniem russkogo obwwestva” CF:blw rsp idl plt.clt

*1881:RSt#31:?? [source sd #2]| “Khod rasprostraneniia v russkom obshchestve politicheskikh znanii,1855-1880” [re.A-2’s Silver jubilee]
*1882:RSt#34:525-42| “Kniaz’ Aleksandr Arkadievich Suvorov”| ((prm vsp unv.rbx SvrAA))

<>Anet,Claude|>Anet=pseudonym| a{}n{}o{
*1917:LND|_Through the Russian revolution: Notes of an eyewitness, from 12th March-30th May [1917] ((UO| 252pp| 34 pix!))

<>Arbatov,Georgii A| a{}n{CWX irx R&A}o{
--|The Soviet Viewpoint| Dodd,Mead. Hamilton bks|

<>Bakunin,Mikhail|>BknM| a{}n{ }o{LOOP
Comprehensive index
*1867de:“Federalism, Socialism, and Anti-theologism” [TXT |_VSB,3:643-4]
*1868se01:Narodnoe delo#1 [People's Cause], “Our Program” [VSB,3:644] Excerpt =

We desire the complete intellectual, socioeconomic, and political emancipation of the people.

I. Intellectual freedom, because without it political and social freedom cannot be complete or lasting. Belief in God, belief in the immortality of the soul, and all kinds of idealism in general . . . on the one hand serve as an indispensable mainstay and justification for despotism, for all kinds of privilege, and for the exploitation of the people and on the other hand demoralize the people themselves, dividing them into two groups with mutually opposed aspirations and thereby depriving them of the energy required to win their natural rights and to build a fully free and happy life. From this it clearly follows that we are advocates of atheism and materialism.

II. The socioeconomic freedom of the people, without which any freedom would be a detestable and meaningless lie. The economic life of a people has always provided the cornerstone and true explanation of its political existence. All previous or currently existing political and civil organizations in the world have been maintained upon the following basic foundations: conquest, the right of property inheritance, the family rights of father and husband, and the sanctification of all these principles by religion; and all this taken together constitutes the essence of the state. The inevitable result of the entire state system has been and had to be the slavish subordination of the unskilled and ignorant majority to the so-called educated, exploiting minority. A state without political and legal privileges based upon economic privileges is unthinkable.

Desiring the true and complete liberation of the people [v.MPR], we seek (1) the abolition of the right of property inheritance, and (2) the equalization of women's rights, both political and socioeconomic, with those of men; we consequently desire the abolition of family rights and of marriage, both ecclesiastical and civil, which is inseparably connected w!th the right of inheritance.

We make two fundamental principles the basis of economic justice:
1. Land belongs only to those who cultivate it with their own hands-to agricultural communes.
2. Capital and all the implements of labor belong to the workers-to workers' associations.

III. The political organization of the future must be nothing other than a free federation of free workers, both in agriculture and in industrial artels (associations) in the factory.

Therefore, in the name of political freedom, we want first and foremost the complete destruction of the state; we want the eradication of the state system with all its ecclesiastical, political, bureaucratic (both military and civil), legal, academic, and financial and economic institutions.

We want complete freedom for all peoples now oppressed by the [Russian] Empire, with the right of complete self-determination on the basis of their own instincts, needs, and desires; so that by federating from the bottom up, those among them who wish to be members of the Russian nation could jointly create a truly free and happy society in a friendly and federal union with similar societies in Europe and throughout the world.

*1868:Catechism of a revolutionary (w/Nechaev) [TXT |_Edie,1:385-423]
*1871no:letter to “My Italian Friends” |_VSB,3:645
*1871:|_On the Paris Commune [TXT]
*1872: Texts on the struggle with Marx in the First International [TXT]
*1873:|_Statism and Anarchy [TXT] |_VSB,3:645-7
*1950:|_Marxism, Freedom and the State| [TXT] translated and edited with a biographical sketch by K. J. Kenafick| ((Writings combined w/o clear indication of original publication information))
*1964:LND,Free Press of Glencoe|_The_Political Philosophy of Bakunin: Scientific Anarchism| EBy G. P. Maximoff with a biographical sketch by Max Nettlau| [TXT excerpts]

<>Balakian|>Palakʻean,Grigoris| a{}b{ARM}e{1934}n{WW1b OTM.TRK ARM}o{Orlg dxv
*2009:NYC,Knopf|>Balakian.GOLGOTHA|_Armenian Golgotha : A memoir of the Armenian genocide, 1915-1918|
((8x11:56-73 covers 15ap24+ events
* 1914jy-1916ap: Life of an exile
*1914jy-1914oc: [?]
*1915ap24-1916fe: [arrest &] First deportation [with some 250 other intellectuals & leaders of Constantinople's Armenian community]
*--The second deportation
*1916fe-1916ap: Caravan of death to Der Zor
* 1916ap-1919ja: Life of a fugitive
*--In the tunnels of Amanos
*--In the tunnels of the Taurus Mountains
*1917ja-1918se: In Adana
kng cover says =  the most dramatic and comprehensive eyewitness account of the first modern genocide. [...] It was the beginning of the Ottoman Turkish government's systematic attempt to eliminate the Armenian people from Turkey [...The campaign] continued through World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, by which time more than a million Armenians had been annihilated and expunged from their historic homeland. For Grigoris Balakian, himself condemned, it was also the beginning of a four-year ordeal during which he would bear witness to a seemingly endless caravan of blood. Balakian sees his countrymen sent in carts, on donkeys, or on foot to face certain death in the desert of northern Syria. Many would not even survive the journey, suffering starvation, disease, mutilation, and rape, among other tortures, before being slaughtered en route. In these pages, he brings to life the words and deeds of survivors, foreign witnesses, and Turkish officials involved in the massacre process, and also of those few brave, righteous Turks who, with some of their German allies working for the Baghdad Railway, resisted orders calling for the death of the Armenians. Miraculously, Balakian manages to escape, and his flight--through forest and over mountain, in disguise as a railroad worker and then as a German soldier--is a suspenseful, harrowing odyssey that makes possible singular testimony

<>Barber,John,and Mark Harrison|_The_Soviet Home Front,1941-1945: A Social and Economic History of the USSR in World War II|*1991:Harlow: Longman| ((prm wrx WW2))

<>Baring,Maurice| a{874}e{945}n{trv RREV1 }o{
*1913:LND|_What I Saw in Russia| ((UO| 1905oc17:1907se; Narrative:212-381))
*1914:LND|Mainsprings of Russia| ((OWN))

<>Barker,Adele, et al|_The_Russia Reader: History, Culture, Politics|>Barker| ((UO| prm.sbk & ndr.sbk| ToC =
I: Icons and archetypes
The Scythians / Aleksandr Blok
On Russian distinctiveness and universality / Fyodor Dostoyevsky [DstF]
To Russia (March 1854) / Aleksei Khomiakov
Moscow and Petersburg, 1842 / Aleksandr Herzen
"Great Russians" and "Little Russians" / Andreas Kappeler
Bathing the Russian way, from folklore to the songs of Vladimir Vysotskii
A cosmopolitan project / Susan Buck-Morss
II: From Kyiv [Kiev] through Muscovy
The Igor tale / Anonymous
The Russian primary chronicle / Anonymous
Slavic Byzantium / George P. Fedotov
Russia through Arabian eyes / Ibn Fadlan
Rules for Russian households / Att. Monk Sylvestr
My early life / Ivan IV
III: Reform to revolution
The bronze horseman / Aleksandr Pushkin
Peter's social reforms / John Perry
Love and conquest / The correspondence of Catherine II and Grigory Potemkin
The War of 1812 / Leo N. Tolstoi
Description of the clergy in rural Russia / I.S. Belliustin [chx]
Emancipating the serfs / Petr Kropotkin
Classic Russian cooking / Joyce Toomre and Elena Molokhovets
The challenged gentry / Elizaveta Vodovozova
Dear Nicky, dear Sunny / The correspondence of Nicholas II and Empress Aleksandra
IV: Far pavilions : Siberia
Russia's conquest of Siberia / Basil Dmytryshyn, E.A.P. Crownhart-Vaughan, and Thomas Vaughan, editors and translators
Sibiriaks / Marie Czaplicka
Exile by administrative process / George Kennan
Science everywhere / Olʹga Marchuk
The big problems of little peoples / Aleksandr Pika and Boris Prokhorov
At the source / Vladimir Sangi
V: A changing countryside
The dacha / Faddei Bulgarin
Work done "out of respect" / Aleksandr Engelgardt
The mushroom hunt / Sofya Kovalevskaya
Progress and prosperity / Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace
Svetloyar : in a wild and holy place / Vladimir Korolenko
Searching for icons / Vladimir Soloukhin
The village of Posady / Lev Timofeev
VI: Near pavilions : the Caucasus
The Russian conquest of the Caucasus / John F. Baddeley [ndr]
Mtsyri / Mikhail Lermontov
Sandro of Chegem / Fazil Iskander
Chechnya, a brief explanation / Georgi Derluguian [ndr]
Evening prayers / Idris Bazorkin
VII: Revolution [WW1b RREV3]
The Communist Manifesto / Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
The background of revolution / Edward Hallett Carr [ndr]
Revolution and the front / Viktor Shklovsky [319-325] [GO]
Letters from the front / Olʹga Chaadaeva, compiler [326-330]
The withering away of the state / Vladimir Lenin (V.I. Ulianov)
Voices of revolution, 1917 / Mark Steinberg, editor [336-338| NB! 1917my12 re-Need for newspapers -- IE=The most advanced media of pbl information available (337-8), and NB! 1917de19 re-Soviet betrayal by WW1 truce, by selling Russia out to GRM]
Gedali / Isaac Babel
Two years among the peasants in Tambov Province / A. Okninsky
VIII: Building a new world from old
Make way for winged Eros / Aleksandra Kollontai
The bathhouse / Mikhail Zoshchenko
We : variant of a manifesto / Dziga Vertov
The travels of my brother Aleksei to the land of peasant utopia / Aleksandr Chaianov
Learning to labor / Anastasiia Bushueva
Stalin's forgotten Zion / Robert Weinberg
IX: Rising Stalinism
Lenin's "last testament" / Vladimir Lenin
The body and the shrine / Nina Tumarkin
Soviet literature : the richest in ideas / Andrei Zhdanov
Swell the harvest / Shock brigade of composers and poets
Dizzy with success / Joseph Stalin
The war against the peasantry, 1929-30 / Lynne Viola et al., editors
Collectivization 1931 / Ivan T. Tvardovskii
Anna's story / James Riordan, editor and translator
The proletariat's underground paradise / Irina Kokkinaki
X: The Great Terror
Bukharin 1936 / J. Arch Getty and Oleg V. Naumov, editors
Mass attack on the watershed / Maxim Gorky et al.
Requiem / Anna Akhmatova
Memories and biographies of the Leningrad terror / Leningrad Martyrology
Revelations from the Russian archives / Diane P. Koenker and Ronald D, Bachman, editors
Labor camp socialism / Galina Ivanova
Spies and murderers in the guise of physicians and scientists / V. Minayev
XI: The war years
June 1941 : the enemy will be destroyed / Leningrad Pravda
Magnificent stubbornness / Vasilii Grossman
Wait for me / Konstantin Simonov
Smolensk roads / Konstantin Simonov
The blockade diary of A.I. Vinokurov
The diary of a Red Army soldier / S.F. Putiakov [sld.dnv]
Tragic numbers : the lives taken by the war / Olʹga Verbitskaia
The paradox of nostalgia for the front / Viacheslav Kondratʹev
XII: The thaw
March 5th, 1953 / Yevgeny Yevtushenko
The Secret Speech / Nikita Khrushchev
The defense of a prison-camp official / Anna Zakharova
Who lives better? / Giuseppe Boffa
When did you open your eyes? / Boris I. Shragin
The last trolley / Bulat Okudzhava
XIII: Russians abroad, near and far
Russian Harbin / E.P. Taskina
China / Aleksandr Vertinskii
From Harbin, home / Natalʹia Ilʹina
On the banks of the Seine / Irina Odoevtseva
108th Street / Sergei Dovlatov
XIV: Life under advanced socialism
Communal living in Russia : stories and thoughts / Ilya Utekhin, Alice Nakhimovsky, Slava Paperno, and Nancy Ries
Trial of a young poet : the case of Joseph Brodsky
The most well-read country in the world / S.S. Vishnevskii, editor
International relations at the Lenin Library / Galina Koltypina
Moscow circles / Benedict Eroftev
The Soviet middle class / Maya Turovskaya
Anecdotes of the times
Partisans of the full moon / Akvarium
XV: Things fall apart
The most responsible phase of perestroika / Mikhail Gorbachev
Causes of the collapse of the USSR / Alexander Dallin
Our fairy-tale life / Nancy Ries
Getting by / Valerii Pisigin
XVI: Building a new world, again
Burying the bones / Orlando Figes
Pyramids and prophets / Eliot Borenstein
My precious capital / Mikhail Ryklin (sp?)
Fade to red? / Masha Lipman
Casual / Oksana Robski
Anecdotes about new Russians -- Return to the motherland / Irina Sandomirskaia

<>Barthas,Louis| a{1879}e{1952}n{}o{
*2004:NH.CT,YUP|_Poilu: The World War I Notebooks of Corporal Louis Barthas, Barrelmaker 1914-1918| EBy >Strauss,Edward M| ((426pp ndx| WW1b sld.vqt France's version of "Tommy Atkins" was the poilu ("hairy one"). A 35-year-old small-town barrel maker who fought from 1914 to 1918 and meticulously documented his experiences, creating a rare account of serving in the Great War for so long. CF=Emilio Lussu (above) He was encouraged in this by his comrades and even continued the endeavor after returning home. In the end, he created 19 notebooks, the contents of which fill a chapter each here. Barthas also sent numerous postcards home (a section of reproductions shows some of these) and relied on them to re-create events at a physical and temporal remove. The result, while sometimes dense, is an uncommonly immediate account of one man's lengthy war experience. The index will help those doing research on particular regiments as well as those searching for information on such topics as smells, fraternization on the battlefield

<>Beattie,Bessie| a{}e{}n{}o{}
*`1918:N.NY|_The_Red Heart of Russia| ((trv wmn))

<>Bebel,August| a{}
*1906:on RREV1| ((G/PREV:197-8 rvw))

<>Bell,Gertrude.f.| a{1868}b{}c{}d{}e{1926}n{WW1 AfroAsia SaA}o{
*1920:LND|_Review of the Civil Administration of Mesopotamia [E-TXT]
*1927:Letters of Gertrude Bell [E-TXT]
*1914je26:NYT [E-TXT]
*2003:James Buchan [TXT]

<>Bely,Andrei [pseud. of Bugaev]| a{
|_Petersburg| ((prm blt hst RREV1))
--| “Revolution and Culture” [RB-C]

>Berdiaev,Nikolai Axr*| G/EUA

<>Bertie,Francis| a{}n{}o{stt.srv Amb.irx
*1924:LND|_The_Diary of Lord Bertie of Thame, 1914–1918| 2vv| EBy Lady Algernon Gordon Lennox| Foreword by Viscount Grey of Fallodon| ((WW1b PRS dvn good account| GBR Amb.irx to FRN))

<>Bervi,Vasilii Vxi*|>Bervi-Flerovskii,Vasilii Vxi*|>BFl|>BrvVV| a{1829ap28
Most pst by pseud,thus most cannot identify
*1859:JMlwx#3|re.ENG lwx
*1862?| “Pis’mo V. V. Bervi k predvoditeliam dvorianstva”|In YMI:54-55| ((8x11 w/YMI| prm dvr.mtg))
*1869:SPB|_Polozhenie rabochego klassa v Rossii| ((>PRK|prm Mrx prl krx trv|not systematic study,but empassioned reportage, “to be read w/bated breath”[VRR:488] 872:2nd ed. destroyed at press by stt|Only few survived, re-prt in BFl,Izb v1 abv))
*1870:71; Nedel’|re.vlg.o
*1871:1894; |_Azbuka sotsial’nykh nauk|Several?? vv|:1871-1894| ((prm scx pbl.scs| CF:GrkM vsp re.TolL))
*1872:SPB|_Issledovaniia po tekushchim voprosam| ((prm PRS.cmn G/RRE:172-3, LiN#7/8:176))
*1872:G&K:33?-52| “Klassicheskaia strana krupnogo zemlevladeniia”| ((IREland lnd brz ekn.trx idl MllJS))
*187?:SPB|_Na zhizn’ i smert’: Izobrazhenie idealistov| ((Hkd BRN#25| prm blt))
*1932:LiN#2:55-74|“Neizdanaia stat’ia”|Introductory article by Lev Kamenev,“Marks o Flerovskom”| ((prm Mrx hst.gph))
*1897:LND|_Tri politicheskie sistemy: Nikolai I, Aleksandr II, i Aleksandr III; vospominaniia...| ((NYP cat|8x11-Brv| prm vsp N-1 A-2 A-3 plt.mvt plt.clt|543 pp|GRM tlng made))
*1915mr:GoM#3:134-82; 4 #4:144-66; #5:122-42; more in 1916??| “Vospominaniia”| ((8x11-Brv| Re-prt (more complete?) of Tri abv| LTF held rights to vsp))
*1929:MVA-LGR|_Zapiski revoliutsionera mechtatelia|Edited with a foreword by M. Klevenskii| ((NYP & HoT cat| prm vsp A-2 plt.mvt|shorted version of GoM vsp; bxo ndx))
*1958:MVA|_Izbrannye ekonomicheskie proizvedeniia v dvukh tomakh| ((OWN prm ekn))
|_O muchenike Nik.... [IISG]
Nikolaevskii on what Marx thought about Bervi's 1869:Polozhenie... [TXT]

<>Beveridge,Albert J| a{1862}e{1927
|_The_Russian Advance|NYC:1903| ((prm trv SIB TolL))
}s{}t{}8{}t pbd))

<>Bezborodko 1799:memo on reform [Raeff2:70-74]

<>Blok,Aleksandr A| a{
*1908no| “Ironiia”| In SoS,5:269-73
*1908no| “Narod i intelligentsiia”| SoS,5:259-68| Translated as “The People and the Intelligentsia” in Raeff3:359-63|
*1918ja19| “Intelligentsiia i revoliutsiia”| SoS,5:396-406| Translated in Raeff3:364-71|
*1908de| “Stikhiia i kul’tura”| SoS,5:274-83
*1918mr| “Iskusstvo i revoliutsiia (Po povodu tvoreniia Richarda [?sp] Vagnera)”| SoS,5:408-12| ((wrx&xdj G/1920 blw))
*1918my| “Katilina: Stranitsa iz istorii mirovoi Revoliutsiia”| In SoS,5:449-50| Translated as “Catiline: A Page from the History of World Revolution”| In RB-C|
*1920:|_Iskusstvo i revoliutsiia| ((UO| G/1918mr abv))
*1920:BRL|_Rossiia i intelligentsiia| ((UO| OWN| prm ntg blt| 71p| Gathered Narod i Int, Stikhiia i kul’tura, Intelligentsiia i rev”, etc))
*1971:MVA|_SoS v shesti tomakh| 5 vols| ((OWN))
*1975:O.ENG|_The_Poet and the Revolution: Aleksandr Blok’s The Twelve| Russian text of the poem,plus translation]| EBy Sergei Hackel | ((PG3453.B6d857| prm stx RREV mnt clt blt))

<>Blokh,Ivan Stanislavovich|>Bloch,Jan Gotlib|>Blioch|>De Bloch,Jean|>BlxIS| a{1836}b{POL}c{POL WZA}e{1901 (1902?)}n{pcxist crt mltism}o{rrd apx stt.srv
Polish-born of Jewish family; converted in St.Petersburg to his wife's religion, Calvinism
SPB| Russian imperial railroad administrator, grew wealthy in connection with railroad business
*1898: First RUS edition, 6vv| *1899:ENG translation = _The_Future of war in its technical, economic, and political relations; Is war now impossible? [Three E-TXT sites] ((WW1a
*1983:LA.CA,Center for the Study of Armament and Disarmament, California State University LA|>Van Den Dungen,Peter|_The_Making of Peace: Jean De Bloch and the First Hague Peace Conference| ((8x11:WW1a full txt))
*2000:War in History#7|>Welch,Michael| [In re. 1899] "...British Publication of ... Bloch's Is War Now Impossible..."| ((E-TXT))
*--Sheehan.WHERE:28-45, 71-2
*--Jewish Encyclopedia [E-TXT]

<>Bobrovskaia,Cecilia| a{
*:|_Twenty Years in Underground Russia: Memoirs of a Rank and File Bolshevik| ((UO prm vsp wmn SDs(b) RREV1 RREV2 RREV3))

<>Bonch-Bruevich,M| a{}n{WW1b WW1c Gwrx}o{mlt.vsp
*1966:MVA|_From Tsarist General to Red Army Commander| ((UO))

<>Brusilov,Aleksei Alekseevich| a{}n{WW1b}o{mlt.dnv
*1971:Westport CN,Greenwood reprint of *1930:L.ENG|_A_Soldier's Note-book,1914-1918| ((UO))

<>Buchanan,George| a{1854}e{1924}n{WW1b RREV2}o{AMB.irx gvt.srv
dgt =>Buchanan,Muriel [ID] r[WRR]
*1923:B.MA,Little,Brown and Co|_My mission to Russia and other diplomatic memories|>Buchanan.MISSION (())

<>Bukharin,Nikolai|>BxrN| a{}e{
Marxists Internet Archive E-TXT~
*1915-1917:|_Imperialism and World Economy| Introduced by Vladimir Lenin. New York City: 1967| (( HB501.B84613 | E-TXT ))
*1918:NYC,Communist Party of America|_Program of the Communists (Bolshevists)|| Pamphlets on Communism, v1 #11| Collected by Tom Burns| (( UO Rare bks 335.408 P191 ))
*1920:MVA|>Bukharin,Nikolai,and Evgenii A. Preobrazhenskii|_The_ABC of Communism: A Popular Explanation of the Program of the Communist Party of Russia| Introduction by Sydney Heitman. Ann Arbor: 1966| ((HX314.B822| E-TXT | Other tlng = _ABC of Communism| Translated by Eden and Cedar Paul,with an introduction by E. H. Carr. LND: 1969|
*1921:MVA|_“The New Economic Policy of Soviet Russia”| ((E-TXT| Also in Lnn.New:43-61 ))
*1922:MVA| “Bringing Up the Young Generation” in RBV1:55-61| ((edc chd clt))
*:|_Politics and Economics of the Transition Period| tlng of _Teoriia proletarskoi diktatury| Edited by Kenneth Tarbuck. LND: 1979. JC474.B7413
*1929:MVA|_Imperialism and World Economy|| IBy Vladimir Lenin| ENG tlng. NYC:1967| ((UO))
--|On factionalism [RRC,3] ((fxn))

*1935:NYC|>Bukharin,N. I.,A. M. Beborin,Y. M. Uranovsky,S. I. Vavilov,V. L. Komarov and A. I. Tiumeniev|_Marxism and Modern Thought| (( HB501.M5M3 ))
*1982:Armonk NY|_Selected Writings on the State| Introduced by Stephen F. Cohen and Ken Coates| (( HB97.5.B854 ))
*1973:NYC|>Cohen,Stephen F.|_Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution: A Political Biography,1888-1938|
--|>Larina,Anna (Bukharin's widow)|_This I cannot forget| ((UO))
--|Marxists Internet Archive bio

<>Bulgakov,Sergei Nxi*| a{871}e{944}n{}o{phl rlg.trx
*1979:Belmont MA,Nordland Pub. Co|_Karl_Marx as a religious type: his relation to the religion of anthropotheism of L. Feuerbach| IBy Donald W. Treadgold| ((Mrx&rlg FrbL))
*2000:NH,YUP|_Philosophy of economy: The world as household| T.E.&IBy Catherine Evtuhov| ((ekn.trx))
*--In RB-C| “An Urgent Task”
*--In SUQ:299-309| “Meditations on the Joy of the Resurrection”|

<>Bunyan,James, ed|>IC&C|_Intervention, Civil War, and Communism in Russia, April-December, 1918: Documents and Materials| ((UO| WW1b WWlc RREV3| Red Army:266-76))

<>Bunyan,James and Fisher,HH, eds|>|_The Bolshevik Revolution, 1917-1918: Documents and Materials| *1934:S.CA,SUP| ((UO| RREV2 RREV3
ch5, "The Armistice": 232-75| sct.B, "The Bolsheviks and the Allies"
*1917no21(NS):Trt invited Allies to join the negotiations w/GRM:242-51
*1917no25(NS):USA threatens RUS w/embargo on fnc credit and supplies:249-51
*1917no29(NS):Another SSR invitation to Allies to join negotiations w/GRM:271-2
Constituent Assembly:338-99
Gwrx:400-475| CAU front []:451-9
*1917oc25(NS):Moldavian Military Congress met and agreed to union w/RUS:462-3
ISL peoples:465-74
Red Army:566-74

<>Butt,V.P. et al. eds|_The_Russian Civil War: Documents from the Soviet Archives|>RGwrx| ((WW1b WW1c Σwrx&REV Gwrx prm.sbk| pt.3:124-76= "The Kaleidoscope of War"))

<>Catherine II, Empress of Russia| a{
*1767jy19:|_Nakaz ... dannyi Kommissii o sochinenii proekta novago ulozheniia|_Catherine the Great’s Instruction (Nakaz) to the Legislative Commission|EBy and TBy Paul Dukes| Series:Russia under Catherine the Great,v2|Newtonville MA:ORP,1977| ((DK171 .R87|129p bbl:39-41| prm lwx.kmm tUt C-2 RUS2))
*1785|_The_Charters to the Nobility, Towns, and State Peasants| EBy David Griffiths and George Munro| ((dvr grd stt.srf)) | The Memoirs of Catherine the Great|TBy Katharine Anthony|NYC:1927| ((DK170.A5|UO special collections| prm vsp C-2 stt))
|_Voltaire and Catherine the Great: Selected Correspondence|TEby A. Lentin,with foreword by Elizabeth Hill|C.ENG:CUP,1974| ((PQ2084.C313| prm C-2 idl))
*1931:C.ENG|_Documents of Catherine the Great| EBy William F. Reddaway| prm noUO
:|>Alexander,John T|_Autocratic Politics in a National Crisis (1969)
--------|_Emperor of the Cossacks: Pugachev and the Frontier Jacquerie of 1773-1775. Lawrence KS:1873. DK183.A45
--------|_Catherine the Great: Life and Legend. Oxford UP. DK170.A58
|>Donnert, Erich|_Russia in the Age of Enlightenment. Leipzig:1985. DK127.D6613 | prm
|>Jones, Robert Edward|_The_Emancipation of the Russian Nobility, 1762-1785. Princeton:1973. HT647.J65
|>Madariaga, Isabel de|_Russia in the Age of Catherine the Great. New Haven:1981. DK171.D45
|>Raeff, Marc, ed|_Catherine the Great: A Profile. NYC:1972

<>Chaianov,Aleksandr| a{}n{theorist of peasant or village culture| Called static peasant way of life a “mode of production” [contradicted orthodox followers of Mrx [EG] & Lenin [EG] who denied existence of independent "village" mode of production] Susan Solomon, _The_Soviet Agrarian Debate ((UO)) described how Chaianov has been called “neo-populist” | Katerina Clark, “The City versus the Countryside in Soviet Peasant Literature of the Twenties: A Duel of Utopias”, in Blw.clt, explored the neo-Slavophile [ID] side of Chaianov}o{
Chaianov's theoretical accomplishments or failures must be placed in the context of the profound changes being worked on rural populations in the early phases of industrialization [EG]
*1920:”The Journey of My Brother Alexei to the Land of Peasant Utopia” | pseud=Kremnev,Ivan| tlng in Smith,R.E.F.,RUS krx,1920-1984:63-106| (())
*1966:Homewood IL|_The_Theory of the Peasant Economy|
1.The family farm husbandry
4.vulnerability to complex web of powerful outsiders|
Chaianov had much influence on Shanin,Awkward [ID]
Edelman,krx.prl:14-19 summary = “The continuing vitality of the community was supposed to bind peasant to each other in opposition to the outside forces of landlords, governments, markets, and (one should add) other villages. This last view dominated Shanin’s conception of the political sociology of the peasantry. With its strong emphasis on the centripetal forcers in the village, Shanin’s approach left little room for the formation of the true social classes in general and rural proletariat in particular. The dominant struggle on the land then became one of united insiders versus outsiders rather than of rich against poor within the village”[19] SAC editor added boldface above in order to raise this question = Why has Edelman written "in opposition to" rather than “in dynamic factional relationship with”? Is it because he sees politics as struggle of one against all rather than as a process of constant rebalancing among various overlapping interests?] | Q's economic views are similar to Robert Redfield's anthropological views [EG#1=HM131.R38 | EG#2=GT5650.R4] = village life over many centuries and in many areas of the world can be seen as a closely knit and harmonious network of interpersonal relations and kinship patterns

<>Chaikovskii,Nikolai Vxi*| a{
*1905:LND|_Russia in Revolution:193-206| ((vsp “recorded” by G. H. Perris| 3x5:bxo))

<>Chernov,Viktor M|>QerVM| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{
SRs leading figure
*1918ja:Constituent Assembly elected him president
*:|_Great Russian Revolution| ((DK265.c48 UqS)) vsp in Moh.RR|

<>Chernova,Olga E. [Chernova-Kolbasina]|>QeraOE| a{
--|_New Horizons:Reminiscences of the Russian Revolution| Westport CN:1975 [L.ENG:1936]| (( prm RREV vsp SRs))
--|vsp of krx.rbx,RREV2 [Page.RR]

<>Chernyshevskii,Nikolai G|>QrnNG| a{}n{}o{journalist| LOOP

<>Churchill,Winston| a{1874}e{1965}n{}o{
*1931:NYC,Scribner's:|_The_Unknown War: The Eastern Front|>Churchill.UNKNOWN| ((WW1b EEUR))

<>Curzon,George Nathaniel| a{}n{}o{}
*1889:LND,Cass|*1967:NYC|>Curzon.RUS|_Russia in Central Asia in 1889 and the Anglo-Russian Question| a{prm}o{irx MPR CAS
"Curzon's controversial life in public service stretched from the high noon of his country's empire to the traumatized years following WW1. As viceroy of India under Queen Victoria and foreign secretary under King George V, the obsessive and tempestuous Lord Curzon left his unmistakable mark on the era -- a remarkable public career but also a turbulent private life, with its infamous vendettas, many long friendships, and passionate, risky love affairs. [...] Born into the ruling class of what was then the world's greatest power, Curzon was a fervent believer in British imperialism who spent his life proving he was fit for the task. His prodigious energy made him the most traveled minister ever to sit in a British cabinet, a writer of immense volumes on Asia [EG=IRN & IND], and a compulsive restorer of ancient buildings in Britain and India"--Jacket blurb on David Gilmour's 684p book, *2003:<i>_Curzon....</i> [UO]

<>Daly,Jonathan and Trofimov,Leonid, eds| *2009:IN.I,Hackett|_Russia in War and Revolution, 1914-1922: A Documentary History|>RWR| ((OWN prm.sbk 8x11  Σwrx&REV WW1b+ RREV2 RREV3 vqt| ToC =
Revolution triumphs
The revolution reaches the provinces [gbx]
Praise and criticism of the revolution
Revolution and the village [krx vlg]
Revolution and religion [rlg]
Revolution and the war [mlt.rpt]
The provisional government in decline [VRM]
Soviet power is born
Soviet power spreads to the provinces
"Enemies of the people"
Socialist dreams
The Bolsheviks go to the village
Matters of survival
Building Socialism
Soviet Russia and the world [SOV&wrl irx]
The fate of the constituent assembly [>Pitch]
Worker unrest [wrk prl]
Red terror [trr]
Reds versus Whites and those in between [Gwrx]
Peasants in revolt
The birth of new nations
The Kronstadt Rebellion [sld.rbx]
The new economic policy and the countryside [NEP in gbx]
Political consolidation of the Bolshevik Regime
The new Soviet Society
Soviet culture : from liberation to subjugation [SSR.clt]
The revolution's heirs|
Many sources appear in English for the first time here. The book deals w/revolutionaries' aspirations as well as the ways in which the Revolution affected the lives of ordinary people, from the workers of Petrograd to Siberian peasants and Ukrainian Jews [UKR Jwx]

<>Dawson,Coningsby| a{1883}e{1959}n{WW1b}o{
*1917:NYC,John Lane Co|_Carry On: Letters in Wartime|>Dawson.CARRY| E-TXT| with an intro and notes by father >Dawson,W.J. ((UO| WW1b vqt sld.ltr~| Battlefield details = 41, !!=46-51, 57-60, 62-5, 69-71, !!=75-88, 98-100, 118-19, 128-30(re.WW1c how hard post-wrx life will be)| A fine moment from the trenches = "A former age expressed itself in Gregorian chants; ours, no less sincerely, disguises its feelings in ragtime" [127]
*1917fe06:British artillery officer Dawson wrote that “bigness of soul” is what makes nations great. The war, he said, was a

prolonged moment of exultation for most of us. [...] These men, in the noble indignation of a great ideal, face a worse hell than the most ingenious of fanatics ever planned or plotted. Men die scorched like moths in a furnace, blown to atoms, gassed, tortured. And again other men step forward to take their places well knowing what will be their fate. Bodies may die, but the spirit of England grows greater as each new soul speeds upon its way [ltr#49:132].

This letter was a controlled but bitter complaint about USA slowness to join wrx. This reluctance revealed the hollow qualities of USA pop culture -- "Money, comfort, limousines and ragtime. I hate the thought of Fifth Avenue, with its pretty faces, its fashions, its smiling frivolity. America as a great nation will die, as all coward civilizations have died, unless she accepts the stigmata of sacrifice, which a divine opportunity again offers her" [131]. Dawson measured the superior greatness of England in terms of the number of casualties it could afford. Dawson saw a direct correlation between the number of casualties and the size of the English spirit. In Dawson's view, each time a soldier dies, the soul of the nation grows.

<>Day,Richard B, and >Gaido,Baniel eds|
*2001:Brill|_Discovering Imperialism: Social Democracy to World War I|>Day.SDs| ((E-TXT| MPR WW1a| EG=
Some scx dddists thought gnr.zbs and violent rvs was best remedy for WW1, others thought disarmament, arbitration and end of old-regime style secret diplomacy would do that job| This prm.sbk concentrates on Central EUR = LxmR and KtkK give evidence of Fischer,Fritz trx = GRM was mltistic as counterpoise of rising wage-labor mvt| Also, some might say that Bauer and Hilferding teach us that OST.MGR ntnQ promoted mltism. There is connection as between OST.MGR ntn.policies and Sarajevo dth.a, but must be careful to distinquish dms ntnQ frm OST MPR expansion into YUG

<>Degras,Jane,ed| a{}n{SSR irx}o{}
*1951-1953:|_Calendar of Soviet documents on Foreign Policy,1917-1941| 3vv | ((UO prm.sbk))
*1951:LND|_Soviet Documents on Foreign Policy| v1, 1917-1924| v2, 1925-1932| v3, 1933-1941| ((prm.sbk))
*1956-1965:LND|_The_Communist International,1919-1943: Documents|3vv| ((prm.sbk Inx3 Comintern))

<>De Leon,Daniel| a{852}e{914}
*1920:NYC,National Executive Committee, Socialist Labor Party|_James Madison and Karl Marx: A Contrast and a Similarity; Two Articles| ((UO Mds Mrx plt.clt USA2.cst 30p lxt 1889:1913;1st pbd))

<>Denikin,Anton Ivn*| a{1872}b{}c{}d{}e{1947}n{}o{mlt.srv
*1922:LND|_The_Russian Turmoil: Memoirs, Military, Social, and Political
*1973:Westport,CN,Hyperion|_The_White Army| ((UO| ))

<>Dixon,William Hepworth| a{}n{R&A}o{
*1867?:|_New America | ((UO | Traveled in USA west w/ Dilke,Charles Wentworth | Mormans, ch.XVI-ch.XXXIII, pp.114-219))
*1870:|_Free Russia | ((SUMMIT | ch.24-ch.33, pp. 135-186, religious dissent and "Old-Believers" [Old-Ritualists (StO)] ))
*1872:LND|_Secret History of "The International" Working Men's Association| Pseudonym= Yorke,Onslow| ((noUO| tntn.orx| *1862:1870; Ntx1 origins & increasingly fraught hst| ~~ 1862:wrl.vst, Nap3 FRN/GRM irx conflict| w/spc emphasis on avocational ID of dddists| vs-Bkn vs-Mrx pro-Tolain| very vs-Cluseret [ID] & his conflation of wrx w/rvs))
*1870:LND|>Barry,Herbert|_Russia in 1870, offered serious critique of D on Russia| ((SUMMIT| Barry had been dtr of Chepeleffsky [Chepelevskii] lnd and iron works in VLA TMB & NNG gbx~| He also pst Russian Metallurgical Works | G/kbk for more Barry "Ivan at Home"| These 2 kng~ available in E-TXT))

<>Dobranitskii,M| a{}n{}o{
*1924:Proletarskaia revoliutsiia#8–9(31–32):73–75| "Zelenye partizany (1918–1920 g.g.)"| ((krx.rbx vs-SDs(b) Gwrx))
*1926:MVA|_Sistematicheskii ukazatel' literatury po istorii russkoi revoliutsiii| ((REF bbl))

<>Dorosh,Harry| a{
*1944:NYC|_Russian Constitutionalism| ((342.47 D737|plt.clt cst rfm Wbr?| USA ?beginnings of CWX.hst.gph| “a sketch” but w/attention to cst idl of DKB| ch on rfm A-2,emphasizing lbx gnt & Vlv.rxn| rdx= main threat,& spc ch on LMeM cst prj shows better future squelched by rvs))

<>Dorr,Rheta Childe| a{1866}e{1948}n{WW1b RREV2}o{jrn trver wmnist
}p{ Progressive Era socialist party~| Drifted away after WW1
*1917:NYC,Macmillan|_Inside the Russian Revolution|>Dorr.INSIDE| ((243pp| E-TXT ~~Pankhurst, Vyrubova and certain RUS high qnv))
*:|_A Soldier's Mother in France| ((E-TXT))

<>Dostoevskii,Fedor M|>Dostoevsky,Fedor| a{}n{world fame}o{writer| LOOP
--|Winter Notes on Summer Impressions
--|Notes from the Underground
--|The Possessed
--|Brothers Karamazov

<>Drahomaniv,Mykhailo Ptr*|>Dragomanov,Mikhail Ptr*|>DrhMP| a{}n{}o{UKR ntn plt pundit
*1905:PRS|_Collected Works??|EBy Bogdan Kistiakovskii| ((noUO))
*1952:NYC|_A_Symposium and Selected Writings: The Annals of the Ukrainian Academy of Arts and Sciences in the U. S. 2/1| ((noUO UKR))

<>Durnovo,Petr N| a{
--|>Aldanov,Marc,on Durnovo,PN in Moh.RR

<>Dziewanowski,M. K.,ed|
*1970:NYC|_The_Russian Revolution: An Anthology| ((Contains=

<>Eastman,Max| a{
*:|_Trotsky:Portrait of a Youth| ((??noUO| chd.Trt))

<>Emin,Ahmed ed|_Turkey in the World War| *1930:P.NJ,PUP (CE.irx.pcx)|>Emin.TRK| ((UO 8x11:WW1a WW1b WW1c OTM.TRK| NO.ndx!! Emin was formerly CST.unv prf of xtx))

<>Engelbrecht,H.C., and >Hanighen,F.C|_The_Merchants of Death: A Study of the International Armament Industry|>Engelbrecht.MERCHANTS| *1934:NYC,Dodd Mead & Co| ((WW1 MIC *2011au30:Reissued as E-TXT by the "Ludwig von Mises Institute" [ID] with this blurb =

Here is the archetype of all post–World War I revisionism of a particular variety: the hunt for the people who made the big bucks off the killing machine. [...The] manifesto of a generation of people who swore there would not be and could not be another such war. || But here is the kicker: it was coauthored by the founder of Human Events, the conservative weekly. So this is no left-wing screed against profiteering. It is a careful and subtle, but still passionate, attack on those who would use government to profit themselves at the expense of other people's lives and property. || Here is a sample of the ideological orientation: "The arms industry did not create the war system. On the contrary, the war system created the arms industry.… All constitutions in the world vest the war-making power in the government or in the representatives of the people. The root of the trouble, therefore, goes far deeper than the arms industry. It lies in the prevailing temper of peoples toward nationalism, militarism, and war, in the civilization which forms this temper and prevents any drastic and radical change. Only when this underlying basis of the war system is altered, will war and its concomitant, the arms industry, pass out of existence." [boldface & underlining is by SAC ed]|| This book is a wonderful example of what Rothbard called the "Old Right" in its best form. The book not only makes the case against the war machine; it provides a scintillating history of war profiteering, one authoritative enough for citation and academic study. One can see how this book had such a powerful effect. || Why re-release this book now [2011]? The war profiteers are making money as never before. They are benefiting from conflict as never before. Everything in this book has not only come to pass but as been made worse by a million times. So this treatise is more necessary than ever. || This is the real heritage of the American Right

<>Englund,Peter| a{1957}b{SWD}n{}o{}
*2011:NYC,Knopf|_The_Beauty and the sorrow: An intimate history of the First World War|Englund.Beauty| ((WW1b vqt))

<>Fanon,Frantz| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{
*1963:NYC,Grove|_The_Wretched of the Earth| ((MPR ntn.ndp| Mau Mau[10] Enx|Anti-Duhring[63] *1810:SPN|Nap1[64] mlt origins of MPR evolve into wrl.mkt[65] BRL.Cnf on AFR[66] rlg as pacifyer[67] Idealized leaders of failed resistance to MPR[69]*1954jy:VTN Dien Bien Phu[70] *1956:ALG[61] wrx:73f | FREV krx:75 | EREV#2 mixes w/EREV#3 Twrl and CWX:77| ch="Concerning Violence":35-106 (A central idl is this = MPR was wrx vs.non-EUR wrl,  now that all this is coming to an end, now that ntn-ndp=vs-MPR REV, what is needed is "reparations", as forced on GRM after WW2)| ch="Colonial War and Mental Disorders":249-310))

<>Fedorov,Nikolai Fdr*|
“The Christian Origins of Freedom”. In SUQ: 281-296
“The Restoration of Kinship Among Mankind”. In SUQ: 175-224

<>Fedorov,Vladimir,ed|>Fedorov.First|_First Breath of Freedom| ((prm sbk DKB

[This] is a compilation of translated primary source documents from the writings of the men who participated in the Decembrist movement and its earlier predecessor groups. The compiler, Vladimir Fyodorov, contributed a short chapter detailing important historical background of the movement, as well as brief historical introductions for each piece; otherwise, he simply lets the primary evidence speak for itself. The personal writings of the Decembrists provide the reader with a deeper and more complex understanding of their specific historical circumstance and perspectives, to a greater degree than most secondary sources would likely provide. This book allows the Decembrists to tell their own story, to justify their revolutionary actions, and to articulate their mission in a way that reflects the historical reality of the group. The documents include published writings, personal correspondences, records of investigative trials and procedures, diary entries, and other similar sources.

The first document presented is Mikhail Lunin's “A Look at the Secret Society in Russia (1816-1826)” which was written after he had been sent into exile following the dismantling of the group, and this short piece touches on many of the overarching themes and ideas present in the other members' writing, and also laid out the fundamental goals and ideals of the movement. For Lunin, the movement was rooted in a group of individuals affected by the influence of enlightenment ideals, and who saw themselves as the progressive champions of the public interest within an autocratic monarchical political system. The desire for the abolition of the system of serfdom, the establishment of a constitution that ensured the rights of Russia citizens, and the advancement of Russian politics and society into more modern form that reflected the contemporary civic movements of other European nations, all combined to ignite the passions of the men who would eventually challenge the Tzar. He also lends insight into an interesting aspect of the members of the Decembrist groups, which is that it was largely comprised of men of aristocratic origin. This characteristic contrasts with other popular European revolutions of the time, and always jumped out to me, personally, as strange. Lunin explained that their noble lineage had allowed the men to develop and grow their talents, and therefore they felt obligated to utilize those talents for the benefit of society as a whole. This sentiment was echoed repeatedly by other members, such as Pestel, Ryleyev [Ryleev], and both Muravyov [Murav'ev] brothers.

This collection of documents also lends insight into the complex personal relationships between the members of the group. Alexander Muravyov wrote a piece about his brother, Nikita, who became the head of the Northern Society, and the respect and admiration that he felt for his brother is palpable to the reader. Ivan Pushchin wrote a particularly moving piece about his great friend, the Russian poet Pushkin, that detailed the conflicting desires to invite his like-minded friend into the Society while at the same time wanting to protect the Society and a high-profile man who had a reputation for fiery emotions and questionable associations. Individual personalities and qualities can be uniquely distinguished, such as Pestel's indelible energy, which is evident in the passion and excitement shown through all of his writings. Kakhovsky's respectful appeal to the Tzar about the Russian people speaks to his resoluteness and certainty in his cause, even while enduring his sentence in exile. The first-hand documents also allow the reader to glimpse into the interpersonal dynamics of the revolutionaries, and trace the development of the organization and the shifts that occur both internally and externally.

Above all, First Breath of Freedom provides a complex and multi-faceted understanding of the Decembrist movement from first-hand perspective of the individuals who initiated a movement that challenged the legitimacy of autocratic rule in Russia. While ultimately unsuccessful, these documents prove that the Decembrists created a well-organized, civic-minded, and intensely passionate association of elite members who truly wanted to use their influence and intellect for the benefit of the whole of Russian society. A later document written by Lunin explains how their movement irreversibly changed the political environment of Russia, and despite the repressive efforts of the monarch, that there would be a new generation of 'freedom fighters', who could not forget the civic ideals that the Decembrist fought to earn, and who would themselves also fight for those ideals. In other words, the Decembrists lit a spark in the hearts of the Russian people that could not easily be extinguished.

<>Feldman,Gerald, ed|
*1972:NYC,Wiley|_German Imperialism, 1914-1918: The Development of a Historical Debate|>Feldman.MPR| ((SMT| 8x11:WW1b prm.sbk w/Feldman commentary GRM MPR hst.gph Fischer,Fritz))
*--GO ndr Feldman

<>Florenskii,Pavel Axr*| a{}n{}o{
--|SUQ: 137-172| “On the Holy Spirit”

<>Florovskii,Georgii Vxi* |>Florovsky,Georges| a{893au29}b{ODE}c{USA}e{979au11}n{}o{rlg.phl
EUA Evraziistvo briefly = they ask right Q~ but give wrong A~
*1937:PRS|_Puti russkogo bogosloviia| *1991:Vil'nius photo reprint| |*1979-1987:Belmont MA,Nordland|_Ways of Russian Theology| TBy Robert Nichols| 2vv| ((|>FWT| G/GLOS| OWN trx gnr.txt chx rlg dxv RUS2 RUS3))
--|RB-C| “In the World of Quests and Wanderings”

<>Fonvizen,Denis. 1779my:"Ta Hsüeh” and other political essays [Raeff3:88-105]

<>Francis,David Rowland| a{}n{WW1 irx}o{
*To 1917:USA Amb.irx to RUS
*:|_The_Papers of David Rowland Francis,American Ambassador to Russia: 1916-1918. University Publications of America. flm (11 reels)
*:|_Dollars and Diplomacy: Ambassador David Rowland Francis and the Fall of Tsarism,1916-1917. Edited by Jamie H. Cockfield. Durham NC: 1981. E183.8.r9f65
*:|_Russia From the American Embassy. 947.084 F847
Clay,Catherine B| "Responsibility in an Untried Field"

<>Freeze,Gregory L.,ed|
*1988:O.ENG|_From Supplication to Revolution: A Documentary Social History of Imperial Russia [through 1906]| ((OWN |>FFS prm.sbk pbl|RREV1=part 3:197-309| dxv dvr kpq mww krx))

<>Gankin,Olga Hess and Fisher,Harold Henry (1890-) eds| a{}n{UO prm.sbk WW1 RREV3 wrx&REV SDs(b) SDs(m) Ntx3}o{Fisher Wki}
*1940,1960:S.CA,SUP|>B&WW1|_The_Bolsheviks and the World War: The Origins of the Third International| ((UO| 856pp The Hoover library on war, revolution, and peace. Publication no. 15| "The documents in this volume do not go beyond the autumn of 1918."--Preface| The bibliography includes a list of periodicals and newspapers which have been cited or from which material has been quoted, together with a brief sketch of the history of those publications (p. 750-770) ToC =
The bolsheviks, the mensheviks, and the Second International
The activities of the bolsheviks abroad, 1914-1916
International socialist conferences, September, 1914-April, 1915
Tactics and dissensions of the Zimmerwald left
Stockholm: the third Zimmerwald conference
Chronology.--Bibliography (p. 729-770)--Biographical notes
FoA rvw))

<>Geiss,Immanuel,ed|_July, 1914: The Outbreak of the First World War, Selected Documents| ((WW1a))

<>Gershenzon,Mikhail O| a{}n{ntg plt.clt RUS2}o{
*1909:MVA|_Tvorcheskoe samosoznanie| Reprint,Latchworth ENG: Prideaux P,1980. B4238.G5t83
*1909|_Vekhi| CLICK FOR SEVERAL EDITIONS| ((>Vexi| prm.sbk ntg RUS2|
*1923:MVA|_Istoriia molodoi Rossii: Analiz russkoi mysli i dushevnogo sostoianiia intelligentsii; Pecherin, Stankevich, Granovskii, Galakhov, Ogarev i dr| ((| prm ntg RS0| ?includes 906:MVA kng on plt.idl Hzn? krj.StnNV))
*1986:CA Irving, Schlacks|_A_History of Young Russia| TBy ?| ((SUMMIT))

<>Gessen,I. V|
*1937:BRL|_ARR#22:?| “V dvukh vekakh:Zhiznennyi otchet”| ((GRS:81,115 prm vsp RREV1))

<>Golder,Frank Alfred|_Documents of Russian History, 1914-1917|>GRH| *1927:NYC,Century| ((prm.sbk| E-TXT (=poorly edited) WW1b RREV2 RREV3 wrx&REV| UO copy has anonymous marginal note, surely a student, in pencil next to pgf in 1916no14(NS):MlkP spq in Dmx. MlkP sd here we are in 27th mo. of WW1b, and we are the same as we were in 10th mo. or 1st mo., anxious to make great sacrificies to preserve ntn unity, but one thing is different = "We have lost faith in the ability of this Government to achieve victory". TSR gvt ignores Dmx efforts at addressing wrxtime problems. In the margin next to this quote, anon. student wrote neatly = "read in March 1968, when furor reached new heights on the Viet Nam question" [155] That was my first spring teaching at UO| ))

<>Golovin,Nikolai Nxi*| a{}n{WW1| mlt.vsp & svt.quality, IE=prm & ndr qualities}o{mlt.ofr
*1900:gGWt akd
*1908:1913; GWt prf
*1914:1918; Chf.Staff of 7th Army on ROM
gte PRS vs.SDs(b)
~~rxn wing of BGv.mvt
*1939:1945; WW2 active collaborator w/FSHh & Vlasov mlt
Resistance Movement condemned him to dth.x, but he died suddenly
*1926:1936; PRS|_Iz istorii kampanii 1914 na Russkom fronte| 3vv|
*1931:NH.CT,YUP|_The_Russian Army in the World War| ((G/Shotwell|
*1935ap:SEER#13,39:571–596| "Brusilov's Offensive: The Galician Battle of 1916"| (( but also
*1936ap:SEER#14,42:564–584| "The Russian War Plan of 1914"|
*1936jy:SEER#35,43:70–90: "The Russian War Plan of 1914: II. The Execution of the Plan"|
In Adams.RR
In Moh.RR:206-220
*2014:MVA,Veche|_Rossiia v Pervoi mirovoi voine|_Россия в Первой мировой войне|544pp| tlng of 1931

<>Gorky,Maxim|>GorM| a{}n{ RREV3 clt rvs SDs(b) Lnn}o{
*1917-1918:PGR|_Untimely Thoughts: Essays on Revolution, Culture and the Bolsheviks,1917-1918| ((prm))
*1946:MVA|>Gorky,Maxim |>Molotov |>Voroshilov |>Kirov |>Zhdanov |>Stalin|_History of the Russian Revolution| 4vv|
w/Lnn [RRC,3]
*1977:L.ENG|>Gorky,Maxim |>Radek,Karl |>Bukharin,Nikolai |>Zhdanov,Andrei|_Soviet Writers' Congress,1934: The Debate on Socialist Realism and Modernism in the Soviet Union| ((mdn))

<>Got'e,Yurii Vladimirovich| a{}n{}o{prf
Time of Troubles: The Diary of Iurii Vladimirovich Got'e,Moscow,July 8,1917[,] to July 23,1922. Translated by Terence Emmons. Princeton NJ: 1988. DK265.6.G66a3

<>Graham,Stephen| a{
*1917:NYC,MacMillan|_Russia in 1916|
*--Michael Hughes|_Beyond Holy Russia: The Life and Time of Stephen Graham

<>Graves,William S| a{865}e{940}n{Gwrx irx R&A}o{mlt
*1931NYC|_America's Siberian Adventure: 1918-1920|

<>Great Britain| Foreign Office|
|_British Documents on Foreign Affairs: Reports and Papers from the Foreign Office Confidential Print|
Part 1 (From the Mid-Nineteenth Century to the First World War) [WW1a],section 1:“Russia”| EBy Dominic Lieven| 6 vols| ((irx ENG))
Part 2 (From the First to the Second World War), section 1:“The Soviet Union”| 15vv| ((prm irx ENG Cwrx RS1 RS2 RREV1 WW1b WW1c RREV2 RREV3 Gwrx NEP STL))

*:BRL|_Die Gewerkschaftsbewegung in Russland|2vv?| ((noUO unx wrk prl RREV1))
| Professional'noe dvizhenie v Rossii|SPB:1908| ((noUO))

*1967:I.NY|_International Communism in the Era of Lenin: A Documentary History| ((prm HX40.G74))
*1970:Garden City NY|_Soviet Russia Masters the Comintern: International Communism in the Era of Stalin's Ascendancy| ((prm Ntx3)) HX11.I567

<>Guchkov,Aleksandr Ivan|
*1936au09:PRS|_Poslednie novosti 5616| “Iz vospominanii...”| ((GRS:187 prm vsp RREV1))

<>Gurko,Vasilii Iosifovich|>Gourko,Basil| a{}n{}o{mlt.gnr
}f{GO brt blw
*1919:NYC|_War and Revolution in Russia, 1914-1917| >Gurko.WAR| Published in England under the title _Memories and Impressions... [E-TXT] ((mlt.vsp wrx&REV WW1b WW1c RREV2 RREV3))

<>Gurko,Vladimir Iosifovich| a{862}b{}e{927}n{}o{stt.srv and pbl activist
Son of a field marshal and brother of a general (Vasilii or Basil abv)
*1885:Graduated from Moscow University
*1885:1902; Served in several bureaucratic posts
*1902:Appointed to a high post in the Ministry of Internal Affairs
*1906:Served briefly as assistant minister
After the 1905 Revolution, turned to zemstvo activity
*1912:Elected to the post-1905-Revolution State Council
*1917:Revolution ended his Russian career
*1890s:Two books on agrarian problems
*1922:PRS|Russkaia letopis'#2:94-99 etc| “Chto est' i chego net v 'Vospominaniiakh' grafa S. Yu. Vitte”| ((GRS:55,120 prm vsp RREV1 stt.srv))
*1939:SUP|_Features and Figures of the Past: Government and Opinion in the Reign of Nicholas II| ((947.08 G936 prm stt pbl))

<>Hannah,James|_The_Great War Reader|>GWR| *2000:College Station,TX| ((UO| prm.sbk WW1b|
pt1= History| pt2= Letters and diaries [mlt.ltr mlt.dnv sld.ltr]| pt3= Memoirs [mlt.vsp]| pt4= Fiction))

<>Harper,Samuel| a{882}e{943
*1945:CHI|_The_Russia I Believe In: The Memoirs of Samuel N. Harper, 1902-1941| ((OWN vsp trv RREV1 hst.gph USA2))

<>Harcave,Sidney| a{}n{}o{}
|_First Blood: The Russian Revolution of 1905| ((>H05| RREV1 RUS3 noWbr| aka _Russian Revolution of 1905
*1903:prg of SDs [H05:262-8]
*1904my04:Draft prg of SRs [H05:268-73]
*1904no:Zmv cng 11 theses [H05:279-81]
*1904de12:TSR ukaz to SNT [H05:282-5]
*1905ja09: Father Gapon and Ivan Vasimov, Workers' petition to TSR [H05:285-9]
*1905mr:05my; prg of Union of Lib [H05:273-9]
*1905oc18:Pravitel’stvennyi vestnik published Witte memo to TSR [H05:289-92]
*1905oc:KDs program [H05:292-300]

*2004|_Count Sergei Witte and the Twilight of Imperial Russia: A Biography| ((Wtt RREV1

TThe last decades if the Romanov dynasty saw serious threats to it's existence, culminating in the revolution of 1917 that did finally topple the tsarist government. However, from 1879 until 1906, the state was served by a very energetic and capable administrator in the person of Sergei Witte. Witte served in a variety of posts within the government during his career, the most important as the first premier of Russia. His accomplishments are quite varied, and he was involved in many of the major developments in Russia during his tenure. Sidney Harcave's biography of Witte is the first biography of Witte in the English Language. It is relatively short for such an important and active individual, being just 270 pages. The biography begins with Witte's early life in Southern Russia. After completing his university degree in Mathematics at Odessa, he began his career as an executive for a private railroad based out of Odessa. From here he was appointed by Tsar Alexander III to a position in the Baranov Commission, with the intention of assessing the shortcomings of the rail system in Russia. From here he was appointed to head the department of railroad affairs, a huge leap in power, especially for someone as young as Witte. Subsequently, Witte was appointed Minister of Ways and Communications by Alexander, a post which allowed him direct access to the tsar. In 1892, Witte was appointed to the important position of Minister of Finance. In this capacity Witte was able to set policy for most economic activity in Russia. It was in this capacity that he also oversaw construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, with railroading being his area of expertise. Witte personally considered his greatest accomplishment as Minister of Finance overseeing Russia's transition to the gold standard. In 1894, Alexander III dies and is succeeded by his son Nicholas II. While Alexander and Witte got along quite well, with both being confident and somewhat provincial in manner, Nicholas was a rather weak and refined tsar that often took offense at the manners of Witte. The relationship between the two would prove to be very problematic for Witte's future career. In spite of this, Nicholas kept Witte as his Minister of Finance, both because of his mother's influence and because of Witte's reputation for hard work and competence. Because of Witte's work on the Trans-Siberian Railway, he found himself immersed in Far East policy, and later disagreements over what direction to take in the East would lead to his first political downfall. Another important development of Witte's during his tenure as Minister of Finance was the implementation of the so-called “Witte System,” a plan for industrialization based around the construction of railroads to spur economic growth. However, this system led to an incomplete industrial revolution in Russia. In 1903, Witte was abruptly dismissed by the tsar as Minister of Finance on the advice of Witte's political rivals, primarily by Plehve and Bezobrazov. For the next two years Witte held positions of little importance, until selected by the tsar to head to peace delegation at Portsmouth to conclude the Russo-Japanese War. Though Russia had not fared well in the war, the agreement reached was very favorable to Russia, which greatly increased Witte's prestige, and led to his becoming Premier of the newly reformed Council of Ministers, a position similar to that of Prime Minister, on his return to Russia. In this position Witte was able to convince the tsar of the necessity of the October Manifesto and was able to overhaul the Fundamental Laws. However, he faced intense opposition by those both within and without his cabinet. As the cabinet that Witte formed was intended to present very diverse views, it ended up being unworkable. Political infighting eventually led to his resignation as Premier in April 1906. Witte spent the remaining eight years of his life embittered to the tsar and the figures that opposed him. Harcave does a good job of presenting the politics involved with the ministries and Witte's cabinet, but does not do the best job covering what Witte's actual policies were. Additionally, Harcave presents Witte in an overwhelmingly positive light, only rarely criticizing him. Overall, this is a good short biography.


1962:NYC|_Readings in Russian History| v1= ”From Ancient Times to the Abolition of Serfdom”| v2= ”The Modern Period”| ((|>HRR| noUO & cannot locate vender| OWN ndr.sbk|
Coolidge Plea for N.EUR hst
Chubaty Def.RUS & UKR
VoI periodization
Kerner Eastward frn mvt ASA MPR
Morrison Warm Water
MlkP EUAism
Toynbee BYZ Heritage
Obolensky BYZ
Rostovtzeff Origin of stt
Riasanovsky Norman.trx
KqvVO St.Sergius
Dewey 1479 Sudebnik
Raeff absolutism trx
Platonov I-4
Keep ZmS
VrnG srf
Spinka Nikon
Sumner P-1
Lipski Anna
Beloff dvr
Gorodetzky dxv scl
Lord 3rd POL rzm
Squire Tsct
Curtiss N-1 mlt
Raeff stt.srv
Tomoshenko skz stt prg &WW1b
Portal mfg
Sumner PSLV
Byrnes Pbd
Von Laue Witte
Baron Plx
Karpovich 2 lbx
Godwin Portsmouth RJwrx
Schapiro Vexi
Florinsky WW1b
Katkov GRM
Scott QKa
Utechin SDs(b)
Belov STL.skz
Jasny xtx
Labedz ntg
Gsovski chx lwx
Karpovich cnp
Matloff WW2
Mosely CWX
Gurian irx

<>Heald,Edward T| a{}e{}n{}o{trv
*1917mr:1917jy; [Letters] *947my:ASEER#6,1/2: [E-TXT] ltr~ to wfe, very balanced| Less advocational that other trv
*:|_Witness to Revolution: Letters from Russia,1916-1919| Eby James B. Gidney| ((noUO| WW1b WW1c RREV2 RREV3 trv))

<>Herzen,Alexander I| a{
Managed and edited "Russian Free Press" [ID] with close associate Nikolai Ogarev
*1851se22:Letter to Michelet [TXT]
From the Other Shore/The Russian People and Socialism
*1857:1860s; Journal “Kolokol” | Edie,1:328-78 | KMM:165-90
*:|_My Past and Thoughts (DK209.6.H4A353| Many editions)
*1980:O.ENG,OUP|_Childhood, Youth and Exile| Translated by J. D. Duff with an Introduction by Sir Isaiah Berlin| ((chd))
*1984:I.NY,CUP|_Who is to Blame? A Novel in Two Parts| Translated and edited by Michael R. Katz
*1985:O.ENG,OUP|_Ends and Beginnings| Translated by Constance Garnett;edited by Aileen Kelly and Humphrey Higgens

<>Hickey,Michael C., ed|_Competing voices from the Russian Revolution: Fighting words (2011)|>HCV| ((UO entry has ToC| WW1:1-63

*1913:BRL|_Russland: Eine Einfuhrung auf Grund seiner Geschichte von 1904 bis 1912| ((frm Honigsheim ndr gnr RREV1 GRM.hst.gph Wbr idl of sham cst is “exaggerated” and “one-sided”[Schultz“Constitution of 1906:45]))

<>Hilferding,Rudolf| a{}e{1941}n{SDs scs fnc trx mrxism WW1 to WW2}o{

<>Hurewitz,JC| a{}e{}n{AfroAsia irx}o{
*1956:P.NJ,PUP|>HDE|_Diplomacy in the Near and Middle East: A Documentary Revord| v1=1535-1914| v2=1914-1956| ((OWN UO| ))

<>Ilʹin-Zhenevskiĭ,Aleksandr Fdr*| a{1894}d{WW2 hlt}e{1941}n{vsp}o{
Soviet mlt apx, chess player, etc
*1984:LND,|_The_Bolsheviks in power: Reminiscences of the year 1918|>Il'in.1918| ((UO| WW1 Gwrx| Includes tlng.prm~

STUDENT REVIEW = [This book] begins after the formation of the All-Russia Board for Organising the Red Army on December 20th, 1917. Zhenevsky has returned from his role as a soldier in WWI and through his connections he is able to attain the post of secretariat to the People's Commissariat for Military Affairs in Petrograd. He is immediately impressed by the Soviets' transformation of factories from the role of munitions manufacturers to the creation of new tools and machines for farmers. This is a main catalyst that influences his desire to become more involved in the inner workings of the new government.

What this book accomplishes through its detailed analysis of the events that took place in Petrograd between December 1917 and November 1918 (though it concentrates mostly on the beginning of 1918), is to provide a first hand account from a multi-faceted and interesting member of the Bolshevik party who is determined to see Russia succeed without much regard to party politics. He never actually enlists in the Red Army even though that would be thought of as his patriotic duty. Zhevensky plays necessary if inconsequential roles during the shifting of the government seat to Moscow, the First Conference of the Red Army Men (as organizer) and the dismantling of the Left SR revolt.

A pressing issue that caused Zhenevsky much stress in his post was the substantial growth of Bolshevik enrollment. Bolshevik Party membership had risen from 23,600 in February 1917 to over 400,000 by the eve of the October Revolution. Between April and November 1918, Petrograd's Military Commissariat had sent off more than 48,000 troops. Petrograd was forced to send their remaining army to face the newly replenished Finnish Front who were allied with the Germans at the time. On the eve of what might have been a crucial and bloody battle in Petrograd, the Finns had 'refined their task to the reclamation of their homeland' and the city was not forced to fight.

Zhenevsky was steeped in the culture and politics of the formation of a new government and army and does not delve much into his personal life. He spends a full two sentences on his wife's suicide during the period of the German encroachment on Petrograd. The importance and relevance of this book is evidenced by the introduction, which states that Zhenevsky served Soviet Russia in six main capacities: “as a journalist, soldier, military administrator, historian, diplomat and chess player” (vii). The most important insights of the book deal with the state of the Red Army and the poor conditions in which Petrograd was to build its new army and government. Zhenevsky felt that it was his duty to help in the creation of order and discipline in the new Army in Petrograd which was made up of volunteers and those recommended by proletarian comrades or party members. There was low self-esteem, lack of supplies, lack of funding and deserters at the front line. Through his post as secretariat, Zhevensky was able to alleviate some of the more pressing logistical and financial issues that affected soldiers and workers and their families. The reader is able therefore able to witness the every day problems that affect the working class and soldiers.

The end of the book focuses on Zhenevsky's dissociation from his post due to infighting within the District Commissariat of Military Affairs and his appointment to work at the Supreme Military Inspectorate. This effectively ends his work in his hometown of Petrograd and represents the beginning of a new life “traveling all over Russia and helping along (the) still young efforts at army-building in very part of the country” (156). Zhevensky's book is a short 164 pages yet manages to adhere to a linear and thought provoking narrative that addresses many different facets of life in Petrograd during a time of political and social upheaval. As a primary source document of life in Petrograd and a chronicle of a short but important time during Russia's history, the book succeeds in providing many examples of every day struggle in one of Russia's most strategically and socially important cities.

<>Ivanov,Viacheslav| a{}
--|RB-C| “Crisis of Individualism”
*1921:| Ivanov,Viacheslav, and >Gershenzon,Mikhail|_Correspondence from two corners| ((dispute discussed by Florovskii))

<>Ivanov-Razumnik| a{}n{}o{
reflection on RREV 20 yrs after, on eve of WW2, in Moh.RR

<>Izvol'skii,Aleksandr Ptr*|>Izvolsky,AP a{1856}e{1919}n{WW1+ RREV2}o{stt.srv AMB.Mirx
*1920:LND,Hutchinson|_The_memoirs of Alexander Iswolsky, formerly Russian minister of foreign affairs and ambassador to France| ((UO))
*1921:Garden City NY|_Recollections of a Foreign Minister: Memoirs of Alexander Iswolsky| TBy C. L. Seeger| ((E-TXT| stt.srv vsp))
*1925:BRL,Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft für Politik und Geschichte m.b.H.|_Iswolski im Weltkriege; der diplomatische Schriftwechsel Iswolskis aus den Jahren 1914-1917; neue Dokumente aus den Geheimakten der russischen Staatsarchive, im Auftrage des Deutschen Auswärtigen Amtes, nebst einem Kommentar von Friedrich Stieve| ?4vv| ((UO| WW1b crr))
*1926:NYC,Knopf|_Isvolsky and the world war, based on the documents recently published by the German Foreign office| tlng of ?selections from GRM pbc just above; "the following pages are based on that collection of documents"| ((UO, E-TXT too? WW1))
*1989:|_vsp| ((UO))

<>Kablits,II|>Yuzov,I| a{}n{}o{
*1886:SPB|_Intelligentsiia i narod v obshchestvennoi zhizni Rossii| ((IISG=R240/38| prm ntg nrd pbl|303p|ch1="ntg-nyi biurokratizm i ppx|2="Bor’ba zpd s ntnalizmom"|3="lbx i ppx"|4="ntn-yi voprosy v Rossii,vkliuchaia i Jwx-skii"|5="Eticheskiia ucheniia i ppx"))

<>Kautsky,Karl|>KtsK| a{G/APL}
*1934:| “Marxism and Bolshevism: Democracy and Dictatorship”| In Socialism,Fascism,Communism. Joseph Shaplen and David Shub,eds| ((335 Sh 22))
*1984:NYC|_Selected Political Writings| E&TBy Patrick Goode| (( bbt.rqt 86.02))

<>Keller,Werner|_East Minus West = Zero|*1966:NYC| ((CWX hst.gph))

<>Kennan,George| a{845}e{924
*1891:|_Siberia and the Exile System| ((OWN| DK755.K343| prm trv

Siberia and the Exile System, which was originally published in 1891, is an investigative report made by the American businessman George Kennan into the lives and conditions of Siberian exiles. Having made a previous trip to Siberia for business, Kennan prefaces this work by investigating whether or not the rumors of horrible prison conditions in Siberia were true or not. The author admits that, before making this particular trip which is described in the book, he had personally looked upon the Russian government favorably and did not believe that the prisons could be as deplorable as he had heard.

During the time of Kennan’s visit, the Russian empire was going through incredibly reactionary times in response to the assassination of Alexander II in 1881. The term ‘nihilism’ invoked in Kennan visions of violent and ruthless enemies of the state; people who should undoubtedly endure years of Siberian internment. However, Kennan quickly goes back on this judgment after his first meeting with a Russian exile. Upon discussing works of literature, world events, and most of all, politics, with a large number of exiles in Siberia, Kennan comes to the conclusion that those he spoke with should be considered moderate. In his own personal opinion, there were no real grounds on which the Russian government should have found the majority of exiles as a threat. As a result, hundreds of smart and capable young Russians were doomed to a life of toil and misery because of Russia’s harsh political climate of the time.

Of course, knowing what we as Americans know now about the Gulag system during Soviet times, it is not surprising that Kennan ultimately comes to the conclusion that the treatment of exiles in Siberia was arguably the worst in a ‘civilized’ country. As an example, the first prison that Kennan investigates is the forwarding prison in Tyumen, whose purpose it was to house exiles on their way farther east. Prisons during this time, in every part of Siberia, revealed horrifying conditions for prisoners because of severe congestion. The political tensions of the time could easily be seen in these prisons, because of the numbers of those arrested drastically increased. As a result, prison conditions were crowded and rife with disease and death. In addition to not having nearly enough space to house the prisoners, there were also no plans to make the conditions any better. Kennan notes that, upon asking prison and prison hospital officials about plans to make improvements, he found that “the officials who care have not the power, and the officials who have the power do not care” (page 404). The prisons in Siberia remained congested for many months of the year, until the Siberian summer came and allowed the prisoners to continue their journey east (on foot, naturally).

This work is valuable for a number of reasons. Not only does it give the reader an inside view of a rarely traversed part of the Russian empire, but it allows the modern day reader to note the progress (or lack thereof) of the Russian prison system, as well as the settlement of Siberia in its entirety. Even in the late nineteenth century, Kennan writes about this system of exile into Siberia as a longstanding tradition, one that has been around since before the times of the Romanovs. The author places the blame of thousands of needless arrests and hundreds of deaths each year on the Russian government itself, stating that the “government is out of harmony of the spirit of the time” (page 187). Russians who showed a lot of intelligence, youth, and vigor in Kennan’s eyes were instead eaten up into the exile system because of the paranoid and outdated government that ruled them.


<>Kennan,George Frost| a{1904}e{2005}n{}o{
*1946 [1991:WDC,United States Institute of Peace] |_Origins of the Cold War: The Novikov, Kennan, and Roberts “Long Telegrams” of 1946| ((prm CWX))

*1956:1958; PNJ, PUP|_Soviet-American Relations, 1917-1920|>Kennan.Gwrx.irx| WW1b WW1c gnr.txt
v1= “Russia Leaves the War”
v2= “The Decision to Intervene”
[v3= Intervention and the Peace Conference]

Russia Leaves the War delineates the international setting of the Bolshevik regime from the November revolution of 1917 to the signing of the Brest Litovsk treaty in March of 1918. The first section of the book analyzes the relationship between the Provisional government and the government of the United States. The analysis is meant to provide historical background to the study of Soviet American relations during the first months of the Bolshevik regime. Kennan writes that American acceptance of the Provisional government allowed for the United States to attach an ideological dimension to the First World War. Such an ideological positional would have been rather unconvincing had the November revolution of 1917 not occurred. The first section can also be seen as delineating the respective goals that the United States government had for the Provisional government. Kennan writes that such goals were contradictory in nature. However, once pursued the American government was unwilling to make modifications to the subsequent goals. Kennan concludes the first section of the book by commenting on the general attitude of the American government when the rein of power shifted from the Provisional government to the Bolshevik regime.

The next section of Kennan’s book describes how the American government reacted to the Bolshevik revolution in November of 1917. Kennan establishes that America’s policy of non-recognition, toward the Bolshevik government, was based upon their understanding that the Bolshevik government wanted to make peace with the Central powers. Such an idea was seen as an act of betrayal by the United States. In this manner, Kennan maintains that American and Soviet relations were colored by Bolshevik war policy. It is against this backdrop that Kennan delineates how the American government came to support a policy of non-recognition.

Kennan’s analysis of Soviet American relations during the first months of the Bolshevik regime can also be seen as addressing the problems of allied intervention within the Russian state. Allied intervention is discussed most closely in relation to the Siberian state. However, the book does mention allied intervention in the Don Cossack territory during the last months of 1917. The primary analysis of Kennan’s book is centered however, on the day to day decisions of American peoples operating in the Russian state and the American government. Kennan establishes that the United States foreign policy was directed and influenced by these individuals. Each individual is introduced in full, so as to underscore their relative importance in the story of American Soviet relations from November 1917 to March of 1918. Kennan states that the policy of non-recognition by the United States government, forced the government to rely upon armatures who served to complicate relations between the Soviet Union and the United States. In this manner, Kennan’s book can be seen as a story of diplomatic confusion, “misunderstanding, intrigue, and malevolent exploitation.” Kennan’s central thesis establishes that the initial stages of Soviet American relations were dominated by diplomatic confusion. It is from this confusion that Soviet American relations receive their complexity.

Kennan’s book provided an excellent analysis of Soviet American relations. The only critique of Kennan’s work is that he places too much focus on individuals and not enough focus on structural constraints))
*1967: "Breakdown of Tsarist Autocracy" [In WW1b] Pipes.RR:1-26
*1979:N.NJ,PUP|_The decline of Bismarck's European order : Franco-Russian relations, 1875-1890|>Kennan.DECLINE| ((UO WW1a|
pt1= The background: Russian opinion and the war with Turkey
Franco-Russian relations, 1879-1880 ; New tsar--new alliance
A bit about personalities
pt2= The Bulgarian "Gâchis": Complications in Bulgaria
The unification of Bulgaria
The aftermath of unification
The estrangement of 1886
Katkov's attack ; The end of Battenberg
The break repaired
pt3= The Reinsurance Treaty : Giers vs. Katkov
France in the spectrum of Russian finance
Bismarck's anxieties
The Tsar's crisis of decision
France and the Russo-German crisis
Russian winter, 1887
The crisis survived
pt4= The demise of the Bismarckian system: The aftermath of the Reinsurance Treaty
The Ferdinand documents
The deteriorating three-emperor relationship
Financial and military stirrings
the Russian break with Germany

<>Kerenskii,Aleksandr Fdr*|>KrnAF| a{}e{}n{WW1b RREV2 VRM}o{Provisional Government official
RUS On eve of WW1a in Moh.RR|
*1919:LND|_The_Prelude to Bolshevism: The Kornilov Rebellion [E-TXT]
*1927:LND|_The_Catastrophe: Kerensky's Own Story of the Russian Revolution
*1934:NYC|_The_Crucifixion of Liberty| ((??noUO))
*1965:NYC|_Russia and History's Turning Point
re.VRM plt in Moh.RR
--|>Abraham,Richard|_Alexander_Kerensky: The First Love of the Revolution

<>Khabalov,on RREV2 [RRC,3]

<>Kizevetter,Aleksandr Axr*| a{866}e{933}n{}o{
*1910:MVA|_Mestnoe samoupravlenie v Rossii IX-XIX st.: Istoricheskii ocherk|2nd ed= PGR:1917| ((gbx.rfm plt.clt lcl.slf.apx cst fdr|2nd ed=JS6056.K47))
*1912:MVA|_Istoricheskie ocherki| ((OWN ndr lbx|“Iz istorii russkogo liberalizma: Ivan Petrovich Pnin”:57-87 (lxt lbx mvt,cst pressure,1730; Pnin:pbl structure has no foundation) ))
*1929:PRAGUE|_Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii| ((GRS:187,221! prm vsp? hst.gph RREV1))

<>Kliuchevskii,Vasilii Osip*|>KqvVO| a{841ja16}b{PNZgbx}e{911my12}n{}o{lbx hstian prf
*1910c:L.ENG and 1911-1913:NYC|_A_History of Russia| TBy C. J. Hogarth??| 5vv| ((gnr |>Kliuchevskii,1-??|>Kqv,1-5| An extremely faulty old translation of the venerable Kurs russkoi istorii| Volumes 3 and four available in later, superior translations = G/1969/ and /1997/ blw))

*1911c:|_Kurs russkoi istorii| *1958 ed,v#5:461 contains txt intended for revised final v.of Kurs, incomplete at K's death & never pbd till now =

K pst nabroski to his kurs in order to bring out a final ed| We will never know bcs he died bfr v5 cld be revised| The era of rfm was the final topic treated in his kurs, and the txt under revision at his death concentrated on the institution and ekn dimensions of serf emancipation| As a young man, K witnessed the era of rfm in all its complexity,but in his unrevised txt he elected to skim over the broader social hst of the era| In the freer atmosphere of the 1905 REV era, his nabroski sought to rectify this delicate evasion in the unfinished revision of v5| Society, he noted, found it nearly impossible, under pressure of endless sequence of innovations, to sustain a well-considered relationship of support and involvement in state sponsored rfm. Society could not adjust them to its own needs. As the reform came into full and coordinated operation, a complex, instinctive, natural mobilization of social forces arose “which was not based on conscious leadership or direction” and which expressed itself only through “aggregate indicators” [avtomatiqeskix pokazatel’ei]. It could be described statistically, for example, stockmarket and price fluctuations. The appearance, for example, of joint stock companies in aggregate indicated that the center of gravity of national life was shifting. Just as the old basis of wealth evaporated, so also did the social presumptions [here called "social-service hierarchies"] that underpinned them. New enterprises and new professions quickly and unexpectedly transformed the perceived social landscape.

“Human [this word substituted for marked out “social”] relations were coming unraveled and at the same time were reweaving themselves in new combinations. The dense structures of community disintegrated along with the ancient gentry estates. Society quickly changed its membership and profile [phrase marked out: “persons re-measured themselves with a new yardstick, old authorities were replaced by new, less ancient”], new types made their appearance in society and in literature. In this whirlwind of new movements, one’s personality lost its stability. Old foundations of personal and social significance crumbled and were replaced by new. People still continued to feel motivated to act, but had ceased to predict the consequences of their actions.” [This was the last sentence that K completed in his MS revision of the famous Kurs. These were perhaps the last paragraphs that the great historian wrote.]

*1969:C.IL|_A_Course in Russian History: The Seventeenth Century| TBy N. Duddington|_Kurs russkoi istorii| v3| ((>Kliuchevskii,3|>Kqv,3| gnr))
*1997:Armonk NY,Sharpe|_A_Course in Russian History: The Time of Catherine the Great| TBy Marshall Shatz
*:| Re.Dmx1 & RREV1,GO GRS:190 etc
*1966:|>Kireeva,RA|_V._O._Kliuchevskii kak istorik russkoi istoricheskoi nauki| ((hst.gph))
*1987:Irving CA:Charles Schlacks,Jr|_V._O._Kliuchevskii’s Russian history: Critical Studies| EBy Marc Raeff| ((noUO hst.gph))
*1995:||>Byrnes,Robert|_V._O._Kliuchevskii: Historian of Russia|

<>Knox,Alfred William Fortescue,General Sir| a{1870}n{WW1b RREV2 RREV3}o{mlt
*1921:LND,Hutchinson Co.|_With the Russian Army,1914-1917, being chiefly extracts from the diary of a military attaché ...| 2vv| ((trv mlt.dvn 58 lxt~ and 19 MAPS))
In WRR }s{}t{}8{}

<>Kokovtsov,Vladimir Nxi*| a{}n{}o{Imperial governmental figure
*1904:1914; Mstt.mny| State Finance Minister
*1911:1914; SoM prx| Council of Ministers President
*1935:S.CA,SUP|_Out of My Past: The Memoirs of Count Kokovtsov...| TBy L. Matveev of 1933:PRS ed#1| *1992:MVA|_Iz moego proshlogo|2vv|| ((DK254.K63A3%7C| vsp stt.srv ekn vsp))

<>Kolchak,Aleksandr V| a{}e{}n{Gwrx SBR}o{
*1935:Stanford|_The_Testimony of Kolchak and Other Siberian Materials

<>Kollontai,Aleksandra M| a{
*1918: “The Family and the Communist State” [RBV1:79-88]
*1921: “Fight Against Prostitution” [RBV1:96-106]
*1923: “Make Way for the Winged Eros” [RBV1:179-84]

<>Korolenko,Vladimir Galaktion| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{
*1972:O.ENG|_The_History of My Contemporary| ((UO))

<>Konstitutsionno-demokraticheskaia partiia|>KDs|
*1906ja05:11; |_Vtoroi vserossiiskii s”ezd Konstitutsionno-demokraticheskoi partii 5-11 ianvaria 1906 g|

<>Kostomarov,Nikolai Ivn*|>KstNI| a{817}n{PBL| prf Pvsp:193 sd Wwa & Kst = new hst.gph sense of nrd; pbl heard “the voice of a living people” not as passive material in hands of ddd stt,“no kak faktor,pytavwiisya samostoyatel’no napravlyat’ istoriqeskii process, po men’wei mere vyrajavwii svoe otnowenie k tem ili drugim ego storonam”}
*1847:GRM Augsburg|_Knigi bitiia ukrains’kogo naroda| Translated as Kostomarov’s “Books of Genesis of the Ukrainian People”| IBy B. Yanivs’kyi [Volodymyr Mijakovs’kyj]|Mimeographed Series:Research Program on the U.S.S.R.,60|NYC:1954| ((prm UKR KMO))
*1854:pbd nrd songs (got into trouble w/plc [KstN,Avto:218])
*1857:pbd rpt [?re.StO or Jwx ritual dth-?] Mordovtsev reprted this in Pamiatnaia knizhka SARoi gubernii [KstN,Avto:226 PmK]
*1857:|_Bogdan Khmel’nitskii i vozrashchenie Yuzhnoi Rusi k Rossii| ((UKR hst))
*1858:|_Bunt Sten’ki Razina| ((rvs RS0 UKR))
*1860jy:Svm#7,3:75-92|“O kazachestve: Otvet 'Vilenskomu vestniku'”| ((Attacked idea that kzk anarchy,KstN tried to show that simple dmk idl motivated kzk| To protect dmk,they shifted back and forth twixt RUS &POL [KstN,Avto:270-1]))
*1860:Klk#61:| ltr-edt Hzn re.UKR
*1861??:Osnova:| “Dve russkoi narodnosti”| ((prm UKR ntn nrd idl=UKR.distinctness;“clxless” “brz-less” nrd| hst= whole nrd| All my hst work in the reform era has given rise to plm attacks|My idea that in udel system of Rus a fdr principle existed, and that I intended that to apply to the present day,perhaps to predict future|But I never said anything directly about that|People read things into my pst [he seems to be saying,in so many words]|Esp. “Dve russ. narodnosti”|People have the habit of reading between the lines,esp. under severe cnp| Even took me to be in favor of “serparatism”,esp. after POL.rbx|Once that great fear passed,then people could see how two RUS narodnosti fulfill one another|Still,I hve been acz- of “UKRainofil’stvo” [KstN,Avto:272-4]))
*1861??:Osnova:| “O federativnom nachale drevnei Rusi”| ((prm ntn fdr hst plt stt idl))
*1909:YSL:117-139| “Peterburgskii universitet nachala 1860-kh godov”| ((prm SPB.unv|xrx))
*1922:MVA|_Avtobiografiia...| ((HOT UIL;noNYP|8x11 xrp:210-226 “5. Zhizn’ v Saratove”| prm slf.bxo vsp))

<>Kovalevskii,Maksim M|>KvyMM| a{}n{vlg.o Mrx | lbx tUt dmk trx idl | FREV}o{prf
*1879:|_Obshchinnoe zemlevladenie [Communal Landownership]| ((hd715.k66| 231p| Translated excerpts in >Krader, _The_Asiatic Mode:343-412| HB97.5.K6976))
*1895:MVA|_Proiskhozhdenie sovremennoi demokratii | 2v| v1: “Obshchestvennyi i politicheskii stroi Frantsii nakanune revoliutsii”| 3d edition| SPB:1912| v2: “Narodnaia monarkhiia: razbor sotsial’nogo i politicheskogo zakonodatel’stva konstituanty”| ((jc421.k6| v1:hst of pbl/plt background to FREV| v2:course of FREV, shifting to tUt crystalizations of pbl/ekn changes))
*1902|_Russian political institutions; the growth and development of these institutions from the beginnings of Russian history to the present time| DK61+.K88
*1906:SPB|_Politicheskaia programma novogo Soiuza narodnogo blagodenstviia | ((prm grp/Partiia.dmk.rfm plt.pty RREV1))

<>Kropotkin,Petr| a{842no27}e{921fe28}n{gte anx}o{anarchist theorist| LOOP
*1874:Arrested & imprisoned for participation in populist movement
*1876:Escaped into west European emigration
*1917:Returned to Russia in the midst of great revolutionary changes
*1862:1867; Siberian diary [RGIA f.1410, op.1, d.84]
*1882:Fortnightly Review#37 or #38:| “The Russian revolutionary party”| ((893:rvs.bbl| AP4.F6))
*1899:Boston-LND|_The_Memoirs of a Revolutionist| (( [ID] 1971:Dover pb ed., w/notes by Nicolas Walter:503-40 and w/original index))
--|_Mutual aid [Hollister,Landmarks,2:301-303]
*1918je16:Svoboda Rossii#48:| “??,re. Linev,LA”
*1995|_Selections| EBy Marshall Shatz| ((UO))

<>Krupskaia,Nadezhda K|
*1917oc26: Leninist party [Senn,Readings,2]
*1922: “What a Communist Ought to Be Like” [RBV1:38-41]
--|Reminiscences of Lenin

<>Kurbskii,Andrei and Ivan IV. The correspondence| DK106.A25

<>Lane,David Stuart,ed| a{}
*1978: & 1971|_Politics and Society in the USSR| ((jn65...| prm.sbk plt.clt))

<>Lange,Christian Lous| a{1869}e{1938}n{}o{psx dddist, rec'd Nobel Pr
Wrote much on internationalism irx and psx
*1917:WDC,Endowment|CE.irx.pcx. Division of Intercourse and Education. Publications, no. 12|_Russia, the Revolution and the War: An Account of a Visit to Petrograd and Helsingfors in March, 1917| ((UO| trv wrx&REV WW1b RREV))

<>Lavrov,Peter L|>LvrPL| a{}o{prf
--|_Historical Letters| TIEBy James P. Scanlan| ((UO))
--| In Edie

<>Lawrence,T.E| a{1888}b{}c{}d{}e{1935}n{WW1b WW1c AfroAsia SaA}o{
*1920au02: "A Report on Mesopotamia"|>Lawrence.REPORT| [E-TXT]
*1926:|_The_Seven Pillars of Wisdom|>Lawrence.7| [E-TXT#1 | E-TXT#2 | E-TXT#3 | E-TXT#4]
*--Clio Visualizing History [many fine photos]
*--Kichael Korda, "What We Need to Learn from T.E. Lawrence" [E-TXT]
*--F/Reid,Brian Holden/

<>Lenin,Vladimir Il'ich|>Ulianov,VI|>LnnVI| a{}n{}o{
SAC 18-hop LOOP
|_The_Development of Capitalism in Russia
|_Persecutors of the Zemstvo|
*1902|_What’s to be Done?| ((SAC.TXT))
*1905| “Ein Vortrag ueber die Revolutionsbewegung in Jahre 1905”|In Leninskii sbornik#5:46| ((crt of Wbr))
*1905|_Lecture on the 1905 Revolution| ((UO))
*1916|_State and Revolution
*1916|_Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism
--| In Moh.RR
*1921| “Better Fewer, But Better”| ((SAC.TXT))
*1921?:C.IL,Charles H. Kerr & Company Co-operative|LnnVI with >BxrN [F/] & >Rutgers,S.J. [Wki] |_New Policies of Soviet Russia| ((UO|>Lnn.New| ekn.trx NEP))

*1960:1978; MVA & LND|_Collected Works| 46 vols| ((prm Mrx Lnn idl))
*1975:NYC|_The_Lenin Anthology| Edited by Robert C. Tucker
|_Reference Index to Collected Works of V. I. Lenin. Parts one and two. bbt.rqt 86.02
|_Selected Works
|_Complete Collected Works | :| ((bbt.rqt 86.02| prm))
*1970:OXF|>Deutscher,I|_Lenin's Childhood| ((OWN))

Lenin cited by GRS:58 (9:129);59 (10:252);191 (ll:182);222 (12:27)

<>Leont'ev,Konstantin| a{831}e{891}n{}o{phl

<>Leontovich,Viktor V|>Leontowitch,Victor| a{
*1957:Frankfurt am Main|_Geschichte des liberalismus in Russland| ((lbx stt.srv| p418:apologizes for Wbr’s wrd.hst “Pseudokonstitutional” [sic],explaining that the great scholar fell under the [temporary] influence of KD acquaintances))
*1980:|_Istoriia liberalizma v Rossii, 1762-1914| ((UO| Translated from the 1957 GRM ed| Later RUS ed=OWN))
*1995:MVA, Russkii put’|_Istoriia liberalizma v Rossii| Series: Issledovaniia noveishei russkoi istorii,1|EBy A. I. Solzhenitsyn| ((OWN NOndx| Dmx4;txt [762] A-2 era [135-163] concentrates on qin lbx,stt.srv lbx & isolates attention to issues of srf.rfm & lwx.rfm| Brief attention to gnr atmosphere of 60s,& to Ktk & Qqn BUT not Blg Egt Lvr Drj PavP Pnt KstN etc;NO LTF WXM VSH etc| Accepts Kulczycki’s “spiritual atmosphere” analysis of 60s,seeing only replacement of Hglan abstractions by Vogt & Moleschott “vulgar materialism”,equally abstract [138] Intro sets down strict definition| Divides rdx~ frm lbx| Combo cannot be| lbx anti=rvs| L follows Hauriou,“Principles de droit public”(PRS:1916) & Dec.Rights of Man and of Cit| Principle idl of lbx is pzn freedom [pzn.rgt] Principle method is not construction but disassemblement [Abschaffen] Historically lbx predates evolution of classical plc.stt~, centralized gvt~ of 18th.c,but was called into being in mod.times to combat centralized stt| lbx strives to reduce gvt control & tUt~ to minimum (therein is major distinction frm anarchism) lbx recognizes need to humanize nkz -- minimum stt does this| lbx.stt based on “répartition de la souveraineté” [fdr of stt.ndp] Power distributed throughout pbl, creating free pzn~ w/in free stt| plt.freedom is extension of public freedom [cvc.rgt], but fundamental difference = Civil freedom can be guaranteed by a centralized stt [235] L pits Granovskii v.Hzn| lbx~ are Qqn,early Kst etc [I suppose even Vlv Zmv plan L-M cst pln| Too bad this tlng appeared just when RUS needed a little authentic, old-fashioned lbxism]))

<>Leroy-Beaulieu,Anatole| a{}e{}n{}o{pundit jrn.svt media
}f{}g{brt also pundit & svt
*1881:elx prf École Libre des Sciences Politiques
*1887:elx mmb Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques
*1906:dtr of Ecole after Albert Sorel dth
*1882:1889; series of rtl in RdDM which fed into editions of L’Empire
*1881:PRS, Hachette|_L’Empire des tsars et les Russes| 3vv| Reprint=*1988, Lausanne, L’Age d’homme (3rd ed?)| ((UO| Intended for the gnr pbl [893:rvs bbl| trv krx tUt stt| plt.vlg.o:“La commune est [...],en dehors de l’autocratie,la seule institution indegène,la seule tradition vivante du peuple russe” 2:2| But at end of v1 he savaged ekn.vlg.o))
--|_The_Empire of the Tsars and the Russians| 3vv| ((UO| RUS3 USA2.gnr w/brt blw))

<>Leroy-Beaulieu,Pierre| a{}e{}n{}o{pundit jrn.svt media
*:|_The_awakening of the East; Siberia - Japan - China| ((E-TXT))

<>Lockhart,Robert Hamilton Bruce| a{1887}b{}e{1970}n{WW1 RREV}o{
*1915:1938; |_Diaries v1| ((UO))
*1933:NYC,Putnam|_British Agent| Iby Hugh Walpole| ((UO| 354pp))
*1967|_Two Revolutions| ((UO))

<>Loris-Melikov,Mikhail Tarielovich| a{
*1881ja28:mmo to A-2 [Raeff2:133-40] (( prm cst plt.clt| See 25:KrA#8 for A-3 & Loris, plus 1881mr08:SoM mtg in Perets dnv [full & corrected re-prt of 1906:Byloe version]))

<>Lotman,Yurii Mxl*| a{922}b{}c{}d[}e{993}n{}o{ [ID] blt.svt clt.trx "Semiotics"
*1985:|_Semiotics of Russian Cultural History| IBy Gasparov,Boris| ((UO| Anthology of rtl~ w/ Ginsburg,LidiiaYa Uspenskii,BorisA))
*2006:|_Lotman and Cultural Studies

<>Lukomskīĭ,Aleksandr Srg*| a{1868}e{1939}n{WW1 RREV wrx&REV}o{mlt.GNR
}m{ GO 1917mr14
*1975:Westport.CN,Hyperion|_Memoirs of the Russian revolution| Tlng of *1922:Vospominanīia generala A. S. Lukomskago| ((UO| 255pp))

<>Lunacharskii,Anatolii V| a{
*1918:1927; on edc in RBV: 285ff
*1923|_Revolutionary Silhouettes| ((UO))
>O'Connor,Timothy E. The Politics of Soviet Culture: Anatolii Lunacharskii. UMI Research,1983

<>Lunin,Mikhail| G/Fedorov,Vladimir

<>Lussu,Emilio (1890-1975)|_A_Soldier on the Southern Front: The Classic Italian Memoir of World War I| Tby Gregory Conti| ((WW1b sld.vqt 288pp| CF=Barthas| Sheer absurdity of life [smx] and death among ITL on attack on OST.MGR Adriatic coastline, Asiago plains between ITL and Slovenia. Supplied with dysfunctional wire cutter vs-barbed wire and bedecked in armored vests with no more protective capability than an ordinary jacket. Two portraits of utterly incompetent commanders. One, Major Melchiorri, ordered death for a unit that had fled a collapsing cave where they had ben ordered to await orders to attack the enemy. Execution squad refused to shoot these fellow sld~. Melchiorri bgn to shoot members of the insubordinate unit until the punishment brigade turned their weapons on the deranged officer, killing him. Lussu observed that "The war's main engine is alcohol". real enemy not the OST troops but their own idiotic or psychopathic ofc~
Like Ernest Hemingway, Emilio Lussu served at the Asiago plateau in Northern Italy. A 1937 note from the author explains that his book has no thesis except to describe what he saw; that is enough, however, to create a compelling read that enters the mind of a man at the front, exposed daily to terrible scenes and decisions that change who he is. At times Lusso's air of detachment is chilling; in other situations, in humanizing his enemies he is himself humanized. Historical details abound and will be gratifying to readers who want to discover more about the war in Italy

<>Lutz,Ralph and >Burdick,Charles B| a{}n{WW1c wrx&REV prm.sbk}o{
*1966:NYC,Praeger|_The_Political Institutions of the German Revolution, 1918-1919|>Lutz.GREV| (())
*1968:S.CA,HtUt|>Burdick|_Ralph H._Lutz and the Hoover Institution

<>Luxemburg,Rosa| a{
*1905:SPB|_Staraia i novaia revoliutsiia [The Old and the New Revolution] ((|>LS&N|))
*1986:LND,Bookmarks|_The_Mass Strike| ((UO))
*1906se25(NS):GRM Manheim| speech re.RREV1, RUS tlng=Rech' proiznesennaia na narodnom sobranii v Mangeime 25 sentiabria 1906 g. (SPB:?)| ((8pp| G/PREV:183-6 rvw))
--|_Gesammelte Werke 5vv| ((UO))
--|_Gesammelte Briefe| ((UO))
--|_Lenin and Marxism| ((see just below))
here in reverse order of original composition & pbc))
*1961:A.MI,UMPress|_The_Russian Revolution and Leninism or Marxism| ((UO| G/PREV:179-82| pbd *1966-1968:Frankfurt|_Politische Schriften|3vv| ((UO))
*1971:NYC,Monthly Review|_Selected Writings....| ((UO))
*1973:NYC,Pathfinder|_Reform or Revolution| With an appendix (63-75),Eduard Bernstein, “Evolutionary Socialism: Ultimate Aim and Tendency” | ((UO| rfm.rvs))
*1978:B.CO,Westview|_The_Letters of Rosa Luxemburg| ((UO))
}s{ }t{ }8{}


<>Maklakov,Vasilii A|>MklVA| a{}n{RREV1}o{1905 activist and KD party leader
Maklakov LOOP
*1923de:SEER#??| “The Peasant Question and the Russian Revolution”| ((prm krx RREV3))
*1936:PRS|_Vlast' i obshchestvennost' na zakate staroi Rossii|2 (or more??) volumes| ((GRS:53,187 prm vsp RREV1 stt.dmx lbx))
*1950:RRe 1| “The Agrarian Problem in Russia before the Revolution”| ((krx Stp))
--|_The_First State Duma: Contemporary Reminiscences| ((stt.dmx1 RREV1 vsp plt))
*2006:MVA|_Vtoraia gosudarstvennaia Duma. 20 fev-2 iiunia 1907 g| ((UO))
--| on skz bfr WW1a [Moh.RR]

<>Manakin,V| a{}n{wrx&REV WW1b}o{
*1917su: mlt shock battalions in Moh.RR|
}t{BSE3 DS&D ZDV,4 MSP Wki

<>Mandelstam,Nadezhda| a{}n{clt blt dsn}o{
*1970:NYC|_Hope Against Hope: A Memoir|

<>Marvin,Charles Thomas| a{1854}e{1890}n{nrg.p CSP.S}o{trv
_The_region of the eternal fire an account of a journey to the petroleum region of the Caspian in 1883| ((UO))

>Marwick|_War, peace, and social change: Documents, Europe 1900-1955| GO W&P| wrx&pcx

<>Marx,Karl| a{
*1853:1856; |_The_Eastern Question: A Reprint of Letters Written 1853-1856 Dealing with the Events of the Crimean War
--|_Secret Diplomatic History of the Eighteenth Century and the Story of the Life of Lord Palmerston| ((DA47.65.M35| A translation of | Die Geschichte der Geheimdiplomatie des 18. Jahrhunderts: Über den asiatischen Ursprung der russischen Despotie.... (See 1977:Berlin edition) ))
*1859:Preface to a Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy [TXT of Marx's brilliant summarization of his historical/materialist doctrine]
*1878fa:Marx's letter to editor of the Russian journal Otechestvennye zapiski| Translated in SLM
*1881| “Briefwechsel zwischen Vera Zasulich und Marx”| Marx-Engels Archiv 1: 309-342| Translated in SLM
*1882ja:Marx and Engels preface to 2nd Russian edition of the Communist Manifesto| Translated in SLM
*1948:ArxME#11, series 2| “Konspekty i vypiski K. Marksa iz russkikh knig”| ((Contents = “Konspekt raboty N. G. Chernyshevskogo 'Pis'ma bez adresa'” (3-17) | “K voprosu ob otmene krepostnogo prava v Rossii” (18-20; also frm Qrn) | Koshelev, Samarin & Dmitriev, Kavelin (“Chem nam byt'?”) | Skaldin |Yanson | Engel'gardt,“Voprosy russkogo sel'skogo khozaistva” | Issue also contains “'Pis'ma bez adresa' N. G. Chernyshevskogo s pometkami Marksa” (172-99). See SLM; see also Kimball resume
*1962:NYC|_Marx vs. Russia| Edited by J. A. Doerig| ((noUO))
*:|_The_Unknown Karl Marx| ((HX39.5.A224+1971))

>Marx,Karl, and Friedrich Engels|
*1953:LND|_The_Russian Menace to Europe: A Collection of Articles,Speeches,Letters and News Dispatches| Edited by Paul Blackstock and B. F. Hoselitz| ((noUO))
*1972:Munich|_Die_russische Kommune: Kritik eines Mythos| Edited by M. Rubel

>Marxism-Leninism,Institute of,Moscow|
*:|_The_General Council of the First International,1864-66 [1866-1868;1868-1870;1870-1871;etc.] ((HX11.I453))
*:|_The_Hague Congress of the First International, September 2-7,1872| ((HX11.I5I66))
*1967:MVA|_K. Marks,F. Engel's i revoliutsionnaia Rossiia| Edited by A. K. Vorob'eva
Boris Nikolaevskii on Karl Marx's Russian-language library [TXT]
Marx's interpretation of Russian society and politics = Shanin and Wada and Wittfogel chs. 9 and 10
On the "Asiatic Mode of Production", G/Kovalevskii G/Krader

<>Marye,George Thomas T| a{1849}n{R&A WW1b}o{
*1914:1916; USA ambassador to Russia
*1929:LND,Selwyn and Blount|_Nearing the End in Imperial Russia| ((479pp))

<>Matlaw,R. E.,ed. Belinsky,Chernyshevsky and Dobroliubov: Selected Criticism. NYC: 1962 [reprint,1976:B.IN,IUP]. PG3011.M33

<>McCauley,Martin,ed| a{}n{}o{}
--|_Octobrists to Bolsheviks: Imperial Russian 1905-1917|>McC1|
--|_Russian Revolution and the Soviet State,1917-1921: Documents|>McC2|

<>Medvedev,Roy A| a{}n{STL| RREV3}o{hst dsn
--|_All Stalin's Men| Anchor pb. Hamilton bks| ((prm dsn))
--|Let History Judge: The Origins and Consequences of Stalinism. NY: 1971
--|Essay in Tucker,Stalinism
--|The October Revolution

<>Medvedev,Zhores A| a{}n{scs plt.clt}o{
*1969:NYC,CUP|_The_Rise and Fall of T. D. Lysenko|

<>Meiendorf,Aleksandr Feliks|>Meyendorff,Alexander| a{1869}e{1964}n{}o{
*1929:NYC,Holt|_Background to the Russian Rev| ((UO DK265.M38))
*1932:|With >Kohn,Stanislav|_Social cost of the war| New Haven, Yale University Press; London, H. Milford, Oxford University Press, for CE.irx.pcx, Division of economics and history| 219 [CE.irx.pcx. Division of economics and history. Economic and social history of the world war ... Russian series]))

<>Mel'gunov,Sergei Ptr*| a{879}b{}c{}d{}e{956}n{vs-SSR gte}o{jrn pbc plt.ddd
Narodnye sotsialisty
*1924|_Red Terror in Russia| ((DK265.7.M4613))
*1953|_The_Bolshevik Seizure of Power| ((DK265.M39613))
[W] [Russian W]

<>Mendeleev,Dmitrii| ((prm clt scs))

<>Merezhkovskii,Dmitrii| a{}
--|RB-C| “Revolution and Religion”

<>Miakotin,Venedikt| a{1867}e{1937
}p{A member of the Union of Unions in 1905 Rev., and later National Socialists. Left Russia in 1918
*1924mr:Slavonic Review#2,6:465-86| “Lenin (1870-1924)”| ((obituary. Lenin “was the incarnation of certain characteristic features of Russian life; a typical outcome of the distorted development of the public life of Russia in the times of tsarism, when the Government drove it into the underground of revolution”. Lenin lived his whole life “remote from the broad life of the people and its complex, mutually interconnected needs, interests and problems”. [IE:Lenin “incarnated” “certain characteristic features”, “the distorted development of the public life of Russia in the times of tsarism”, namely the absence of what has to be described as “a civil society”

<>Military-Revolutionary Committee|>Voenno-revoliutsionnyi Komitet|>MRC| a{917}n{RREV3}o{mlt.rvs.cmm sld}
*1964-1967:MVA-LGR|_Petrogradskii Voenno-revoliutsionnyi Komitet: dokumenty i materialy| 3vv|

<>Miller,Wright W| a{}n{}o{trv
}q{1930s into WW2:trv, often by foot around USSR (Russia)
*1958:|_The_Young Traveler in Russia|
*1961:NYC|_Russians as People| ((prm trv| DK276.M5| *1960:Daedalus rvw))
*1970:South Brunswick.NJ,Barnes|_Leningrad| Series: Cities of the World,vol. 13| ((prm grd| DK552.M54))

<>Miliukov,Pavel Nxi*|>MlkPN| a{}n{prf RREV1 RREV2 Gwrx | KDs, Dmx, VRM, gte| ntg}o{Historian and leading Russian lbx politician, 1905-1920
Miliukov LOOP
*1903?|_Iz_istorii russkoi intelligentsii: Sbornik statei i etiudov| Reprint of ed#2 (Gulf Breeze FL:1970?)| (())
*1904:C.IL|_Russia and Its Crisis| Concentrate on chapters 5, 7 &8 | Summary of chapter four| ((|>MR&C))
*1915se:Progressive Bloc program [DIR]

*1917:C.ENG, CUP|_Russian Realities and Problems|>Mlk.R&P| WW1b wrx&REV| Co-authors = Miliukov,Paul | Struve,Petr | Lappo-Danilevskii,A | Dmowski,Roman | and Williams,Harold| Edited by J.D. Duff

The book is [...] a comprehensive look at pre-revolutionary Russia and the various problems it was faced with. A few of the authors are ex-patriots of the Russian system leading to some natural biases toward the subject matter while one author is British (Harold Williams), who wrote with a more objective tone.

Part 1 was written by Paul Miliukov, a former professor at Sofia University, Miliukov was a prominent member of the Russia Duma from its creation in 1905. He was the leader of the Constitutional Democrat party and it is claimed by the editor that no man knows more about Russian legislative politics had Paul Miliukov. Part 1 talks about World War I from an interesting perspective, Miliukov believes that World War I was primarily a war of England versus Germany, and Russia versus Austria Hungary. The dangers of imperialism come to a head in the struggle of the major European powers. Germany feels they are being suffocated by British commercial and naval might, while Russia wants greater influence over the Slavic peoples in the Balkans.

Part 2 also written by Miliukov, discussed the tsar’s corrupt influence on the workings of the Russian Duma established after the 1905 revolution. The 1905 Russian constitution brought a small taste of democracy to Russia by allowing political parties and giving some people the right to vote. This democracy, however, was largely a farce as the tsar constantly undermined the Russian Duma. Abusing his power the Czar severely limited the voting power of the peasants and urban workers, while expanded the rights of the rich and landed gentry. The tsar also exempted his own personal finances from Duma control, despite his personal finances being directly tied to the state treasury.

In part 3 Peter Struve, covers the history of Russian economics leading up to the war. Struve discusses Russia historical position as a link between the Western and Eastern worlds. He attempts to identify the difficult moments when it can said that Russia entered the world of European economics, as opposed to the relative isolation if lived under before the reforms of Peter the Great. The founding of St Petersburg, he argues was a key moment as it was a window to the West.

Roman Dmowski, in part 4 discussed Russia’s tenuous relationship with Poland throughout the century. World War I calls in question the Polish identity and the existence of a Polish nation. The essay deals with the issues that empires with Polish lands faced in dealing with Polish people. Dmowski also goes further back into history to discuss Poland’s unfortunate position of constantly being wedged between great Empires, such as the Holy Roman Empire or the Byzantine Empire. Due to Poland’s geographic position Poland has always had to absorb culture and ideas that where alien to the nation. The essay also deals with the differing lifestyles of people living under different occupying nations and empires throughout history.
In part 5, Harold Williams discusses the multi-ethnic nature of the Russian Empire. He argues that some people knew that under the Russian empire there exists a large Finnish, Polish, Armenian, and Jewish population. Russia is not the mono-ethnic homogenous state that many believed it to be, with over 100 different languages being spoken throughout the Russian Empire. During the 18th century Russia moved to a heavy development of Western culture, largely drowning out some of the smaller Eurasia cultures present in Russia at the time.

The final part is about scientific development in Russia. Lappo-Danilevsky, the author of the chapter discusses the historical influences on Russian learning throughout history. The influences on Russian learning range from the Greek civilization to monotheism. A gradual rise of secular thought and trade with the West was responsible for a great deal of Russian education and learning.

Russian realities and problems is a rather old book that may be outdated by much more recent research. The book does present an interesting style of primary source narratives of people who where very much involved in the history directly. The first two chapters in the book written by Paul Miliukov prove to be the strongest and most useful for historical research and understanding due to Miliukov’s position in the Russian Duma during it’s founding.

*1921:1924; Sofia|_Istoriia vtoroi revoliutsii| Translated by T. and R. Stites, et al. as = _The_Russian_Revolution| 3vv|>Mlk.RR| ((DK265.M49313| 3vv| prm RREV2 lbx| Excerpted in Moh.RR|

The book begins with a good, though brief, introduction to the author, Paul Miliukov, giving the reader an idea of the perspective from which he is writing. This early section contains what I see as one of the most important lines of the book "Miliukov's attempt to maintain the distinction between historian and memoirist does not come off." (page xx) As a reader it is very important to keep in mind that Miliukov's writing has been called "False from beginning to end" (Trotsky).  Almost all historians acknowledge that he at least omits details which might prove critical of him or his pro-Romanov, or rather pro-strong government beliefs.

This is the first volume in a three part series dealing with the 1917 revolution and the events which followed. This installment focuses on the events which took place in 1917 with a pair of chapters on the important events leading up to 1917, one covering the 1700's until 1905 and another from 1905 and 1907.

One topic which is covered in depth throughout this book is the Duma. Miliukov being an influential political leader witnessed the inner workings of the Russian legislative body and gives some interesting insights as to the body's operations (the Duma's reaction to the appointment of Protopopov, pgs. 18-20, the failed attempt to dissolve the Duma, pg. 169).

Another topic discussed in some detail is the role of the military in the 1917 revolution [mlt]. Beginning with the uprisings in Tauride Palace mutinies on Feburary 26 th (pg. 26) and continuing with the problems of morale amongst the men fighting at the front after the overthrow of the old government. (pgs. 97-108)

There are also many descriptions of the role of the soldiers in the Bolshevik revolution which starts on about page 175 and goes throughout the rest of the book.

One of the main actors of this period that Miliukov mentions at length is I.G. Tsereteli, a onetime Duma deputy from Georgia. He goes so far as to quote one as saying, "As a whole, the history of the Committee in terms of its organization and membership should be divided into two periods: before and after the arrival of Tsereteli " (pg. 52).

Since there are two members in our group who are focusing their researching on the Okhrana I should note that there are only two references to the group in this book, both of which are brief. On Page 24 there is a mention of how the major proponent of a plan to march on the same day as the Duma reopened was in fact an Okhrana agent provocateur. On page 26 there is a mention that one of the first acts of the mutinying soldiers mentioned above was to burn the Okhrana headquarters at Tverskaia Street (pg. 26).

*1926:SEER#5:?| “The Influence of English Political Thought in Russia”| ((lbx plt.idl mnt))
*1935:PRS|Sovremennaia zapiski#57:??| “Liberalizm, radikalizm i revoliutsiia: Po povodu kritiki V. A. Maklakova”| ((GRS:54 prm plm w/Maklakov RREV1 lbx rdx plt.trx))
*1942:Ph.PA|_Outlines of Russian Culture| v1= “Religion and the Church in Russia”| v2= “Literature in Russia”| v3= “Architecture, Painting, and Music in Russia”| ((gnr clt chx rlg avc blt xdj rkt mzk RUS2))
*1955:NYC|_Vospominaniia| Abridged translation EBy Arthur Mendel|_Political Memoirs,1905-1917| ((DK254.M52A313| prm vsp KDs RREV lbx RUS2))
*1974:1975; Gulf Breeze FL, Academic Internatinal|_Outlines of Russian Culture| v3,pt1 = _Origins of Ideology| v3,p2 = _Ideologies in Conflict| TEby Joseph L. Wieczynski| IBy Joseph T. Fuhrmann,“The Two worlds of Paul Miliukov”| ((trx RUS1 re.ToT zpd StO Raskol Krizhanich| pbl sSs/ToR clx| pt2 ch.2= “Lack of Opposition to the P.1 rfm~”:12-20| ch. 7=“Social Opposition”| ch. 11=“Society and the Table of Ranks” 91-96))

<>Milner,Alfred| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{
*1892:|_England in Egypt| ((E-TXT| MPR WW1a

<>Mirsky,Prince D.S|>Sviatopolk-Mirskii,Dmitrii Petrovich.| a{890au22}e{939je06}n{}o{ ID
*1926:N.NY_Contemporary Russian Literature,1881-1925| ((PG2951.M52| ntg blt REV))
*1927:N.NY|_A_History of Russian Literature from the Earliest Times to the Death of Dostoyevsky [1881]| ((891.709 M679h| blt ntg))
*1931:L.ENG|_Russia: A Social History|L.ENG:1931| ((947 M679| pbl gnr))

<>Mohrenschildt,Dmitri,ed|>Moh.RR| a{}
*1971:NYC|_The_Russian Revolution of 1917: Contemporary Accounts| ((noUO| OWN prm.sbk vsp WW1c RREV2))

<>Mombauer,Annika, ed|>Mombauer.ORIGINS |_The_Origins of the First World War: Constroversies and Consensus| ((WW1a+| Dracobly = She stands on the opposite end from Clark in that she defends something of a Fritz Fischer type position but this is a much more balanced collection than, say, the great 1960s:Geiss,Immanuel))

<>Mossolov,AA|_At the Court of the Last Tsar (1900-1916). London: 1935

<>Murphy,AB, with >Patrikeev,F|_The_Russian_Civil War: Primary Sources| (2000) | ((|>MGwrx| GO/GLOS| prm.sbk | maps bbl | wrx&REV WW1c UKR| Editors provide a ca. 15p introduction))

<>Nabokov,Vladimir Dmt*| a{869}b{}c{}d{}e{922}n{}o{
--|_Provisional Government, 1917 [being a translation of 1922:BRL|ARR,1:9-96| “Vremennoe pravitel'stvo”]
--|_V. D. Nabokov and the Russian Provisional Government,1917

<>Nenarokov,Albert|_An_Illustrated History of the Great October Revolution| *1987:MVA| ((?lxt pp. 66 71 82 102 122 140 161 184 210 233 234 235 264 265 308 309 346 350?))

<>Nevison,Henry Woodd| a{}n{}o{jrnist for Daily Chronicle
*1906:|_Dawn in Russia: Or scenes in the Russian Revolution| ed#2 [1906]| Reprint series:Russia Observed| NYC:Arno P,1971| ((prm vsp trv lxt flm mxp RREV1))
--|In Page.RR

>Nicholas II GO/Russia| Emperor Nicholas

<>Nol'de,Boris Emmanuilovich| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{
--|_Russia in the Economic War| ((WW1b MIC ekn| G/Shotwell))

<>Nol'de,E. Yu|
| re.cst in RUS; hst basis for different path, etc GO GRS:115-16
| GO SoM

<>Novgorodtsev,Pavel| a{}
--|RB-C| “The Essence of the Russian Orthodox Conscience”

Editorial in 1st issue of his Masonic journal\Utrennii svet\[Morning Light] and an essay on education [Raeff3:62-86]
More = [BL&T:59, 117f]

<>Novikov,Nikolai,*1946:USSR ambassador to USA. GO Kennan, Origins | ((prm CWX))

<>Ogarev,Nikolai| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{rvs gte
*1856+: Close associate of Hzn in west European political emigration [ID]
*1861jy01:Proclamation "Chto nuzhno narodu?" [What do the people need?] ((Compare w/1905 era peasant demands))

<>Okhrana| Russian Imperial Department of Police| a{}b{}n{}o{tUt plc
_The_Okhrana--the Russian Department of Police; a bibliography, edited by Edward Ellis Smith
*1930:Philadelphia|>Vasil'ev,Aleksei T. [Vassilyev here] _The Okhrana: The Russian Secret Police. Edited,with an introduction,by Rene Fülöp-Miller
*1932:MVA|>Men'shchikov,A. P|_Okhrana i revoliutsiia| ((GRS:52,117 plt.plc RREV1))


<>October Storm and After: Stories and Reminiscences|>OS&A| ((prm.sbk vsp RREV3))

<>Owen,Lancelot A| a{}
*1937:L.ENG||_The_Russian Peasant Movement, 1906-1917| ((NoUO| krx RREV2))
| in Adams.RR:

<>Page,Thomas, ed| a{}
*1965:N.NY|_Russia in Revolution: Selected Readings in Russian Domestic History since 1855| ((>Page.RR| NoUO; OWN prm.sbk|
*1861:krx.rfm in NVG gbx|
*1880:corporal punishment in mlt|
*1881:dlo.Bgq ppx trr|
*1898: Isaev on vqt,ekn,krx|
*1902:plc rpt on prp among krx QER gbx|
*1904:Ganz's observations trv|
*1905:Ermolov disc. w/ N-2 re. Gapon|
*1905:plc rpt re.krx in TVR gbx|
*1905no:plc rpt on Wtt & krx.rbx; other plc rpt,KZN|
*1905:mlt.nvy & RREV1|
Nevison on RREV1|
Khrustalev-Nosar on soviet|
*1910:gzt rpt on rxn,Black Hundres|
Pollock trv account|
Lobanov-Rostovsky vsp|
Chernova,Olga vsp of krx.rbx|
Kossak-Szucka,Sophia vsp|
Farson vsp on mfg|
SDb jrn on prl|
Trt on Red Army mlt in Gwrx|
Gordon,A Gwrx|
Mrs. Stan Hardin in SSr jld|
re.Reed 921:prl.rbx,prc|
Bechhofer,C trv Gwrx,krx hunger|
Strong,Anna vsp,Gwrx|
Duranty,I Write As I please etc|
Reswick,I Dreamt Rev|
White,W These Russians|
Kravchenko,Choose Fr|
Burg,D HRM,dissent

<>Paléologue,G. Maurice| a{1859}e{1944}n{}o{stt.srv
*1914:1917; Last French Ambassador to Russian Imperial Court
*1925:NYC,George Doran|_An_Ambassador's Memoirs| ed#4 3vv| tlng of Russie des tsars pendant la grande guerre| How do the several editions compare?

*1762de28:memo, etc. [Raeff2:54-68]

<>Pares,Bernard| a{1867}e{1949}n{RREV1 WW1b wrx&REV}o{
*1907:LND-NYC|_Russia and Reform| Reprinted as Russia Between Reform and Revolution| ((|>PR&R| trv RREV1 Dmx noWbr))
*1915:LND|_Day by Day in the Russian Army,1914-1915| ((940.918 P216| mlt))
*1939:NYC,Knopf|_The_Fall of the Russian Monarchy: A Study of the Evidence| (( RREV2 stt| 510 p

Just before the end of WWI, Nicholas II abdicated his throne due to problems that arose during his rule, which was ordered by the government itself. The problems were not few and it resulted in lies and secrets from the government. Bernard Pares writes about the problems in “The Fall of the Russian Monarchy”. He gives a basic background of these troubles. One, which happened as part of Sturmer’s Mystery Cabinet, was “to assign five million rubles from the military fund to the Premier for the purposes which were to be disclosed” (318).

At the end of the Russian/Japanese war, there was a question of who was going to be the Emperor. This issue would show that the government had problems because there was no general election for the public to elect a new leader. Pares writes how Sergei Witte wanted to be Emperor and told Nicholas that he would kill himself if he were not leader. The Russian/Japanese war in itself had problems as Pares explains because Nicholas did not calculate the costs of waging a war.

Another government plot was what to do with Poland, which was in the hands of the Romanov Empire. The government devised a plan, which basically stated that the government of Russia was to be the ruling government. Nicholas personally signed off on this. Nicholas had always wanted government affairs to be kept from the public and Pares writes from letters written by Nicholas that Nicholas was not happy with the publicity of Witte by saying, “I do not quite like his way of getting into touch with various extremists, especially as all these talks appear in the press the next day” (90).

These readings help to define Russian Political Culture because they are giving insight into the realities of this time period. The government was corrupt and the leaders knew this was going on. It also shows how the people were willing to uprise against the government as shown during the 1905 revolution and how a complete government can be overthrown if a leader is not liked as in the February Revolution. Pares writes how Nicholas was not really ruling when he was away which created arguments within parliament with no central person acting in charge. This was after Russia went into World War I even though the public opinion was very low. Even among his wife, Alexandra, the opinion of Nicholas was low. Pares writes that Nicholas and Alexandra were separated due to their different sides and opinions.

The insights presented by Pares are that the Fall of the Regime was inevitable based on the actions or lack thereof on the part of the government in Russia. There was no government order taking place and the extreme secrecy within the government and encouraged by Nicholas II was no secret from the public. Certain events such as the absence of Nicholas from government affairs and decisions led to his forced abdication and betrayal from people who he saw as the most trusted such as his wife Alexandra. Pares uses personal accounts through quotes from people living through these events to add to his opinion. Pares writes how Nicholas believed he was the “sole protector” but in reality people did not trust him.

Pares believes the most important time during the fall of the Romanov Empire was the three months right before the forced abdication of Nicholas. The abdication was inevitable because the leaders within the government had hit their breaking point in dealing with Nicholas. Pares believes there were three tasks that Nicholas failed to do which were to “restore the administration of the country, give it a new shape as would represent the colossal change which had taken place, and to keep Russia in the war” (477) Nicholas could not fulfill these especially since he had deserted the government and country to fight in World War I himself. Therefore, the collapse of the old regime was going to happen with or without Nicholas in power but Russia was not prepared to have someone else take over when they forced Nicholas to leave.

This book covers the years of the reign of Nicholas II of Russia. It gives a brief background of the years and events before his reign. His father is described as a firm autocrat with a powerful personality, coupled with a strong will. When Nicholas's father came to power, he regulated the various reforms that had been put in place by the previous administration. These regulations so limited the reforms as to render them, in all practical sense null and void.

The author, Bernard Pares, takes great care throughout the book to show that the prospect of revolution was always regarded by the monarchy as a continuous threat. The Revolution did not spring up out of nowhere, newly born as a fresh idea in the peoples' mind. It was always there, just simmering underneath the surface, with the lid of an archaic class organization holding any liberal tendencies firmly in check. The class structure was based on an economy and infrastructure that had not truly entered into the 20th century. Russia was used to just ‘muddling through,' a phrase or a similar variation of it that is found throughout the book, but that speaks volumes about the way things were handled.

Nicholas II is faced with disruption and a possible major crises, which he averts by creating the Duma. The Duma is an organization that is supposed to be elected by the people to represent them as a governmental body, although the Emperor still has the last and final say. Disagreements arise and eventually the Duma is disbanded, and the members are prevented from running in future elections by Nicholas. The voting franchise is henceforth limited so that the Duma no longer is a true representative of the population, but it continues to question Nicholas and provide him with headaches and opposition. Nicholas runs his government in a seemingly haphazard fashion, nominating rivals, reactionaries, liberals, and personal enemies to different posts in government. This makes it so that petty squabbles for power, cutthroat and dirty politics become the way the government was run. The good and honest governmental officers were the exception, not the rule, and Nicholas was severely lacking in judging the character of men. This is extremely unfortunate, since the road to power and appointments was through him, and it was not based upon a merit system but simply through currying his personal favor. Rasputin is a perfect example of this, and the author goes into much detail in how Rasputin effectively helped ruin Russia and its administration. He especially goes into detail on the relationship between Rasputin and the Empress. The author gives the impression that he feels that the Emperor was controlled by his wife in certain respects, to the detriment of the country. Eventually the situation completely crumbles around the monarch, hastened by Nicholas' decision to take command of the army, and the many bad appointments that he made. The men he picked did not do their jobs, and the population started to have a defeatist attitude. The main issue was that of food. It was not necessarily the lack of food supplies, but rather the lack of infrastructure and organization that was necessary to transfer the food were it was needed. The people eventually rioted, military regiments mutinied, and chaos was moving forward. The revolution had began. Nicholas II, faced with all this, abdicated the throne. He had truly believed God had appointed him to be the autocrat of Russia, so this was the most drastic move he could make. The idea of giving up the throne would never have occurred to him when he first took power. The world had changed, but Russia had failed to change along with it.

*1931:LND|_My Russian Memoirs| ((SUMMIT))
*1948:LND|_Wandering Student|

<>Parmelee,Maurice F| a{1882}e{1969}n{R&A trv}o{prf ntg.ddd nudist eccentric
KU & MU prf sociology
*1924:NYC,Crowell|_Blockade and sea power: The blockade, 1914-1919, and its significance for a world state| ((UO| WW1b vqt
pt1= History of the blockade, 1914-1919
Warfare by economic measures and Neutral rights
The law of blockade and the declaration of London
Expansion of the blockade by the Belligerents
Neutral United States and the Blockade
Belligerent pressure upon neutral Countries
The British blockade organization
American regulation of war trade
The Allied blockade administration
Neutral regulation of trade, 1914-1919
Allied agreements with neutral Countries
The relaxation and termination of the blockade
The effects of the allied blockade
The military success of the allied Blockade
pt2= Sea power and the world state
Ethical dualism in wartime
Sea power and imperialism
The freedom of the sea
The balance of power and economic Imperialism
The essential features of a world State
The league of the entente allies
The coercive measures of the World state
pdx#1. The declaration of London Concerning the laws of naval warfare
pdx#2. British note respecting the Withdrawal of the declaration of London Orders in council
pdx#3. British statement of the Measures adopted to intercept the seaborne Commerce of Germany
pdx#4. Chart of the Allied blockade Administration in London
pdx#5. Statistics of imports into Scandinavia and Holland in 1916 and 1917
pdx#6. The German treaty of Brest-Litovsk

*--Don C. Gibbons, "Say, Whatever Became of Maurice Parmelee, Anyway?" [E-TXT]

<>Pasternak,Boris L| a{}n{wrx&xdj.clt Gwrx WW1 blt}o{pst stx
*1957:Milano,Feltrinelli (in Russian) |_Doctor Zhivago|>Pasternak.DZh| ((WW1 RREV Gwrx| Winter,Jay quotes Lara, "'I believe now that the war is to blame for everything, for all the misfortunes that followed and that dog our generation to this day.' Before, men had died one at a time. 'And then there was a jup from this calm innocent, measured way of living to blood and tears, to mass insanity and to the savagery of daily, hourly, legalized, rewarded slaughter'"| Wki on the novel))
--|_The_Last Summer| ((WW1a|*1916wi:Serezha visits his married sister. Tired after a long journey, he falls into a restless sleep and half-remembers, half-dreams the incidents of the last summer of peace [1914su] before the First World War 'when life appeared to pay heed to individuals'. As tutor in a wealthy, unsettled Moscow household he focuses his intense romanticism on Mrs Arild, his employer's paid companion, while spending his nights with the prostitute Sashka))

<>Pavlov,Platon V|>PavPV| a{}o{prf
*1850:SPB|Brilliant defense of PhD bfr GrnTN Slv etc|_Ob istoricheskom znachenii tsarstvovaniia Borisa Godunova|
*1858ja:EkU#1:19-21; #2:36-9| “Pis’ma iz-za granitsy: Mysl’ o vseobshchem muzee”| ((E.Pav:249| rsp vst edc, creation in lcl grd~ “populyarnyi, obwwenarodnyi universitet” on foundation of encyclopedic vst~, lct, blt.vqr, rdg, etc, “obwwee obrazovanie”| NB! cld be developed on bzn basis, as stk.cmp [E.Pav:232] More in 58ap:OtZ#4))
*1859ja:mr; OtZ#1 & #3| “?”| ((E.Pav:226 sd cnp wld not allow full pbc of these idl= vqe & oxo are “korennye stixiia russkogo grajdanskogo obwwestva” cvc.pbl| they did provide “nekotorye garantii kak protiv qrezmernogo usileniya centralizacii [stt], tak i protiv rezkogo vozvyweniya odnogo svobodnoe sosloviya [sSs] na sqet drugogo| RUS capable of sustaining its traditional plt.clt “obwwenarodnost’ i sovewwatel’nost’” [ntn dmk] Had sense of conflict in this non-idealized tUt structure. There have been not onloy boyars, slujilye lyudi, dxv, but also oxo “ne byli soverwenno bezglasny kak v politiqeskom, tak i obwwestvennom otnoweniyax”. Conclusion = “Rus’ XI, XII i XIII stoletii byla nevejestvenna, sueverna, opozorena yazvoyu xolopstva, no vmeste s tem obladala samostoyatel’nost’yu oblastnoyu, slujiloyu, cerkovnoyu, obwwinnoyu. Pri drugix obstoyatel’stvax ona mogla by vyrabotat’ iz sebya i drugie formy jizni, vyswie gosudarstvennye i obwwestvennye uqrejdeniya”))
*1860ja:fe; OtZ#1-2|“O zemskikh soborakh XVI i XVII stoletii”| ((SLF idl different, no idealization of zmisbo))
*1862:SPB|_Mesiatseslova na 1862 god| Appendix: “Tysiacheletie Rossii”| Reprinted in YMI:52-54| The version presented in his lecture, SNC,2:351-4 and LOD:7-13| ((prm 1000y.lct zms~ This pbc a kind of kln))
*1863:SPB| “Tysiach.”|re-pbd under separate covers| ((A vast plan to study R hst frm point of view of “samopoznanie nrda” w/big role fr clt))

<>Pethybridge,Roger, ed|
|_Witnesses to the Russian Revolution| ((DK265.7.P37| trv RREV1 RREV2 RREV3))

<>Petrunkevich,Ivan I| a{
*1934:ARR#21:??| “Iz zapisok obshchestvennogo deiatelia”| ((GRS:55 prm vsp RREV1 NB! tlng|lbx))
*:|_Memoirs of a Social Activist| :| ((noUO GO SUMMIT|98je:noUO|Birn,81de17:bbt.rqt| prm vsp Zmv lbx KDs lbx plt.clt|NB! UO RXV re.ssn))

<>Piatnitskii,O. A|_Memoirs of a Bolshevik| ((SDs(b) vsp))

<>Pitcher,Harvey|_Witnesses of the Russian Revolution|>WRR| ((UO prm.sbk| Organized chronologically in 14 phases frm fall of N-2 to failure of UqS
 Who (8 major)=
Price,Morgan Philips (1885-1973):3-
Buchanan,Muriel:4-5 [trv.wmn]
Reed,John (1887-1920):6-7
Thirty-two others less prominent))

<>Plekhanov,Georgii V|>PlxGV| a{}n{}o{("father" of Russian Marxism and a critic of previous Russian revolutionary traditions
*1884:GNV| “Our Differences” [Nashi raznoglasiia]| With “Letter to P. L. Lavrov (In lieu of preface)”| In Selected Philosophical Works 1:122-400| (( |>NaR| prm Plx LvrPL))
*1910:SPB|_N. G. Chernyshevskii| ((OWN ndr idl.bxo Qrn))
*1929:L.ENG|_Fundamental Problems of Marxism| EBy D. Riazanov| ((HX314.P54513| prm Mrx))
*1961:1981; MVA & L.ENG|_Selected Philosophical Works| 5vv| ((HX314.P556| bbt.rqt 86.02| prm Mrx SDs idl ntg))
--|Oriental Despot AMP [Raeff,Peter the Great]

<>Pobedonostsev,Konstantin P| a{}n{cnx | ntg idl stt.srv}o{
*1898:L.ENG|_Reflections of a Russian Statesman| Translated from the Russian by R. C. Long| (( You will have to order this through ORBIS (SUMMIT)| Excerpt = On false dmk in RRC,2))

<>Pokrovskii,MN, Yakovlev,YaA, et al.,eds| Arkhiv oktiabr'skoi revoliutsii: 1917 god v dokumentakh i materialakh. 10 volumes. (1925-1939)| ((noUO or SMT))

<>Ponomarev,Boris N.,ed| a{}n{STL.prs hst.gph}o{stt.srv
*1938:NYC|_The_Plot Against the Soviet Union and World Peace: Facts and Documents Compiled from the Verbatim Report of the Court Proceedings in the Case of the Anti-Soviet “Bloc of Rights and Trotskyites”| ((prm)) DK267.P64

<>Postgate,Raymond| a{}{}n{}o{jrn scx pop.hst
*1920:|_Bolshevik theory| ((SDs(b) trx Mrx mrx MRX))
*1920:LND|_Revolution from 1789 to 1906: Documents Selected and Edited with Notes...| ((D361.P65| prm.sbk))

<>Prigogine,Ilya|>Prigozhin,Ilia] and >Stengers,Isabelle| *1984:NYC,Bantam||_Order out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature| tlg of La nouvelle alliance| ((UO| G/Whitehead,A))

<>Proletariat |>Workers |>Unions |>Labor etc| n{wrk prl unx}o{}
*1979:MVA,Nauka|_Fabrichno-zavodskie komitety Petrograda v 1917 godu: Protokoly|
*1982:N.NY,Krause reprint|_Tret'ia vserossiiskaia konferentsiia professional'nykh soiuzov,3-11 iiulia (20-28 iiunia st. st.)....| EBy Diane Koenker| ((RREV2 RREV3))
*1983:N.NY,Kraus reprint of *1927:MVA|_Oktiabrskaia revoliutsiia i fabzavkomy|

<>Pushkarev,Sergei German|>PwkSG| a{}n{}o{
*1917:Memoirs in Moh.RR| ((prm vsp))

<>Pushkin,Aleksandr Srg*|>PuwAS| a{}n{}o{
*:|_Correspondence| 3vv|

<>Ransome,Arthur| a{1884}b{ENG}e{1967}n{WW1b WW1c}o{jrnist, raconteur, sailor
*1912:kng on Oscar Wilde caused suit by Lord Alfred Douglas
*1913:gt-RUS to study folklore [nrd.svt.e] but also to be away frm wfe, and legal actions
*1913:1919; Ransome worked as jrnist for Observer and Daily News, reporting on WW1 in RUS and RREV [*2005mr01:The Guardian rtl abt Ransome as ENG agent, SD(b) agent, and/or jrnist [E-TXT]
*1920:EST Revel = new home (w/Shelepina,Evgeniia (TrtL's former secretary)
Later jrnist w/MGuardian
*1912:|_Oscar Wilde: A Critical Study
*1919:NYC|_Russia in 1919| (())
chd~ blt
*1976:L.ENG|_Autobiography of Arthur Ransome| EBy Rupert Hart-Davis| (())
*1997:Signalling from Mars: The Letters...| ((UO))
The Arthur Ransome Society [TARS]
*1984:|>Brogan,Hugh|_The_Life...| ((UO| Brogan,4:95-117 "Russia and War"; 5:118-48 "Revolution"; 6:149-205 "Bolsheviks"))

<>Radishchev,Aleksandr| a(}e{802}n{dsn}o{
*1791:Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow| (Cambridge:1958) [HN525.R313. Cf.:RRC2,2#22 and DIR2:112-124]

<>Radzinskii,Edvard|_The_Rasputin File...

The author, Edvard Radzinsky, started off by telling and taking the reader along to help him look for a lost file. He takes his audience to a revolutionary time in history and to untouched places since the time of the Tsars to find the Rasputin File.

The Rasputin file is first hand accounts of Rasputin’s inner circle that was taken by the Extraordinary Commission. The testimonies vary from court, government and church officials to the every day peasant. The documents are oral accounts of people that he held influence over, his friends, his enemies, and his lovers. It is rifled with scandals of backstabbing, masked friends, and lies. It is a file that shows how Rasputin bought the end to an absolute monarchy.

Radzinsky explained how Rasputin climbed into the hearts of the Tsar and Tsarina and how other people used that affection for their benefit. If someone desired to increase their status politically or within the courts then they had to follow monarchal suit and be fond of Rasputin or at least pretend to enjoy him. The reign of Rasputin led to political changes and personal association changes of Tsars based upon the degree of affection that each gave ‘Our Friend’. It was not until a traitor appeared among Rasputin’s inner circle that the elite began to question the friendship between him and the Tsars and take a closer look at who the man called Rasputin really was.

Who Rasputin was is a mystery still. He has several names, two that are real and others that have been attached to him because of history and reputation. Some are well in meaning and some are just. But who is Rasputin? In the first few pages the character is put on a judgment block for the reader. Readers learn about his home life, reputation, work ethic, and his travels. Rasputin at home was lazy, stupid and did not care about his life health or his family’s life or health. It is not until he gets beaten to the point of death by someone he was stealing from that Rasputin decides he was a changed man and goes on to travel to monasteries. Radzinsky goes into detail about Rasputin’s travels and the different types of Orthodox religion and religion in general that he encounters. It was these journeys that turned Rasputin into a pious man of god, but it was his foundation character that breaks his plastered holy image and leads his friends to turn against him.

<>Reed,John Silas| a{}n{}o{Influential journalist and member of the American socialist movement of the early 20th century
Son of a prominent Portland, Oregon, business family
*1917:With wife Louise Bryant, traveled to Petrograd, Russia, into the maelstrom of Soviet Revolution

*1919se:Chicago| Communist Party of America [USA] founded. Reed closely associated| Reed had only one more year of life left to him, and it was not a happy year. He reacted strongly against the efforts of Soviet Communist Party leaders to dominate the American movement. A great admirer of the Soviet Revolution, an eyewitness to it and one of its most widely read chroniclers, Reed became disillusioned
*--He died in Russia and, despite his misgivings about the course of revolutionary events in Russia, was buried in the Kremlin wall with other honored figures
*1919:USA N.NY|>Reed,John|_Ten Days That Shook the World|>R10| [W#1] [W#2], the most famous English-language first-hand account of the Soviet Revolution
*1919:LND,Workers' Socialist Federation|_Red Russia: The Triumph of the Bolsheviki
--|The War in Eastern Europe
*--Michael Munk biographical sketch with emphasis on Reeds Oregon roots [TXT]

<>Robins,Raymond|_Raymond Robins' Own Story. Edited by William Hard. NYC: 1920| ((947.084 R558 H))

<>Rodichev,Fedor| a{}n{}o{
*?:Slavonic Review#2:249-62| “The Liberal Movement in Russia (1891-1905)”| ((lbx RREV1))

<>Rodzianko, | a{}b{}n{Dmx WW1b RREV1}o{stt.srv
Reign of Rasputin

<>Roehl|>Röhl,John.C.G|_Wilhelm II: Into the Abyss of War and Exile, 1900-1941|> ((WW1a WW1b WW1c| GRM MPR W-2| mnx.plt| Roehl describes how Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg and General Staff commander Helmuth von Moltke side-lined W-2 whom they took to be an obstacle to good ntn policy| 1914jy:Crisis required that the two send W-2 away on a yachting voyage to Norway. They kept the MPR uninformed to mounting crisis on the brink of WW1. They edited official documents sent to him. And this just represented a more than usually intense example of an isolation of W-2 from gvt policies & decisions which GRM military leaders put in place as early as 1905 Moroccan Crisis. This is not centralized autocracy, it is military ministerial cooptation of the throne))

<>Root,Elihu| a{1845}e{1937}n{WW1 RREV wrx&REV R&A}o{
*1918:C.MA,HUP|_The_United States and the war ; The mission to Russia ; Political addresses| Collected and edited by Robert Bacon and James Brown Scott| ((UO| 362pp ndx))

<>Rosenthal,Bernice Glatzer and Martha Bohachevsky-Chomiak, eds| a{}
*1990:NYC, Fordham|_Revolution of the Spirit| 2nd ed| ((|>RB-C| prm.sbk phl idl ntg REV.clt RUS3|

<>Ross,Edward Alsworth| a{}n{prm trv}o{prf trv
*:|_Russia in Upheaval
*:|_The_Russia_Bolshevik Revolution
*1923:NYC,Century|_The_Russian_Soviet Republic| ((UO))

<>Rozanov,Vasilii Vasil’evich| a{}n{}o{
--| “On Sweetest Jesus and the Bitter Fruits of the World”| In RB-C | SUQ:227-240

<>Ruhl,Arthur| a{876}n{}o{trv WW1b
*1917:NYC,Scribner|_White nights, and other Russian impressions| ((trv vqt|248pp| The road to Russia.--White nights.--At the front.--The Moscow art theatre [ttx MXT].--A look at the Duma [Dmx].--Russia's war prisoners [wrx.jld].--A Russian cotton king [wlt].--Down the Volga to Astrakhan [VLG.R].--Volga refugees [rfg].--Rumania learns what war is [ROM] ))

<>Russia| Committee of Ministers|>Komitet ministrov|>KoM| a{}n{}o{stt.tUt}
*1905:SPB|_Zhurnaly Komiteta ministrov po ispolneniiu ukaza 12 dekabria 1904 g|| ((GRS:58 prm RREV1))

<>Russia| Council of Ministers|_Sovet ministrov|>SoM| n{prm stt tUt RREV1}
|_Petergofskie soveshchaniia o proekte Gosudarstvennoi dumy [1905jy19:29;]|PGR:1917| ((GRS:168f,188))
| “Soveshchanie pri Sovete ministrov,24 maia 1905 g”|In Monopolii i ekonomicheskaia politicka tsarizma v kontse XIX-nachale XX v (LGR:1987):127-42| ((GRS:186))
| “Zasedaniia Sovieta ministrov Rossii 3 i 11 fevralia 1905 g.:Zapisi E. Yu. Nol'de”| EBy R. Sh. Ganelin| Arkheograficheskii ezhegodnik za 1989 g (MVA:1950):296-305| ((GRS:115))

<>Russia| Emperor Alexander II| a{}e{}n{}o{
Politics of Autocracy: Letters..., 1857-1864

<>Russia| Emperor Nicholas II and Empress Alexandra| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{
*1914jy29:1914au01; Four days of correspondence by telegram between N-2 and Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany [W TXT]
--|_The_Fall of the Romanovs: Political Dreams and Personal Struggles in a time of Revolution| ((DK258.s74))
--|_Secret letters of the last tsar : being the confidential correspondence between Nicholas II, and his mother, Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna
--|_Letters of the Tsar to the Tsaritsa,1914-1917| ((SUMMIT))
--|_Letters of the Tsaritsa to the Tsar, 1914-1916
--|_Complete wartime correspondence of Tsar Nicholas II and the Empress Alexandra : April 1914-March 1917| ((WW1
--|_Last diary of Tsaritsa Alexandra
--|_A_lifelong passion : Nicholas and Alexandra : their own story| (())
--|*1905: Memo on the State Duma [Raeff2]
--| Some letters [Page.RR | WRH]
--|>Bark,Peter N-2 at GHQ in Moh.RR:75-84|
--|_Bazili,Nikolai Aleksandrovich, two memoirs| ((DK254.B37A33))
*1905:|>Ermolov disc. w/ N-2 re. Gapon in Page
Treadgold in Adams.IR

<>Russia| Gubernatory|>Governors|>Gubernatorial Reports of Russian Imperial Governors, 1855-1864| ((SMT UW))

<>Russia| Grand Duke Aleksandr Mxl|
|_Kniga vospominanii|2? volumes|PRS:nd| ((GRS:222 prm vsp RREV1))

<>Russia| State Council|>Gosudarstvennyi sovet|>GoS|

<>Russia| State Duma|>stt.dmx|>Gosudarstvennaia duma| a{}b{}e{}

<>_Russian_Court Memoirs, 1914-1916

<>_Russian_Revolution: Essays, Photographs, and Excerpts from Classic Works about the Men [sic] and Ideas that Shaped the Most Significant Revolution of the 20th Century| NYC: Macmillan,1967| ((DK265.a145| prm.sbk RREV2 RREV3))

<>_Russian Version of the Second World War: the History of the War as Taught to Soviet Schoolchildren| EBy Graham Lyons. TBy Marjorie Vanston|New York City: Facts on File,1976,1983| ((D743.R87| ndr WW2 R&A))

<>Savinkov,Boris Vkt*| a{879}b{}c{}d{}e{925}n{WW1a wrx&REV}o{rvs trrist
SRs boevaia organizatsiia [IE= From very beginning, mlt angle to his dms rvs.plt, more precisely a total.wrx angle]
WW1b FRN mlt| WW1c
VRM gvt Mwrx mnr under KrnA
Web bibliography
*1917:|_Pale Horse [E-TXT1 | 1919: TXT2(searchable E-TXT = F/March 17/ F/George/ [F/ I /] F/Fedor/ F/Vania/ F/Heinrich/ F/Erna/ F/love/ F/hate/ F/flower/ [=esp."red" flower] F/kill/ F/spirit/ F/Andrei Petrovich/ F/In my childhood/ F/You love no/ F/Frol Sem/ [=2nd false ID] [kbk=] F/tavern/ F/Nothing/ F/Tivoli/ [=night bfr botched dth.x.assassination] F/I rise./ F/vengeance/ F/What would I be doing/ F/counsel/ F/August 5/ F/I don't care who dies/ F/you lost a fellow/ F/August 18/ F/August 22/ F/time I was in prison/ F/September 5/ F/radiant in the night/ F/thinking again of Elena/ F/tottering on his feet/ F/September 15/ F/September 16/ F/September 17/ F/Tsushima/ F/Peter continues to unsheathe/ F/September 25/ F/September 27/ F/October 5/)] ((1913:blt re.RREV1| Written under pseudonym "Ropshin"))
*1924:LND,Williams and Norgate|_The_Black Horse: A Novel| Kon' voronoi| ((UO| Pages recommended by student researcher = 14 24 36 43 65-73 101-110 131-140))
*1927:|_The_Tale of What Was Not| OR = _What Never Happened [E-TXT] To chego ne bylo ((re.RREV1| Pages recommended by student researcher = 27 43 56 69 76 80 83 93-96 112-120 161-170 202 320-324))
*1931:|_Memoirs of a Terrorist| ((UO))
Web bxo
*1991:|>Spence,Richard|_ Boris Savinkov: Renegade on the Left| ((E-TXT of review))
*2004:|_THE RIDER NAMED DEATH [Vsadnik po imeni smert'] [ID] | a FLM based on Savinkov's life [Website release announcement | Snippits depicting acts of terrorism | E-TXT of review]
*2007:SEER#85,1::25-46,198| Daniel Beer, "The Morality of Terror: Contemporary Responses to Political Terror..."| ((Re.2 pre-revolutionary novels of Savinkov, The Pale Horse (1909) and What Never Happened (1912) and the public debate they provoked among contemporaries about the legitimacy of political violence. The anguished meditations of the doubt-ridden heroes of Savinkov's novels issued a powerful challenge to existing justifications, notably among SRs, for violent insurgency against the state. Mounting individualism had important consequences for the contemporary understanding of political conflict.))

<>Sazonov,Sergei Dmt*| a{1861}e{1927}n{WW1a WW1b}o{stt.srv irx.amb
*1925:LND,Allen and Unwin|_How the war began in 1914 : being the diary of the Russian Foreign Office from the 3rd to the 20th (old style) of July, 1914| ((Originally published by the "Red Archives" Department of the Russian Soviet Government's 1923 historical journal, v4))
*1928:LND,J.Cape|_Fateful Years,1909-1916| ((UO|))

<>Scheibert,Peter| a{}
*1972:Darmstadt|_Die russischen politischen Parteien von 1905 bis 1917: Ein Dokumentationsband| ((plt.pty~ RREV1 RREV2 RREV3))

<>Schierbrand,Wolf von| a{851}e{920
*1904:NYC|_Russia, Her Strength and Her Weakness| ((DK262.S25| OWN| trv RREV1 ekn))

<>Scudder, J. W. Russia in the Summer of 1914. Boston:ca. 1920. DK262.S35| prm

<>Sechenov,Ivan M| a{}n{}o{scs psx
*1952:MVA|_Autobiographical Notes| ((R534.S4 A313))
--|Selected Physiological and Psychological Works| MVA:?|

<>Semevskii,Vasilii Ivn*|>SmvVI| a{848
*1881:1901; SPB|_Krest’iane v tsarstvovanie imp. Ekateriny II| 2vv| ((krx C-2 ppx.hst.gph))
*1888:SPB|_Krest’ianskii vopros v Rossii v XVII i pervoi poloviny XIX v| ((SPB.unv PhD diss))
*1898:SPB|_Rabochie v sibirskikh zolotykh promyslakh|2vv ((1 of first hst of RUS prl; so S originated krx.scl of RUS.hst & prl.scl))
*1909:SPB|_Politicheskie i obshchestvennye idei dekabristov| ((DKB mnt plt.clt| ?Is S now pulling krx, prl & ntg together? hst of cvc.pbl))
*1911:PkrVI,edt:7-18| “Idei, ob”ediniavshiia uchastnikov kruzhka Petrashevskogo i drugikh”| ((OWN in PET 8x11 under Bykov,PV| PkrV axx gte Plw))
*1919:GoM#1-4:??| “Petrashevtsy: Kruzhok Kashkina”| ((PET EvpAI RS0 krj))
*1922:MVA|_M.V. Butashevich-Petrashevskii i petrashevtsy| ((PET| UO HAS))
bxo WtnVI?

<>Serge,Victor [pseudonym of V. L. Kibalchich]
*1963, then 1978:O.ENG|_Memoirs of a Revolutionary,1901-1941|
--|_The_Case of Comrade Tulayev| ((prm))

<>Service,Robert| a{
*1979:L.ENG|_The_Bolshevik Party in Revolution: A Study in Organisational Change,1917-1923
*1986:L.ENG|_Russian Revolution,1900-1927| ((UO:DK262.S455| prm RREV Gwrx NEP irx ENG))

Memoirs of WW1 & RREV1 childhood [Moh.RR] | ((prm vsp chd))

<>Shanin,Teodor, with Haruki Wada, Derek Sayer, Philip Corrigan, and Jonathan Sanders| a{}
*1983:L.ENG|_Late Marx and the Russian Road: Marx and ‘the Peripheries of Capitalism:’ A Case| ((|>SLM| prm krx
*1859:Chernyshevskii critique of those who harbor “prejudices” against the Peasant commune [Q.PSS#05:357-92]
*1862fe05:fe16; Chernyshevskii, Unaddressed Letters (5) [Q.PSS#10:90-116] [MER 44 246 256 272 277 (noUO)]
*1878fa:Marx's letter to editor of the Russian journal Otechestvennye zapiski [date suggested by Wada,56; 1877no:Traditional date]
*1879fa:NaV Executive Committee Program (SLM:207-212) [RN7,2:170-4]
*1879oc01: The People and the State (SLM:219-23)
*1880sp:NaV tactical Program (SLM:223-31) [RN7,2:175-183]
*1880no:NaV Workers’ Organization Program (SLM:231-7) [RN7,2:184-91]
*1880oc25:Revolutionary populist journal Narodnaia Volia [NaV] Executive Committee letter to Marx (SLM:206-7) [RN7,2:228-9]
*1881fe05:Kibalchich, article on political revolution and the economic question (SLM:212-8)
*1881fe:Zasulich's letter to Marx (draft)
*1881fe:mr; Marx's reply to Zasulich letter (draft)
*1881mr:Marx's final text of letter to Zasulich
*1881fa:1882wi; NaV Military-revolutionary organization Program (SLM:238) [RN7,2:196-200 | mlt]
*1882ja:Marx and Engels preface to 2nd Russian edition of the Communist Manifesto [MER:88-9 (noUO)]
*1882fe16:Last will and testaments of revolutionary populists A.Mikhailov and A.Barannikov (SLM:239-40)
*1924:Riazanov,David discovered the drafts of the 1881wi:Marx/Zasulich correspondence

<>Shchapov,Afanasii P|>WwaAP| a{
*1858:KZN|_Russkii raskol staroobriadchestva,razsmatrivaemyi v sviazi s vnutrennym sostoianiem russkoi tserkvi i grazhdanstvennosti v XVII veke i v pervoi polovine XVIII: Opyt istoricheskogo issledovaniia o prichinakh proiskhozhdeniia i rasprostraneniia russkogo raskola| *1906:Soq#1:173-450; and KZN:1959 reprintings| ((BX601.s5| StO|cvc.virtu Dbr & AnvM plm,Svm))
*1859:KZN|_Golos drevnei russkoi tserkvi ob uluchshenii byta nesvobodnykh liudei|*1906:Soq#1:1-15 reprint| ((srf.rfm srf vqt chx rlg|based on 858no08:lct;also earlier 857no08:lct “Religiia i russkaia narodnost’” [text lost po-edt note, Soq:15]))
*1860:MVA|_Narodnye russkie legendy|Second ed|Published by Shchepkin and Soldatenkov| ((nrd.blt spx, cf.Dobrovol’skii,Zapreshen:50-5 SldKT pbc))
*1860:1861; OtZ| “Zemstvo i raskol”| *1906:Soq#1:451-504 reprint| ((Zmv StO|Wlg plm G/26:KrA#14:128-47 [Nqka.Wwa]))
*1861my:WwaA ltr-A-2| “Pis’mo ... Shchapova Alek. II v 1861 g.”|Published 1926:KrA#19:150-65| ((See VR-D:177| Nqka.Wwa:646 sd [plt.clt] Wwa,like Hzn, suffered “liberal’nye kolebaniya”; for Hzn it was dvr ogrqaniqennost’; for Wwa, krx ograniqennost’| Verya v carya [odd assertion in view of Wwa ref. to TSR blw] i v iduwwie sverxu rfmy on prosit carya sozdat’ Rossiiskuyu federaciyu samoupravlyayuwwixsya obastei [fdr slf.gvt rgn~] s “narodnym kontrolei nad provincial’nym gubernskim upravleniem” [C&B], s “vosstanovleniem” vsesoslovnyx [vse.sSs] “zemskix sovetov” [zmi.SOV~] i central’nogo zemkogo sobora [ZmS], ograniqivayuwwego carskuyu vlast’ [TSR] Prosit uniqtojit’ “nepomernuyu ekonomiqeskuyu centralizaciyu” [ekn.sttism] i osuwwestvit’ “vsenarodnoe prosvewwenie” [vse.nrd edc] [646] re.edc:has been exclusive, cannot remain “kastal’nuyu monopoliyu [clx.mpy] gorodskix korporacii [crp] samyx maloqislennyx privilegirovannyx sSsovnyx kast”|Must be VsR & vse.sSs))
*1861wi:KZN.unv|lct-krj “O cst” [*1924:Izvestiia Obshchestva arkheologii, istorii, etnografii pri Gosudarstvennom Kazanskom universitete#33,2/3:38-58 (KZN.rxl)]
*1861ap:KZN| “Rech’ posle panikhidy po ubitym v s. Bezdne krest’ianam”| *1923:KrA#4:407-10| ((pnxB srf.rfm krx.rbx| Field,Rebels:96-102 tlng 3 versions of Wwa lct))
*1861oc:OtZ#10:579-616 & 11:79-118|“Velikorusskie oblasti i smutnoe vremia”| *1906:Soq#1:648-709 reprint| ((ToT gbx))
*1861oc08: as copied 1862ja07: “Pis’mo Shchapova k Kn. [P. P.] Viazemskomu”| NVD:368-77 w/Nqka comments, originally *1959:LiN#67:657-68| ((See Nqka.Wwa:645-56| VzmPP| re. 861au:RVe|Vzm poem “Zametka”,an attack on civil libertarianism in name of spiritual liberty, it would seem [?~~ 1909:Vekhi idl~?] Lozung “sozyva Vsenarodnogo ZmS imeyuwwii funkcii Uqreditel’nogo sobraniya| ltr not sent to V, but to Hzn who cldn’t pbc in ltr form| Wwa then decided to put main idl in rtl prj “O russkom dvorianstve” [dvr] which was never pbc & has not survived [Nqka.Wwa] TXT (as from LiN; get NVD pages) = Ya demokrat, drug federal’noi soyuznoi obwwinno-demokratiqeskoi konstitucii russkoi, vo imya demokrata Xrista i demokrata-mujiqka Antona Petrova, za krov’, za svobodu mujiqkov i vsego naroda, derznul skazt’ v sobranii molodogo pokoleniya: “Da zdravstuet, da budet obwwino-demokratiqeskaya konstituciya!” [LiN:657]|| A popular assemblyh nakanune kotorogo miy jivem i o kotorom pomywlyal pervyi krest’yanin – Pososhkov [LiN:657] A hybrid of sel’sk.mir [vlg.mir], vls.sxd, grd.sxd [grd.dmx], vsegrdie dumy, Veqe [Vqe], oblast.sovet [rgn.SOV], obww. fed. soyuzn. sovete [fdr], sxode, ili s”ezde|| Mistakes ofr P-1 = on napered s”ezdil v Zapadnuyu Evropu, za granicu, a ne ob”exal napered Rossiyu, da i ottogo, qto ewwe pri otce vladeli vospitaniem carskix detei nemcy – istoriqeskie vragi slavyan||Ya gotov umeret’ za etu muqawwuyu menya mysl’ ob obwwinnom narodosovetii, o zemskom – oblastnom i soyuznom narodosovetii| Ya gopvoryu i budu govorit’ do smerti ili do katgorgi odno: konstituciya russkaya ne mojet byt’ soqineniya ne novym Speranskim [SpxM] – geniem byurokratiqeskim, ne novym Mura’evym ili Pestelem [DKB] – nespelym, odnostoronnim geniem 14-go dekabrya, ne odnim Iskanderom [Hzn], -- nikem. Ona doljna byt’ sozdana, organizovana samim narodom, izlyublennymi vybornymi umom narodnym, kogo – skaju starinum narodnym slovom – kogo mej sebya izlyublyat i vyberut. [LiN:651] Wwa sd he wldn’t gtz Hzn but to the graves of Rdw & Ryleev))
*1862:Iskra|“Iz bursatskogo byta”| ((chx dxv vqt))
*1862fe18:Vek#1/6|“Sel’skaia obshchina”|*1906:Soq#1:760-7 reprint| ((vlg.o))
*1862mr11:Vek#7/8:| “Zemstvo”|*1906:Soq#1:753-9 reprint| ((Zmv lnd ntn hst.gph dmk))
*1862mr:Vek#11| “Zemskie sobory v XVII stoletii: Sbor 1642 goda”| *1906:Soq#1:710-17 reprint| ((elx zms~))
*1862mr:Vek#12| “Gorodskie mirskie skhody”| *1906:Soq#1:783f reprint| ((grd.sxd))
*1862ap01:Vek#13/14|“Sel’skii mir i mirskoi skhod”| *1906:Soq#1:768-82 reprint| ((vlg.sxd vlg.m))
*1862oc:Vremia#10:319-63 & 11:251-97| “Zemstvo i raskol”| *1906:Soq#1:505-579 reprint| ((StO|#1 “Beguny”?))
*1862:SPB|_Zemstvo i raskol| ((StO Zmv 862oc10:cnp rzr 16p brochure))
*1862no:OtZ#11:1-43|“Zemskie sobory 1648-1649 i sobranie deputatov...”| *1906:Soq#1:718-52 reprint| ((elx dep.rpz ZmS))
*1870mr:de; OtZ#3 #4 & #12|“Estestvenno-psikhologicheskie usloviia umstvennogo i sotsial’nogo razvitiia russkogo naroda”| ((PSU| prm psx mnt pbl nrd| ?Relation of this title w/ “Istoricheskie usloviia intellectual’nogo razvitiia v Rossii”|*1906:Soq#2:??| ntg edc clt.hst))
*1906-1908:SPB|_Sochineniia| 3vv| Biography by G. A. Luchinskii,3: I-CIX| ((Hkd:281.947 Shch29))
*1927:KZN|_Neizdannye sochineniia| ((prm SldKT pbc))
*1937:IRK|_Sochineniia| Supplement to 1906-1908 ed|

<>Shchepkin,Nikolai Mxl*|>WwpNM| a{
*1905:RnD|_Zemskaia i gorodskaia Rossiia o narodnom predstavitel’stve| ((IISG 60p rpz cst plt.clt grd krx vlg))

*1787:"Petition..." and "Pace of Russia's Modernization" [Raeff3:49-60] ((mdn))
--| "On the Corruption of Morals in Russia [English-Russian text = HN525.S513 1969]

<>Shein,Louis J., ed| a{}
*1977:ONT Waterloo|_Readings in Russian Philosophical Thought: Philosophy of History| ((|>WPT| D16.8.R34| prm.sbk hst.gph idl RUS2 plt.clt|

<>Shipov,Dmitrii N|
*1918:MVA|_Vospomananiia i dumy o perezhitom| ((GRS:53,121 prm vsp RREV1))

<>Shklovsky,Viktor| a{1893}e{1984}n{WW1b WW1c wrx&clt blt RREV2 RREV3}o{
*:|_A_Sentimental Journey: Memoirs, 1917-1922| TEBy Richard Sheldon| IBy Sheldon & Monas| ((UO
Making armored cars and novels: A literary introduction / Richard Sheldon
Driving nails with a samovar: A historical introduction / Sidney Monas|
Part one [historical]: Revolution and the front
Part two [literary]: Writing desk
The book borrowed its title from ENG pst Laurence Sterne. It describes the travels of a bewildered intellectual through Russia, Persia [IRN], the Ukraine [UKR], and the Caucasus [CAU] during the period of the Russian Revolution. Valuable first-hand account of events, Also an important experimental literary work - a memoir in the form of a novel))
*1917su:WW1b vsp in Moh.RR and in Barker|

<>Shmemann,Aleksandr|>Schmemann,Alexander,ed|. ((|>SUQ))

<>Sholokhov,Mikhail A|
--|And Quiet Flows the Don
--|Man's Fate

<>Shotwell,J.T, General Editor, The >Carnegie Endowment for International Peace [>CE.irx.pcx]: Division of Economics and History|
*:|_The_Economic and Social History of the World War| a{}n{WW1b ekn.hst skz mfg mlt.vsp}o{

CE.irx.pcx pbd two series =
  1. *1928-1931:New Haven:YUP for CE.irx.pcx, Russian Series| ((Several prm.sbk~ + at least one ndr.sbk [Florinsky.END]))
  2. *:CE.irx.pcx, Turkish Series| G/Emin,Ahmed [ OTM.TRK]
--|Here are some titles in the Russian Series, generally by pre-RREV3 RUS gvt administrators =
|>Antsiferov,Aleksei (1867-1943) on Russian agriculture
|>Antsiferov (a 2nd title) on _Coop movement during war| ((HD3515.C6))
|>Bilimovich,Aleksandr (1876) on R agriculture
|>Batshev,Mikhail on R agriculture
|>Ignat'ev,Pavel Nxi*| 1870-1945| Russian Schools and Universities in the World War| ((edc unv scl))
|>Ivantsov,Dmitrii on R agriculture
|>L'vov,Georgii Evg (1861-1925) Other pbc= Vospominaniia]
|>Obolenskii,Vladimir (1869-) Other pbc= _Moia zhizn'| ((DK265.7.O26A3))
|>Polner,Tikhon Ivn (1864-1935) and >Obolenskii,Vladimir. lcl gvt, Union of Zemstvos| Other pbc~ re. TolL
|>Struve,Petr on food supply| Other pbc (with Miliukov et al.)= 1917:|_Russian_Realities and Problems (ENG lectures ((DK262+.D8%7C))
|>Turin,Sergei Ptr on lcl gvt, Union of Zemstvos| Other pbc= survey hst of prl.unx| ((UO))
And yet another clutch of titles by
|>Astrov,Nikolai (-1934) on All-Russian union of towns| ((UO))
|>Gronskii,Pavel (1883) on central gvt| ((UO))
|>Kohn,Stanislas (1888-1933) on _The_Cost of the War to Russia: The vital statistics of European Russia during the World War, 1914-1917| ((UO))
G/Meiendorf,Aleksandr Feliks
|>Nol'de,Boris (1876-1948) on R in the ekn wrx| ((UO))
|>Zagorskii,Semen (1881-1930) Menshevik [SDs(m)] economist on state control of industry| ((UO))
Then there is this =
|_Russian Public Finance During the War| With sections by
|>Kokovtsov,V intro
|>Bernatskii,Mxl Vxr (1876-) on R pbl finances, monitary policy
|>Mikel'son,Axr Mxl on R pbl finances, expenditures
|>Apostol',Pvl Natanovich (1872-) on R pbl finances, credit
And these scattered here and there in

<>Siniavskii, Andrei. The Russian intelligentsia [HN530.2.A8 S56 1997]

<>Small,Melvin,and J. David Singer|_Resort to Arms: International and Civil Wars, 1816-1980| *1982:Beverly Hills CA| ((OWN| prm rfr xtx wrx&REV))

<>Sochor,Zenovia A| a{}
*1988:I.NY:CUP|_Revolution and Culture: The Bogdanov-Lenin Controversy| ((PG3467.M29 Z88| Bgd Lnn phl trx rvs.clt idl SDs(b)))

<>Soiuz Osvobozhdeniia|>Union of Liberation|
*1905:PRS|_Osnovnoi zakon Rossiiskoi imperii: Proekt russkoi konstitutsii, vyrabotannyi gruppoi chlenov 'Soiuza osvobozhdeniia'| ((GRS:54 prm cst SoO))

<>Solov'ev,Vladimir Srg*| a{853}b{}c{}d{}e{900}n{}o{phl
--|_A_Solovyov Anthology| ((UO))
--|_Politics, Law and Morality
--| “Beauty, Sexuality, and Love”. In SUQ:73-134
--| “The Enemy from the East”. In RB-C
--| “The Russian National Ideal”. In RB-C
--|_Russia and the Universal Church. TBy Herbert Rees. LND: 1948
--|_War, Progress, and the End of History. CLND: 1915
--|GO Birkbeck for 844: 54;crr [in FRN] w/Wm Palmer

<>Solzhenitsyn,Alexander Isaevich| a{1918}e{2008}n{}o{pst
--|Cancer Ward
--|First Circle
*1974:1976; NYC|_The_Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation| 3vv| ((HV9713.S6413))

*1971:NYC,Farrar,Straus and Giroux|_August 1914| ((UO WW1| G/November 1916 (v2 in this series)
General Samsonov and Colonel Vorotyntsev lead Russian soldiers into battle and subsequent defeat at the Battle of Tannenberg in 1914))

*1999:NYC,Farrar,Straus and Giroux|_November 1916| ((UO WW1| G/August 1914 (v1 in this series)

(Origins of the Kadets)
(From the notebooks of Fyodor Kovynev)
(Society, the government, and the Tsar in 1915)
November 1916. To the Petersburg Proletariat
(Aleksandr Guchkov)
Emperor and Empress: extracts from their correspondence
A student handbill
Prince Lvov [L'vov] to Rodzyanko
(The Progressive Bloc)
(The State Duma, 14 November)
-- (The State Duma, 16-17 November)
A circular telegram from Sturmer
A novel on the 1917 Russian Revolution, chronicling the events which led up to it. The protagonists are its participants--from peasant to tsar))


<>Sotsial-demokraticheskaia Rabochaia Partiia,Rossiiskaia|>SDs|>SDs(b)|>SDs(m)|>Social Democratic Workers Party| a{}n{}o{plt.pty~
*1905:| “Materialy po istorii konferentsii s.-d. partii v Rossii v 1905 g”| In 1922:Proletarskaia revolutsiia#11:157-78| ((GRS:81))
*1912:|_Vserossiiskii konferentsiia... 1912 goda|

<>SDs(b)|_Rossiiskaia sotsial-demokraticheskaia rabochaia partiia (bol’sheviki)| a{}

<>SDs(m)|_Rossiiskaia sotsial-demokraticheskaia rabochaia partiia (men’sheviki)| a{}
|_The_Mensheviks in the Russian Revolution| ((RREV2 RREV3))

<>Soviet Union,Communist Party of| Kommunisticheskaia partiia Sovetskogo Soiuza|>KPS| a{}n{}o{prm RUS3 plt.clt
--|UPNE = NH Hanover: Published for the University of Vermont by University Press of New England
*1930:|_Istoriia VKP(b)|2 special issues: 1) pererastanie of brz-dmk REV into scx REV; & 2) Lnnist prg for STL.skz|EBy E. M. Yaroslavskii| ((prm SDb hst.gph))
*1938:MVA| 1960:MVA|_History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union| EBy Boris Ponomarev, et al| ((>HCP|))
*1959:Notre Dame|_The_Russian Revolution and Religion: A Collection of Documents Concerning Suppression of Religion by the Communists,1917-1925| EBy B. Szczesniak| ((prm RREV Gwrx rlg stt&chx))
*1960:MVA|_History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union| A post-Stalin edition, EBy Ponomarev,Boris N.,et al| G/1938 abv|
*1961:MVA|_Russia enters the 1960s: A documentary report on the 22nd Congress...| EBy Harry Schwartz| *1962:P.PA:Lippincott| ((278p))
*1969:1974; MVA|_History of Soviet Foreign Policy,1917-1970| 2vv| EBy Ponomarev,Boris N [Ponomaryov here]; Gromyko,A.; and Khvostov,V| ((prm))
*1970:MVA|_A_Short History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union| EBy Ponomarev,Boris N.,et al| TBy David Skvirsky| ((SDb))
*1972:Toronto|_Guide to the Decisions of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union,1917-1967|
*1974:Toronto|_Resolutions & Decisions of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union| v1 = “...,1898-October 1917” (Elwood)| v2 in four books,“The Early Soviet Period, 1917-1929” (McNeal)| ((UO=JN6598.K7R455| prm.sbk SDb REV SSR.stt wrx&REV Gwrx NEP RUS3))
*1984:UPNE|_A_Documentary history of Communism| EBy Robert V. Daniels|2vv|Rev. ed| ((UO))
*1988+: UPNE|_A_Documentary history of Communism| EBy Robert V. Daniels|2vv | Updated, rev. ed|
*1989:MVA, Novosti|_Documents and Materials: Moscow, Kremlin, September 19-20, 1989| ((Prs))
*1993:UPNE|_A_Documentary history of Communism in Russia: From Lenin to Gorbachev| EBy Robert V. Daniels|“Third, revised and updated edition”--Preface (1993 ed)
*2007:NH.CN,YUP|_Soviet culture and power: A history in documents, 1917-1953|>SC&P| EBy >Clark,Katerina| >Dobrenko,Evgeniĭ Axr*| >Artizov,Andrei and >Naumov,Oleg V| ((UO| prm.sbk| SSR stt&clt cnp blt xdj.clt STL|
"Prohibit travel . . ."
"The utterly indecent proposal to preserve the Bolshoi theater"
*--Organizing the "artistic milieu" : the era of NEP
The organization of proletarian art : the cultural revolution [clt.REV clt.rvs]
"Gorky, whom no one takes seriously in politics"
"Work with the anti-Soviet intelligentsia"
*--The thirties = Introduction. the culture of high Stalinism, 1932-1941
The demise of RAPP
The writers' congress
The gorky factor
The union of Soviet writers
Stalin and the Moscow Art Theater
The anti-formalist campaign
The campaign for a patriotic culture
The censorship
Presenting the image of the leader
Stalin as patron-potentate
Reports on writers from the NKVD and Soviet officials
Petitions to Stalin
The Stalin-Sholokhov exchange
*--The forties introduction. The culture of late Stalinism, 1941-1953
The literaryfFront:: the war
The literary front : Zhdanovism and beyond
The most important art
Moments musicaux [FLM]
The revolution has ended at the point where it began. "Leaders of the Soviet Union, Stalin chief among them, well understood the power of art, and their response was to attempt to control and direct it in every way possible. This book examines Soviet cultural politics from the Revolution to Stalin's death in 1953. Drawing on a wealth of newly released documents from the archives of the former Soviet Union, the book provides remarkable insight on relations between Gorky, Pasternak, Babel, Meyerhold, Shostakovich, Eisenstein, and many other intellectuals and the Soviet leadership. Stalin's role in directing these relations, and his literary judgments and personal biases, will astonish many." "The documents presented in this volume reflect the progression of Party control in the arts. They include decisions of the Politburo, Stalin's correspondence with individual intellectuals, his responses to particular plays, novels, and movie scripts, petitions to leaders from intellectuals, and secret police reports on intellectuals under surveillance. Introductions, explanatory materials, and a biographical index accompany the documents."--BOOK JACKET. "This book is based on selections from a book of documents compiled by Andrei Artizov and Oleg Naumov and published in Russian as Vlastʹ i khudozhestvennaia ︡intelligentsiia : dokumenty TsK RKP(b)--VKP(b), VChK--OGPU--NKVD o kulʹturnoi politike, 1917-1953 gg (Power and the creative intelligentsia : documents (of the Communist Party and the secret Police) on cultural policy, 1917-1953) by Mezhdunarodny fond Demokratia (International Democracy Foundation), Moscow, 1999"--T.p. verso
*:|_Russian Rev| ((NoUO))
--|Aid to wrl REV [SP&D,2]

<>Stalin,Joseph V|>Dzhugashvili,Iosif V|>StlJV|>StlIV| a{}n{}o{LOOP
--|Joseph Stalin Internet Archive
--|_Stalin Digital Archives| ((UO))
*1931je23: Speech| Edited by Geo Counts| ((UO))
*1942:NYC|_Selected Writings|
*1952-1955:MVA|_Works| 13vv|| ((UO 12vv only?))
*1971:Davis.CA,Cardinal Publishers|_Selected Works|
*1972:GardenCity.NY|_Essential Stalin: Major Theoretical Writings,1905-1952. Edited by Bruce Franklin| ((DK268.S75A38))
In Moh.RR

<>Stead,William Thomas| a{
Baylen,Joseph O|_The_Tsar's Lecturer-General: W. T. Stead and the Russian Revolution of 1905| ((AS36.G378A3no.23))

<>Stolypin,Petr Arkad*|>StpPA| a{}b{}c}d{}e{}n{RREV1 krx.rfm lnd.rfm}o{stt.srv mnr MID
1907:1911; Prime Minister| ~~stt.dmx| krx.rfm Stp.rfm S.rfm
*1970:Metuchen NJ|>Bock,M. P|_Reminiscences of My Father, Peter A. Stolypin| Excerpt in Moh.RR| (())
*1976:CO.Boulder|>Conroy,M. S|_Petr Arkadevich Stolypin: Practical Politics in Late Tsarist Russia| (())
*1965je:SEER#43,101:257-274|>Mosse,W. E| “Stolypin's Villages”| (())
*1985:P.NJ, Kingston P|>Zenkovsky,AV|_Stolypin: Russia’s last Great Reformer|TBy M. Patoski; IBy Ph. Mosely| ((85fa:bbt.rqt))
*2011:MVA,ROSSPEN|_Petr Arkadevich Stolypin : Entsiklopediia| ((UO))

<>Stronin,Oleksandr Ivn*| a{
*1885:SPB,tpg.Mtpt|_Istoriia obshchestvennosti| ((cvc.virtu| Vast(767p) plt.trx search for scs lwx~ of cvc.pbl hst of obwwejitiya [i] ch1=“Istoriia grazhdanstvennosti”| Takes up ntn & shows all are a mix predanie ~~only to lng; thrfore not blood but blt=ntn lgc [726ff] 86my17:no14; Pypin 2ltr-Qrn [LpC:554,8| Q#15:612f,942] pbl=structr on lwx of mech;pbl=like“pyramid s kruglym osnovaniem” idl [SWG:436] BrE#62:825 d.scr- geometric concept of pbl.structure well| L-S“Stronin”, frm RXV,re.his idl:only 2 plt pty:pro-krx & con-krx(159), representative gbx figure))

<>Struve,Petr Berngard| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{}o{
*1909: G/Vexi
--|RB-C “The Intelligentsia and the National Face”|

*1918:|_Out of the Depths (De Profundis): A Collection of Articles on the Russian Revolution| ((>IzG| prm.sbk ntg rlg.idl RREV

*1931:Vienna| “Witte und Stolypin”|In Menschen die Geschichte machten| v3| EBy P. R. Rohden and F. Ostrogorsky| ((ndr Wtt Stp stt.srv RREV1))
Pipes.Struve| ((UO))

<>Sukhanov,Nikolai|>Gimmer,NN| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{rvs dddist SR SDs RREV2 VRM RREV3}o{Russian SD
*:|_The_Russian Revolution| Excerpt in Moh.RR| ((1917mr02:oc25; Eye witness to events))
*:|>Getzler,Israel|_Nikolai Sukhanov: Chronicler of the Russian Revolution| ((DK268.S93G48+2002))
*2003:Journal of European Studies#33|>Dukes,Paul| "Nikolai Sukhanov: Chronicler of the Russian Revolution"

<>Sviatopolk-Mirskaia,E. A| a{
*1965:IsZ#77:241 etc|“Dnevnik ... za 1904-1905 gg”| ((GRS:51,115 prm dnv RREV1))

>Sviatopolk-Mirskii,Dmitrii| G/Mirskii,D

<>Sviatopolk-Mirskii,Petr D| a{
*1905:SPB|_Rechi g. ministra vnutrennikh del kn. Sviatopolk-Mirskogo i tolki o nikh pressy|EBy A. Achkasov| ((GRS:53 prm MVD tUt stt RREV1))

<>Szczesniak,Bolesław,ed|_The_Russian Revolution and Religion: A Collection of Documents Concerning Suppression of Religion by the Communists,1917-1925. Notre Dame: 1959| ((274.7 Sz19| RREV3 Gwrx NEP))

<>Taylor,Graham Romeyn| a{}n{trv gbx RREV2 RREV3}o{
“The Revolution [1917-1918] in the Provinces” In WRH2:604-615| ((unpublished diary and letters (see s-field below) ))
[W re. father's archive w/letters]

<>Tikhomirov,Lev| a{852}b{}c{}d{}e{923}n{lgcNO}o{Revolutionist of the 1870s-early 90s, turned loyal subject of tsar
Narodnaia volia party
|_Russia, Political and Social| [TXT] (( prm plt pbl idl))
*:|_Vospominaniia| ((UO vsp))
*1930:KrA#2/39:63-6 etc| “25 let nazad: Iz dnevnikov...”| ((GRS:117 prm dnv))

<>Tocqueville,Alexis de| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{hst.gph}o{
*1835:1840; Original French edition| English tlng = |_Democracy in America| (())
*1856:Original French edition|*1955:NYC|_The_Old Regime and the Revolution in France| (( ~~rvs trx))
SAC LOOP on "Tocqueville" includes E-TXT~ of main titles above=

<>Tolstoy,Leo| a{}n{}o{World famous writer & moralist

<>Tolz,Vera| a{}n{G.rfm Prs}o{jrn RFE/RL
on jrn & mxx in LRF

<>Trotsky,Leon|>TrtL| a{}n{}o{LOOP
*:|_1905| TBy A. Bostock| NYC:1972| ((DK254.T7a48 (NO LONGER IN CATALOG?)| prm RREV1 hst.gph RREV:noWbr))
*1917:1922; |_Trotsky Papers,1917-1922. Edited by Jan Meijer. 2 vols. NoUO
*1920:|_Antwort auf Karl Kautsky's "Terrorismus und Kommunismus"| ((UO KtsK ?ENG tlng?))
*1923:| “From the Old Family to the New” in RBV1:89-95; fmy
*1930:NYC|>Trt.slf.bxo|_My Life: An Attempt at an Autobiography| ((DK254.T6A36| prm vsp rvs idl

Leon Trotsky was not raised to be a revolutionist. He was not embroiled in the social dramas that tend to mold a young man into political turmoil. His father did not inspire orators of the past with speeches of grandeur to lead his son to a promised land. His mother did not sob about the injustices of a harsh land, harsh weather, and an even more harsh social system. He was instead raised amongst a monotonous deluge of farm work, hunting, and late night conversation to pass one day to the next more seamlessly. Yet, this upbringing did ultimately spawn into that of a revolutionist. Why? What led him to oppose the norms, expect changes, and then, act on those beliefs? Leon Trotsky did not gravitate towards revolutionary aims because he was led that way, he gravitated towards them because the social inequalities that he witnessed during the time of his youth in the city, as well as, in the country.

Leon’s childhood was full of many contradictions. He grew up in Yanovka, a village that was named after the landlord Yanovsky, located in western Russia. His father, a Jew, had purchased many acres before the progroms of 1881 that restricted the obtaining of land by peoples of Jewish descent. They lived a very simple life. Yet, they were well off for the times. The way Leon puts it is that “one measured profit or loss with the eye. For that very reason, it would have been difficult to fix the extent of father’s fortune.”(Trotsky, 7) He never really knew their financial position because his father did not believe in wasting money on anything that was not necessary. All the while, his parents could afford an education for Leon, send him to the city, allow him to immerse himself a different social culture than the one that he had learned on the farm. Through this social comparison, his views on the world began to expand, and his obligation to incite change began to grow.

This reading helps us define Russian political culture by the study of contrast. The relation between the haves and the have nots. During the late nineteenth century, in Russia, you did not want to be a have not, yet, most were. In this occasion you have a Jewish family, one of the general have nots of this period, being land owners. Not only did his family own a large amount of land, but also owned one of the only wheat mills in the area. “The peasants often used to wait at the mill for weeks to have their grain ground.” (Trotsky, 9) They had a machine shop. They were the haves of their village yet on a national scale, they were isolated. When Alexander II was assassinated, there was very little talk at the table. There was only their life, their situation. Leon did not see the oppression that was happening all over Russia, he saw the way that his father treated the workers. He saw the way their wages could be changed because of semantics and that their was nothing that could be done once his father made a decision. This effected Leon. He began to help out others even at the behest of his father. He was caught writing a letter for a maid and was told to not do that again. He writes that “the bewildering wrong side of life, recognized neither at home nor at school, did not however cease to exist because of that, and proved sufficiently powerful and all-pervading to command my attention.” (Trotsky, 45) This shows his defiance to the culture that his father has set, and inspires visions of his future.

The insights that are gained from Leon’s childhood grow mostly from the contrasts between his time on the farm and his time at school. At home, Leon was a farm kid. He enjoyed working in the machine shop, chopping grain, trying to make his mom laugh, and drinking warm tea. Though, things changed for Leon when he began to receive an education. The contrast became apparent. First, there were regulations for Jews when it came to getting an education. Only ten percent of applicants accepted to the school could be Jewish. This was a lesson in political culture in itself. He realized that while he loved the education, he cared very little for his teachers. He was not very found of his classmates as well. One instance seems to have shaped him and his views on his classmates and thus his peers permanently. He was the leader of a classroom gag on his teacher. When the next day he realized he was fingered as the initial inciter, he had a hard time finding forgiveness. When he returned to school the next year he had not forgot. He “met most of the boys who had either betrayed me, or defended me, or had remained neutral. This determined my personal relations for a long time. Some boys I cut completely; with others who had supported me during these trying moments, I became even more friendly.” (Trotsky, 72) This shows his ability to trust, yet only once it is earned. This is a valuable trait to a person amongst revolutionists. But this was school, he had yet to form a view on politics. In fact, he says “during my school years I held no political views, nor for that matter had I any desire to acquire them. At the same time my subconscious strivings were tinged by a spirit of opposition. I had an intense hatred of the existing order, of injustice, of tyranny.”(Trotsky,90) He goes on to say that “my political frame of mind while at school was vaguely oppositionist, but no more than that.” (Trotsky,95) He really shows a slow burn towards a revolutionists mindset. Then, something that still vividly dances in Leon’s mind, “in february, 1897, a woman student, Vetrova, burned herself to death in the Peter-Paul fortress.” (Trotsky, 104) He then tells Grigory Sokolovsky that it is time to get started. With these words Leon Trotsky was on his was way, and he would soon find that many others felt the same.

The books main points relate to references in the monographs by examining the social structure between the elite and the lower classes. In “Pre-soviet Russian concepts of civil society and their legacy, Prof. Kimball wrote that “the whole social structure was held at arms length form the levers of political power and thus control over its own social identity and political destiny.” (Kimball) Politics controlled nearly all social aspects of life. It was this control that started to weigh heavy on Trotsky. His teachers had control over him, yet he had no control over his teacher. When a teacher gives no explanation as to why he has not returned graded papers, Leon is left to only wonder why. When he pries further to find the answer, he is met with anger and given no satisfaction. This seems to be an anecdote for the way politics are ran in Russia of this time. Kimball also wrote that “a stiff and artificial social structure locked Russians in suffocating assigned and hierarchical categories.” (Kimball) Trotsky knew all about this concept. He was labeled from the beginning for being a Jew. He was labeled for being amongst the farming class of peoples. These labels were not meant to be removed. They were not meant to be overcome. They were meant to hold you in a controllable position in society. Without land the Jews cannot grow and prosper. Without an education the lower class cannot enlighten themselves. Without money the peasants cannot afford to sway from the blanket of security in which the Russian government can provide. These are all methods of oppression that were being used on anyone and everyone during Leon Trotsky’s lifetime. To sum it up, “They were generally excluded from opportunities of recruitment into higher positions.” (Kimball)

In conclusion, Leon Trotsky was not born a revolutionist. He was not raised a revolutionist. He was not trained to be a revolutionist. He was a young man from humble beginnings who grew during a time of oppression. He witnessed the mistreatment of his fathers workers, mistreatment of the school kids by those who meant to govern, and most of all, mistreatment by his own nation and the police that took without asking, killed without explanation, and acted without consequence. It was these things that he witnessed, paired with the unexplained self-immolation burning of a young woman, that finally sent him on a path of change. That path led to more change than just himself. It led to revolution.

*1932:NYC|_History of the Russian Revolution| On theory of "permanent revolution" = E-TXT
--| In Moh.RR
*1937:LND|_Revolution Betrayed
*:|_Whither Russia? Towards Capitalism or Socialism. 330.947 T 756
*:|_Writings. (1929,30,30-31,36-37,29-33 supp.,34-40 supp.) (83mr31: bbt.rqt)
*:|_Bulletin of the Opposition| 4vv| ((prm WWW?))
*:|_Literature and Revolution. PG2951.T76
*:|_Portraits: Political and Personal. . HX23.T76
*:|_Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and His Influences
*:|_First Five Years of the Communist International. 2 vols
*:|_Whither Russia? Towards Capitalism or Socialism. 330.947 T 756
*:|__The_Young Lenin| ((OWN))
Eastman ((chd.Trt))
Deutscher,I|_The_Prophet Armed| The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky,1921-1929. The 2nd of 3 vols. London: 1959.

<>Trubetskaia,O. N|>ToiaON| a{
*1937:PRS|Sovremennye zapiski#64:??| “Iz perezhitogo”| ((GRS:53,117,187 prm vsp RREV1))

<>Trubetskoi,Evgenii|>ToiE| a{}e{}n{EUAist}o{phl
--| RB-C| “The Bolshevist Utopia”
--|RB-C| “The Religious Movement in Russia”
--|_The_Legacy of Genghis Khan and Other Essays on Russia's Identity| ((UO| TTR))

The collection of essays by the esteemed linguist Nikolai Trubetskoi entitled “The Legacy of Genghis Khan” describes his less well-known views as a participant in the movement in the early 20th century Russian intelligentsia community known as “Eurasianism.” His main points are outlined in the essays, “On True and False Nationalism,” “The Legacy of Genghis Khan: A Perspective on Russian History,” and, perhaps to a lesser extent, “The Upper and Lower Stories of Russian Culture” and “At The Door: Reaction? Revolution?”

His first main point discusses the “wrong path of European culture” described by the Eurasianist movement, or what he deems true and false nationalism. Essentially, his argument is such that every individual should be self-aware and strive to be unique – and that all nationals of such individuals should strive to do the same. He stresses three types of false nationalism. The first involves the downplaying of one’s own unique culture, in striving to resemble the Romano-Germanic “Great Powers,” while the second, which he labels “militant chauvinism,” is ostensibly the opposite – claiming that one’s own unique culture is somehow superior to others and attempting to force assimilation of “inferior” cultures to one’s own. “Cultural conservatism” is his last false nationalism, or the attempt to identify uniqueness of culture of patterns or culture from a nation’s history without account for the passage of time. He asserts that Russia in the post-Petrine era falls in the most former category, or that any Russian “nationalism” since that time has been merely a thinly veiled attempt at being more European and not “nationalism” at all.

He then moves to discuss what nationalism should mean to Russia in the post-Petrine period, after Peter introduced the dangerous false nationalism and idealization of European culture that divided the upper and lower classes of Russia and the old Rus’ from the new Russia. It is his assertion that this nationalism should be determined by the very unique development of Russian history, that it is to say, that the Russian state should not be assumed to have risen from the ashes of even Kievan Rus’, but that “Russia-Eurasia” is the rightful heir of the Golden Horde and the legacy of Genghis Khan. Russia, then, is not European (or Asian, really), but Eurasian, and it is from this point that the views of the Eurasianists stem.

The final very important point is a more abstract one, discussed in his essay, “At the Door: Reaction? Revolution?” After a discussion of the differences between leftist and rightist ideologies, he explains that European history has travelled along a practically straight line a leftward direction (democracy-socialism-communism, constitutional monarchy-democratic republic-Soviet Federal Socialist Republic). This hypothetical line, however, is not infinite and has, the Eurasianists believe, reached its end, and that these leftist ideologies are becoming decrepit, deteriorating. It seems then, that as the younger generations look begin to look back to the right, the future will lead to reactionary rightism, but he does not believe historical development can return on the same line – instead, he believes that this will not be reactionary except in optical illusion, but will be rather a jump to a whole new line, a whole new plane. In order to move forward, he asserts, the creation of something new in place of a used-up history is necessary. The European ideological path has reached its end, and should be abandoned in favor of something new.



<>Trubetskoi,Nikolai Srg*| a{890}b{}e{938}n{MNG EUAist}o{
>Evraziistvo|>EUA| Evraziisty Eurasianists [ID] CF=Leont'ev,K| Trubetskoi,N| Savitskii,PN| Suvchinskii,PP| Chkheidze,KxtAxr| Arapov,P| Efron,Srg| Mirskii,D| Florovskii,G (brief ~~)| Influenced BrdN
PRG & PRS? location of Evraziĭskoe knigoizdatel'stvo| jrn Evraziiskii sbornik [SMT] edt=AleNxiIvn|
Following in UO library = *:|_Common Slavic Element...| ((UO))
*:|_Legacy of Genghis Khan...
*:|_Letters and Notes
*:|_Puti Evrazii
*:|_Three Phil. Studies|

<>Tsereteli,I. G| a{
*1917ap:Crisis in Moh.RR| ((prm vsp VRM))
--|>Roobol,W. H|_Tsereteli--A Democrat in the Russian Revolution: A Political Biography

<>Tugan-Baranovsky,M. I| a{}n{prl krx zvd}o{ekn
*1898:SPB|_Russkaia fabrika v proshlom i nastoiashchem| Translated as *:|_The_Russian Factory in the 19th Century| ((HD2356.R9T8513))

<>Tyrkova-Vil'iams,Ariadna|>Tyrkova-Williams,A| a{869}e{962}n{}o{plt.ddd [ID]
}g{hsb= Williams,A
*1919:|_From Liberty to Brest-Litovsk: The First Year of the Russian Revolution [1917]| ((UO))
*1935:|_Cheerful Giver | ((re.her hsb Williams,A))
*1952:NYC| *1990:LND, ed#2|_Na putiakh k svobode| ((GRS:115 prm vsp gte RREV1| ?Part of 3vv vsp, including To,chego bol'she ne budet [SMT noUO]))
--|On KDs in Moh.RR

<>Ulianova-Elizarova,Anna I'inichna| _Lenin's Boyhood and Adolescence| ((chd.Lnn))

<>United States Department of State| a{}n{R&A}o{}
*1920:WDC| Foreign Policy Association|_Russian-American Relations,March,1917-March,1920: Documents and Papers| Reprint= Westport CN: 1977| ((UO))
--|_American Diplomatic and Public Papers: The United States and China| v9= Russia and the Manchurian Borderland| v10= The Russo-Japanese War| ((UO| RJ.wrx USA-CHN irx))
--|_Confidential U.S. Diplomatic Post Records: Russia and the Soviet Union. 3 parts: “Russia: From Czar to Commissars,1914-1918”. flm (10 reels). “The Soviet Union,1919-1933”. flm (75 reels). “The Soviet Union,1934-1941”. University Publications of America,flm (60 reels)
*1940:WDC|_Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States: The Lansing Papers,1914-1920| 2vv| ((UO))
*1931+:WDC|_Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States,1918-1919: Russia| 4vv| ((UO))
--|_Records of the Department of State Relating to the Internal Affairs of Russia and the USSR,1910-1929| ((Microcopy of National Archives holdings #316,177 rolls=

#7-18 (1910mr:1918no;)
#97-105 (1914mr:1918se;Calamities & disasters,etc)
#116-117(NoUO 1913se:1918de; Financial conditions)
#142 (NoUO 1910mr:1919au; Railways rrd)
#164 (NoUO file #861.797-861.7971)]
See 8x11 US Nat.RXV for pbd ndx~=
*1966:WDC| “Pamphlet Accompanying Microcopy No. 316: Records of the Department of State Relating to Internal Affairs of Russian and the Soviet Union,1910-29”, and
*1976:WDC| “Purport Lists for the Department of State Decimal File,1910-1944”| See Univ. Pubs. Confidential. flm DK246.U5 cf. Z2491.U4

<>United States Department of State, Division of Near Eastern Affairs|Periodical Report on Matters Relating to Russia [1917de01:1919je; ]. WDC:| ((UO))

<>United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary. Bolshevik Propaganda: Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee of the Judiciary,United States Senate,65th Congress,Third Session. WDC: 1919

<>United States. Special Diplomatic Mission to Russia| *1918:Boston,Marshall Jones Co|_America's message to the Russian people; addresses by the members of the Special diplomatic mission of the United States to Russia in the year 1917| ((UO| 154pp WW1b| Addresses by Elihu Root (1845-1937), John R. Mott (1865-1955), James Duncan (1857+) and Charles Edward Russell (1860-1941)| R&A))

<>Vekhi [Landmarks; Signposts] prm RREV1

<>Vernadskii,George Vxr*| a{}n{]o{hst
*:|Nachertanie russkoi istorii. S prilozheniem "Geopoliticheskikh zametok po russkoi istorii" by Savitskii,PN

<>Vinogradov,Pavel [Vinogradoff,Paul here]| a{}n{plt stt.dmx Zmv lbx unv.prf}o{Professor and political theorist
*1914:1915; Lectured in London [SAC]
*1915:L.ENG|_Self-government in Russia| ((UO| As WW1b got under way, V tried to explain to English why Russia was a good parliamentary ally =

pp.50ff = local self government in the time of Alexander II| Tver Province gentry projects for a Russian political future were central to Vinogradov's vision [ID] | V shared the Tver gentry disgust with social/service hierarchies =
(1) superannuated but still enforced medieval social estates [sosloviia] and
(2) bureaucratic [chinovnik] arbitrariness built into the autocratic Table of Ranks
Vinogradov proposed a 3rd alternative = Democratic [vsesoslovnye] self government | Preliminary stages of democratic rule in Russia might result in gentry and other elite social forces predominating over the laboring masses, but it would be step one in a process that would lead toward authentic democratic self rule))

*:|_The_Russian Problem|


<>Vodovozov,V. V., ed|>VdvVV| a{
*1906:SPB|_Sbornik programm politicheskikh partii v Rossii| 4+? volumes| ((prm.sbk plt.pty RREV1 lgc))

<>Voline [pseud. of V. M. >Eichenbaum,VM]| a{}n{RREV3 Gwrw}o{
*:|_Nineteen-Seventeen: The Russian Revolution Betrayed
*1969:PRS|_La révolution inconnue,1917-1921...| ((UO))
*1974:NYC|_The_Unknown Revolution,1917-1921| ((NoUO))

<>Vol'skii,NV|>Valentinov| a{1879}e{1964}n{}o{
*1969:AnnArbor.M,UMP|_The_Early Years of Lenin| ((Lnn.chd))
--| vsp Lnn in Moh.RR

<>Vyshinskii,Andrei| a{}n{}o{
*1948:NYC|_The_Law of the Soviet State| tlng of “Sovetskoe gosudarstvennoe pravo”| ((342.47 V998))
*1952:MVA|_Lenin and Stalin: The Great Organizers of the Soviet State| tlng of ed#2| ((UO))

<>Wade,Rex A.,ed| a{}
*1989:FL Gulf Breeze|_Documents of Soviet History| v1= The Bolshevik Revolution and Establishment of the Soviet State|

<>Wallace,Donald McKenzie| a{841}e{919}n{}o{Englishman, a long-time visitor to Russia and astute observer
--|_Russia| SEVERAL EDITIONS, 1877, 1881 [TXT], 1905, 1910. 1912| ((krx trv| Only about 2/3 of 1912 edition got into Cyril Black's pb ed))
*1971:OSP#4:73-88|>Harrison,W| “Mackenzie Wallace's View of the Russian Revolution, 1905-1907”| ((trv))

<>Walling,William English| a{
*1908:NYC|_Russia’s Message: The True World Import of the Revolution| | ((DK262.W3| Several editions| prm RREV1 mnt USA1~~))
*1917:NYC|_Russia’s Message: The People Against the Czar| ((947.08 W158| prm USA1~~ REV| See Kennan,RUS leaves the wrx,p. 266ff))
*[1918]:[n.p.]|_Bolshevism Self-Revealed| ((335.4 P 191 v. 1 no. 21| prm USA1~~ REV))
[W] [W]

<>Walzer,Michael compiler|_Regicide and revolution: Speeches at the trial of Louis XVI|>Walzer.REGICIDE| *1974:LND,CUP| ((prm.sbk FREV))

<>Weber,Max| a{}n{prf}o{Great German sociologist learned Russian in order to follow portentous 1905 Revolution [LOOP]
*1894: See MWG 1/3| “Developmental Tendencies in the Situation of East Elban Rural Labourers” [“Entwicklungstendenzen in der Lage der ostelbischen Landarbeiter”] Translated with an “Introduction to Weber” by Keith Tribe. In Economy and Society 8 (1979): 172-205. H1.E25
*1895:| “Der Nationalstaat und die Volkswirtschaftspolitik”| Inaugural address at Freiburg U| ((In GPS (3rd edition,1971)( [1st ed. Munich: 1920;2nd: 1958]. Translated in part as “Economic Policy and the National Interest in Imperial Germany”. In WST: 263-8))
--|_The_Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by Talcott Parson. Second ed.,with Introduction by Anthony Giddens. LND: Allen & Unwin,1976 [NYC: Scribner,1977]
--| “Die protestantischen Sekten und der Geist des Kapitalismus”. Translated as “The Protestant Sects and the Spirit of Capitalism”. FMW: 302-22,450-9
--| “The Relations of the Rural Community to other Branches of Social Science”. Translated by Charles Seidenadel in Congress of Arts and Science,Universal Exposition,St. Louis,1904. Boston MA: 1906;reprinted with alterations, FMW: 363-85
*1905je06:Heidelberger Zeitung#131 [Zur Rede Alfred Hettners über “Das europäische Russland: Volk, Staat und Kultur”], and *1905je06:Heidelberger Tageblatt#131| “Russland-Abend”| These are two newspaper reports on Max Weber’s critique of Hettner’s presentation, “Russland-Abend im nationalsozialen Verein”| Reprinted in MWG1/10:698-700| ((| no Weber,Wbr))
*1906fe:ASS#22| “Zur Lage der bürgerlichen Demokratie in Russland”| An appendix titled “Zur Beurteilung der gegenwärtigen politischen Entwicklung Russlands” which also included S. J. Zhivago’s [Giwago here] review of the constitutional project published by the newly formed Russian political party Soiuz Osvobozhdeniia [Petr Struve, ed., Loi fondamentale de l’Empire Russe (Paris:1905)] Reprinted in MWG1/10:86-279| Translated in part as “The Prospects for Liberal Democracy in Tsarist Russia” in WST:269-284| GO Istoricheskii ocherk blw| ((lbx dmk RUS RREV1| sig. passages:GO FMW:71-2 & Moore| cynical; contemptuous of fa?? of rxn,sceptical re.KDs| Fall of tsar leads to bureaucratic authoritarianism, not cst dmk| Only disasterous EUR wrx can lead to overthrow of N-2 Mommsen,WbrP:7(both pieces re.RUS essentially journalistic, to keep GRM informed); 29; 14(re.rigidity of lbx plt; missing opportunities); 43(Realpolitik); 56f(RREV1)| Weber,Wbr:327-8))
*1906au:ASS#23| “Russlands Übergang zum Scheinkonstitutionalismus”| Reprinted in MWG1/10:293-684| ((RUS cst| Mommsen,WbrP:56f,29| GO Wbr.RREV1))

*1906|_Russian Revolutions| *1995:I.NY:CUP=Abridged and translated| ((>Wbr.RREV| UO| WW1 trx plt.clt))

Max Weber’s work Russian Revolutions come as a four-part collection of his Russianist essays. These four essays can generally be split into two distinct categories of both topic and length, based on two different thematic moods that run through Weber’s works as a result of world events happening during the different periods in which the essays were written. The essays’ topics illustrate to the reader the gradual transition of a political culture still roughly confined to a small group of literate political activists and the Tsarist bureaucracy in 1905 into a relatively larger body of the Russian public in 1917.

The first group is comprised of the two larger essays covering the Russian revolutions in 1905: “Bourgeois Democracy in Russia” and “Russia’s Transition to Pseudo-constitutionalism.” The general mood that runs through these two texts can be described as an expression of Weber’s sympathy to the plight of idealistic liberalism struggling in the Russian Empire. Beginning with “Bourgeois Democracy in Russia,” Weber deals with the conflicts and dilemmas facing the anti-autocratic movement, followed by “Pseudo-democracy in Russia,” which is more centrally focused on the mechanisms of the Tsarist political system.

Following Russia’s defeat in the 1905 Russo-Japanese War, Tsar Nicholas II moved to stabilize his regime by alleviating the pressure of liberal reform movements (the core of which were the local administrative zemstvos) by offering some kind of accommodation – to no avail. The reformists pressed hard for the establishment of civil liberties and a functioning parliament but continue to be unsatisfied with offers made by the autocracy. Culminating with the 9/22 January “Bloody Sunday,” in which civil liberties demonstrators were massacred outside the Tsar’s Winter Palace in St. Petersburg, the ensuing upheaval finally extracted a promise from the autocracy for the civil rights of freedom of thought, speech, assembly/association, as well as a promise of habeas corpus and increased popular representation, coupled with a provision calling for all Imperial laws to be approved by the Imperial Duma – promises that have been attributed to an attempt by Nicholas II and Count Sergei Witte to split the opposition into liberal reformists and Marxist radicals.

[wrx&REV=] Weber saw this episode as an indication that the Tsar had alienated his subjects beyond the possibility of compromise, though Weber conceded that the fall of the Tsar, however inevitable, would still require a war. Weber goes on to describe three elements of the liberal-democratic forces that would be responsible for pushing Russia towards federalist democracy once the autocracy crumbled. Those three elements are:
1. The bourgeois “status-group,” who could be considered bourgeois in “attitude to life and education” and should be distinguished from the industrial bourgeois social class that possessed an inconsistent commitment to notions of liberal constitutionalism, often even expressing overt hostility to it.
2. Landed members of the zemstvos, members of the Union of Liberation and the Constitutional Democratic Party.
3. The quasi-proletarian intelligentsia, such as doctors, teachers, journalists, etc.

The accomplishments of these three different elements, particularly through acts by the zemstvos in the fields of education, health and road construction despite obstruction by the autocracy, Weber claims, flew in the face of assertions that the Russians were unable to exercise effective self-governance. However, despite these accomplishments, Weber sees only a slim chance of a successful establishment of a liberal-democracy in Russia, as any improvement in the status of peasants was more likely to aid communist radicals rather than liberal reformers. Additionally, liberal reform movements faced obstacles from the Church, which had high resistance to change; difficulties arising from the peasant class, which was already experienced with concepts of communism and wary of notions of individualism; the challenge of cooperation from a volatile petty bourgeoisie; and the opposition by socialist radicals opposed to ideas of a necessary “bourgeois step” preached by Marxism.

In the second essay, “Pseudo-democracy in Russia,” Weber examines the political systems of the Tsarist regime, particularly by focusing on the “interim ministry,” which refers to the period of time between Count Sergei Witte’s appoitment to the position of Premier in October 1905 to his resignation in April 1906.

Reeling from concessions made to the reformers, Nicholas worked to reinstate his authority through the cooperation of the Cossacks, police and army in instituting harsh repression upon perceived threats to the established power structure. Running parallel to these more aggressive endeavors was the task undertaken by the government to “create institutions which would give the outward impression abroad that the Manifesto of 17 October was being carried out, though without seriously jeopardizing the power of the bureaucracy.” Weber points out that the motives for presenting an image of a flowering Russian democracy were rooted in Russia’s status as a “debtor state.” As a debtor state, Russia relied heavily on foreign investments and loans, whose preconditions demanded social order and a western-style constitution.

In actuality it was inevitable that those rights granted in the October Manifesto would amount to nothing more than an empty promise, as the protection of such rights requires certain institutional structures that Russia lacked. As Weber explains, rights such as habeas corpus “assume the existence of bodies with constitutionally guaranteed independence, which can exercise effective control of the administration.” Rather than establish such bodies, Weber continues, the imperial bureaucracy only had “police interests.”

To further ensure the ineffectiveness of any popular representation in government, the administration coupled its promises of strengthening the Imperial Duma’s governmental oversight abilities with an electoral process so complicated so as to confound attempts to turn the Duma into a successful means of popular expression. The additional prohibition of political meetings eventually convinced the public that “whatever the bureaucracy banned must necessarily be something excellent.”

In the end, the duality of granting and promising specific civil liberties while simultaneously taking such extravagant efforts to render those liberties ineffectual proved to be so much more destructive to the bureaucracy and bred so much more hatred among imperial subjects than outright repression. It was by this practice that Weber claims the bureaucracy established a superficial pseudo-democracy rather than instituting genuine reforms.

The second part of “Russian Revolutions” comprises two significantly smaller essays: “Russia’s Transition to Pseudo-democracy” and “The Russian Revolution and Peace.” Contrary to the two earlier essays, these later works began in 1917 and have been said to display a strongly nationalistic, defensive side to Weber, wary and pessimistic of notions of a Russo-Germanic peace arising out of the Russian Revolutions of 1917. For Weber, the success of the 1917 revolutions was particularly shocking for three main reasons:
1. The Stolypin agrarian reforms had so definitively split the peasant classes into two categories: those with land and the mass of the poor and land-hungry.
2. Despite significant growth since the 1905 revolutions, the body of radicalized proletariats was still quite small.
3. Those radicalized proletariats were unable to establish a lasting alliance with the bourgeois, whose credit was necessary to finance “the organization of a permanent administration.”

[wrx&REV=] Despite the successful destruction of the Tsarist autocracy, Weber still saw little hope of the forging of a peace agreement between Germany and Russia (which he saw as Germany’s chief threat due to Russia’s explosion in population) because of the disinterest in peace expressed by the Provisional Government under Miliukov. As Weber saw it, the radical elements of the Duma and bigger landowners supporting the Provisional Government had identified two main benefits to the continuation of the war:
1. The war would keep revolutionary elements of the peasant class occupied in the trenches and contained within a system of military discipline.
2. The foreign banks, whose funds the Provisional Government relied on, would only grant loans if the peasants were suppressed and Russia remained in the war.

Weber was equally pessimistic of the motives and ability of the Petrograd Soviet to generate a significant shift in what Weber saw as a tendency towards imperial expansionism. Weber expands on this concern by describing a test of imperialism for the Soviet’s chairman, Chkheidze: “Does the politician in question restrict himself to cleaning up his own backyard, i.e. to creating a democracy within his own country or not? If he does not, he is an imperialist, whether or not he intends to be.” Citing Chkheidze’s call for the Germans to depose the Kaiser as a failure of the test, Weber pushes his offensive, stating “whether Russian imperialism takes a despotic, a liberal or a socialist form is neither here nor there.”

All in all this left Russia waiting for a real federalist democracy, rendering the current state of political limbo a “pseudo-democracy,” leaving a lingering threat to liberal democratic ideals and dashing hopes of a swift end to Russia’s participation in the Great War.


*1906:KIV, I.I.Chokolov|_Istoricheskii ocherk osvoboditel’nogo dvizheniia v Rossii i polozhenie burzhuaznoi demokratii| ((SIE| noUO| MWG 1/10:78f| prm| G/Zur Lage| in 8 parts))
*1909mr17:Russkie vedomosti#62| “Maks Veber o Germanii i svobodnoi Rossii” [1909 March 20]| A letter to the editor, reprinted with a German version (“Ueber die Erneuerung Russlands”) in MWG 1/10:689-90
*1917ap26:Frankfurter Zeitung| “Parlamentarisierung und Föderalismus”| ((frm Mommsen,WbrP cst fdr))
*1946:O.ENG|_From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. Translated by Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills|
*1978:C.ENG|_Selections in Translation. Edited by W. G. Runciman| ((>WST| HM51.W396))
Baron (1970)
Honigsheim,Paul| *1949:Agricultural History#23:179-213| “Max Weber as Historian of Agriculture and Rural Life”
Kimball (1991se)
Pipes (1955ap)
>Scaff,Lawrence A, and Thomas Clay Arnold| “Class and the Theory of History: Marx on France and Weber on Russia”| In Antonio, Weber-Marx: 190-214

<>Weidlé,Wladimir|>Veidle,Vladimir| a{895}n{}e{979
|_Russia Absent and Present| Translation of La Russie absente et presente, v1 of “Triptique européen” (PRS:1949) | ((gnr REV.trx RUS2 plt.clt|pst also on Goethe & PuwAS

Veidle described the tragic evolution of a very low and flat but immensely broad popular culture in Russia (an idea not unlike Dostoevskii's notion of wirokaia natura [ID]). Veidle described how an astonishing high culture arose on that flat popular culture. Russian high civilization was a thin, unstable ascending line of creative brilliance, stretching to the loftiest reaches, but with feeble roots in the broad popular culture. We might illustrate these lines thusly =


Both popular culture and high civilization were to be admired and respected for their various conributions to national life. Issues arose from the way in which each of these lines just barely interacted with one another. In a healthy national environment, high and low culture nurtured one another. But in Russia, high culture was alien to, alienated from, the broad culture and unstable in its contact with "the people". Veidle imagined a more normal, a more sound, relationship between popular culture and high culture in the form of a triangle, broad at the base and high at the apex, but with stable sloping foundations on the base. In Russia, the image was a low thin (but unusually broad) horizontal line from which, at one narrow point, there arose a lofty thin and wobbly (but unexpectedly high-reaching) vertical line


<>Whitehead,Alfred North| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{scs.trx vqt.phl}o{scs mth
Stengers,Isabelle| *2011:C.MA,HUP|_Thinking with Whitehead : a free and wild creation of concepts| TBy Michael Chase ; foreword by Bruno Latour| ((UO| On Stengers, CF=Prigozhin| Foreword: What is given in experience? / Bruno Latour -- Introduction: Whitehead today?
*--From the philosophy of nature to metaphysics. The mathematician and the sunset -- Events and passage -- The foothold of the mind -- There it is again -- Attention to objects -- The ingression of scientific objects -- Interlude: A pragmatics of concepts -- Science and the modern world : a strange book -- A new epoch? -- From the concept of nature to the order of nature -- Scientific objects and the test of the organism -- The event from its own standpoint? -- Entry into metaphysics -- The great refusal -- Cosmology. Hic circuli, hic saltus -- Thinking under the constraint of creativity -- The risks of speculative interpretation -- Feeling one's world -- Justifying life? -- The adventure of the senses -- Actuality between physics and the divine -- And they became souls -- Modes of existence, modes of thought -- God and the world -- An adventure of ideas -- Conclusion: Word of a dragon, word of trance
*--Alfred North Whitehead has never gone out of print, but for a time he was decidedly out of fashion. Whitehead as a daring thinker on par with Gilles Deleuze, Felix Guattari, and Michel Foucault. Reading the texts in broadly chronological order while highlighting major works, Stengers unpacks Whitehead's often complicated language, explaining the seismic shifts in his thinking and showing how he called into question all that philosophers had considered settled after Descartes and Kant. The implications of Whitehead's philosophical theories and specialized knowledge of the various sciences come yoked with his innovative, revisionist take on God. Whitehead's God exists within a specific epistemological realm created by a radically complex and often highly mathematical language. "To think with Whitehead today," Stengers writes, "means to sign on in advance to an adventure that will leave none of the terms we normally use as they were."))

<>Williams,Albert Rhys| a{}n{R&A}o{jrn
*1919:NYC|_The_Bolsheviks and the Soviets : the present government of Russia, what the Soviets have done, difficulties the Soviets faced, six charges against the Soviets, the Soviet leaders and the Bolsheviks, the Russians and America| ((UO))
*1969:CHI|_Journey into Revolution: Petrograd,1917-1918| ((UO))
*1919:NYC|_Lenin: The Man and His Work. With the impressions of Col. Raymond Robins and Arthur Ransome
*1919:NYC, People's Council|_Russian Soviets: Seventy-six Questions and Answers on the Workingman's Government of Russia| ((342.47 W67))
*1921:NYC|_Through the Russian Revolution| A facsimile edition of 1921 edition| Biographical sketch by Joshua Kunitz| NYC: 1967| ((DK265.W46; 947.084 W67))

<>Williams,Harold| a{1876}e{1928)n{}o{trv
}g{wfe= Tyrkova-Vil'iams
*--Alston,Charlotte|_Russia's Greatest Enemy? Harold Williams and the Russian Revolutions| *2007:LND,Taurus|

<>Witte,Sergei Yuli|>Vitte,Sergei Yuli| a{
*1899| “A Secret Memorandum of Sergei Witte on the Industrialization of Imperial Russia”| A translation,with an introductory article, by T. H. Von Laue of Witte’s “Report of the Minister of Finance to His Majesty on the Necessity of Formulating and Thereafter Steadfastly Adhering to a Definite Program of a Commercial and Industrial Policy of the Empire”| In *1954mr:JMH#26,1:60-74| ((xrx prm ekn mfgR Wtt MPR| Vsepodanneishii doklad ministra finansov S. Yu. Vitte....; reprint: Adams.IR:))
*1899|_Samoderzhavie i zemstvo| ((flm| prm stt Zmv))
*1905oc18:Pravitel’stvennyi vestnik published Witte memo to TSR [H05:289-92]
*1905de:SPB|_Zapiska po krest’ianskomu delu| ((GRS:110,120| prm skz RREV1| cf.bbl/Krivoshein))
*1921:NYC|_The_Memoirs of Count Witte| 2 eds| Translated and abridged by A. Yarmolinsky| ((prm Wtt vsp ekn stt.srv vsp [Stearns,Pageant:672-4] | G/Anan’ich & Ganelin re. crt of Wtt.vsp))
1938:Ph.PA|_Background for Chamberlain: A Turn of the Century Plan for European Peace [An excerpt from author’s Memoirs]| ((341.69 W783| prm vsp pcx irx))
| Bakhmet.RXV Columbia U| ((GRS:221))
| on SBR.rrd; USA1~~ desc [Walsh, Readings] prm
| on A.3 [Walsh,Readings] prm
| ekn [RRC,2] prm
Von Laue

<>|_World War I : The definitive visual history : from Sarajevo to Versailles| Compiled by >Grant,R.G.| *2014:NYC,DK Publishing, Inc.; Smithsonian Institution| ((WW1.lxt))

<>Wrangel,Peter|>Vrangel',Petr N| a{878}e{928}n{RREV3 Gwrx}o{
*1930:NYC,Duffield & Co|_The_Memoirs of General Wrangel
--|_White armies Gwrx in Moh.RR|:273-79 from *1967:NYC|_Always with Honour| ((noUO))

<>Yakhontov,Arkadii N| a{
--|_Prologue to Revolution: Notes of A. N. Iakhontov on the Secret Meetings of the Council of Ministers,1915| ((RREV2 SoM))

<>Yanov,Alexander| a{}n{}o{
--|_The_Drama of the Soviet 1960s:A Lost Reform
*1978:|_The_Russian New Right| ((DK274.Y39))
--|_Russian Challenge and the Year 2000

<>Yusupov,Feliks F. [Youssoupoff]|
*1954:LND|_Lost Splendor

<>Zaichnevskii,Petr| a{}b{}c{}d{}e{}n{prc.MoR}o{rvs std
*1862my:Proclamation "Molodaia Rossiia" [Young Russia] | Translated by Jeffrey Rooney in *1982ja:RRe#41,1:47-59| "The Question of Revolutionary Organization in
the Career of Petr Grigor' evich Zaichnevskii"

|_We | _My in Russian| ((SSR blt | SAC | Anti-utopian ["distopian"] science fiction novel))

<>Zeman,Z. A. B., ed| a{}
*1958:LND|_Germany and the Revolution in Russia,1915-1918: Documents from the Archives of the German Foreign Ministry| ((prm irx GRM RREV))

<>Zen'kovskii,Vasilii Vxi*| a{881jy04}b{Prokurov (Xmel'nickii)}c{PRS}d{}e{962au05}n{gte}o{rlg phl
*1915:KIV.unv prf psx
*1918:Skoropadskii (Hetman) gvt mnrer of rlg~
*1926+:PRS Russian Orthodox Institute prf in Paris from 1926
*1914:KIV|_Problema psikhicheskoi prichinnosti
*1924:LPZ|_Psikhologiia detstva
*1926:PRS|_Russkie mysliteli i Evropa| ed#1|
*1934:PRS|_Problemy vospitaniia v svete khristianskoi antropologii
*1948:1950; PRS|_Istoriia russkoi filosofii| 2vv
*1953:AnnArbor MI,American Council of Learned Societies|_Russian Thinkers and Europe| Tlng 1926:ed#1|
*1955:PRS|_Russkie mysliteli i Evropa: Kritika Evropeiskoi kul'tury u russkikh myslitelei| ed#2| ((B4231.Z5| ch6 on Konst.Leontiev & EUAians))
*1961:PRS|_N. V. Gogol
*1961:1964; PRS|_Osnovy khristianskoi filosofii| 2vv

<>Zetkin,Clara| a{}
on RREV1 ((G/PREV:187-91))

<>žižek,slavoj|>Zizek,Slavoi| a{}n{}o{"Maverick philosopher", and author of over 30 books, has been acclaimed the "elvis of cultural theory" [pop-art], and today's most controversial public intellectual. His work traverses the fields of philosophy, psychoanalysis, theology, history and political theory —- encompassing film, popular culture, literature and jokes, providing analyses of the complexities of contemporary ideology, as well as a sophisticated philosophy. his recent films -- THE PREVERT'S [??PERVERT'S] GUIDE TO THE CINEMA and žižek! -- reveal a theorist at the peak of his powers and a skilled communicator.
*:Verso [the largest independent, radical publishing house in the english-speaking world devoted to social theory, including jean baudrillard, jacques derrida, ernest laclau, terry eagleton, chantal mouffe, jacqueline rose, judith butler, benedict anderson, raymond williams, judith butler, edward said, frederic jameson, david harvey, immanuel wallerstein, and tariq ali] Library of Social Science is pleased to present to readers of our newsletter this exciting set of books -—essential texts for understanding žižek's thought =
|_The_Essential žižek: the complete set| ((
v1=_The sublime object of ideology| explores the ideological fantasies of wholeness and exclusion which make up human society. slavoj zizek's first book, is a provocative and original work looking at the question of human agency in a postmodern world. in a thrilling tour de force that made his name, he explores the ideological fantasies of wholeness and exclusion which make up human society
v2=_The_Ticklish subject: The absent centre of political ontology
v3=_The_Fragile absolute: Why is the christian legacy worth fighting for?| Argues that the subversive core of the christian legacy forms the foundation of a politics of universal emancipation. one of the signal features of our era is the re-emergence of the 'sacred' in its different guises, from new age paganism to the emerging religious sensitivity within cultural and political theory. A specter is haunting western thought, the specter of the cartesian subject. in this book slavoj žižek unearths a subversive core to this elusive specter, and finds within it the indispensable philosophical point of reference for any genuinely emancipatory project| published here with a new preface by the author – is that christianity and marxism can fight together against the contemporary onslought of vapid spiritualism. the revolutionary core of the christian legacy is too precious to be left to the fundamentalists
v4=_The_Plague of fantasies: the relations between fantasy and ideology, and the deluge of digital phantasms [vs.mxx] surrounding us| Modern audiovisual media have spawned a 'plague of fantasies', electronically inspired phantasms that cloud the ability to reason and prevent a true understanding of a world increasingly dominated by abstractions -— whether those of digital technology, or the speculative market. into this arena, enters žižek: equipped with an agile wit and the skills of a prodigious scholar, he confidently ranges among a dazzling array of cultural references -— explicating robert schumann as deftly as he does john carpenter -— to demonstrate how the modern condition blinds us to the ideological basis of our lives))

<>Zubov,V| a{}n{}o{stt.srv
*1917oc:Gatchina Palace mzm dtr| WW1 vsp in Moh.RR
~~KDs [Rosenberg.lbx]
*1968:MNC|_Stradnye gody Rossii| ((WW1 RREV vsp))
}s{(BSE3) Mints.RREV,3:160

Secondary Sources

<>Adams,Arthur E., ed| a{}
|_Imperial Russia After 1861| Problems in European Civilization (Heath)| B.MA:1965| ((>Adams.IR| noUO| G/SUMMIT| sbk| rdx ntg:
Berlin,I ppx mrl condemnation of RUS plt & pbl systems|
Meyer,A Lnn prl rvs|
Fischer,G lbx before RREV1 oscillation twixt “Small deeds” & “senseless dreams”|
Karpovich,M After RREV1, REV or coop w/stt?|
Adams,A Pbd cnx|
Von Laue’s tlng of 899:Witte memo|
Strakhovsky,L Stp|
Volin,L skz improving|
Gershenkron,A mfg progress improving ekn
Karpovich,M modernization making REV more remote| ((mdn))
Black,C No plt alternative to stt|
Treadgold N-2 bulwark against rfm
*:|_The_Russian Revolution and Bolshevik Victory: Why and How?|>Adams.RR (1967)|>Adams.RR2 (1972)| 3rd ed. EBy Suny,G., and Adams|>S&Adams.RR3| ndr.sbk
Miliukov,P from RUS ed. of Mlk.RR
Pares on Rasputin
Liashchenko on WW1c ekn and pbl consequences:15-23 [wrx&REV]
Chamberlin on spontaneity of RREV2
Trotsky.RR on workers leading rev
Chernov.RR on R foreign policy
Mitrany,David| primitive peasant war gained momentum (from MvP) [wrx&REV]
Owen,Lancelot on peasants
Pipes on national minorities
Deutscher on SDs(b) leading workers toward rev
Kerensky on why Prov. Gov failed and why SDs(b)~ succeeded (*1932jyi:SEER)
Strakhovskii,Leonid on Kerensky betraying RUS
Fainsod on SDs(b) organization as key to victory
HCP on how Marxist-Leninist Theory guided SDs(b)

<>Allworth,Edward, ed| a{}n{ntn CASA}o{}
*1967:NYC|_Central Asia: A Century of Russian Rule| ((UO| sbk))
*1971:NYC|_Soviet Nationalities Problems| ((sbk))
*1973:NYC|_Nationality Question in Soviet Central Asia| ((dk855.4.a63|sbk))
*1988:Durham,DUP|_Tatars of the Crimea: Their struggle for survival; original studies from North America, unofficial and official documents from Czarist and Soviet sources| *1998 ed [UO]| ((|394p| sbk prm/ndr TTR))
*1989:Durham,DUP|_Central Asia: 120 Years of Russian Rule|  *1994 ed "130 Years" [UO]...| ((ndr.sbk USA5.MPR))

<>Amari| a{}n{DKB}o{}
*1958:NYC|_The_Decembrists...| ((UO|

STUDENT REVIEW = The Decembrists [deals with] the events that led up to the December 14th, 1825, uprising [and describes] what happened to those who were involved. Starting with a group of upper class military commanders who had come back from fighting Napoleon in Paris, and how they sought to better Russian through organizing secret societies, and their eventual violent mutiny of the new Tsar.

The secret groups that were set up started in social gatherings where revolutionary thoughts were discussed amongst those elites who had returned from Paris. in January, 1821, the groups had it first meeting in Moscow. This meeting was called The Congress of the Union of Common Weal. This event was significant because it was the first nationwide secret political congress in the history of Russia, However, the ending decision of the congress was to abolish the congress. However, one of the leading members, Pestel, wanted to keep the movement alive. He became the leader of the Souther Society, and began to continued the work of the secret society. There was also another society that was set up without any knowledge of the previous societies. This was called the Society of united Slovs, and it wasn't until a member of the Southern society attempted to recruit a member of the United Slavs that the groups became aware of each other's existence. However, none of these groups did much more than talk or plan. It seemed that the groups were all talk, despite some of the members eagerly volunteering to assassinate the Tsar, Alexander. It wasn't until Alexanders death, that anything actually happened.

On November, 19th 1825, Alexander died of malaria. The next person up to be the Tsar was his brother Constantine. However, Constantine did not want the title. But another brother, Nichols who was third in line for the throne, did not know about this, and he ordered all of the soldiers to pledge allegiance to Tsar Constantine. After finding out about Constantine's lack of desire for the throne, he gained control. This was when the groups decided to put their plan into action. On December 14th 1825, Nicholas ordered the soldiers to now pledge allegiance to him. But the high ranking officers involved in the secret societies decided that they were going to convince their troops to not take the pledge and fight in the name of Constantine against Nicholas. They mutinied against the man who wanted to be Tsar, in the name of the man who turned down the job. The ordeal turned into a stand still between the mutineers, and those who were loyal to the New Tsar. Just as the members of the secret society assumed, Russians did not want to kill Russians. Eventually artillery was used from Nicholas's side, and it was over. All of the conspirators were rounded up and arrested.

Nicholas took his time interviewing and recording everything from his new prisoners. Many of them told him whatever he wanted to hear, but many held out with the names of the fellow conspirators. Nicholas then set up a committee called "The Secret Committee to Investigate the Members of the Criminal Society" in odder to get the the bottom of what had happened. In the end, the main five figures involved (including Ryleyev, Pestel, Sergei Muraviov-Apostl, and Kakhovsky) were sentenced to death, and the rest were sentenced to hard labor in Siberia. Oddly enough, the death sentence had been outlawed in Russian, but they were able to find a heinous crime loop hole. Russian must have been out of practice, because three of the four ropes snapped, requiring them to be hung again(which was also against the law).

Those sent to Siberia had many troubles as well. The first prison they were sent to was very hard for the Decembrist. they were not used to hard work, and being locked in small dark rooms. However, they were soon transferred to Chita, where Nicholas had sent General Leparsky to look after them. This was a much better place, and was almost comfortable. Slowly, as the years passed, they were released, but still required to live in Siberia. It was not until the death of Nicholas, that his son, Alexander II, pardoned the Decembrist and let them leave(but not to enter Moscow or St. Petersburg). At this point there were only fifteen of them left alive. On February 17th, 1892, the last of the Decembrist died, but their story, and ideas lived on.

The uprising of the secret societies, or Decembrists, accomplished very little in comparison to what they wanted to achieve, but many people looked up to what they did, even Nicholas on his death bed had wished he was made some changes that they had wanted. When the remaining Decembrists returned from Siberia, they were seen as political heroes, and they were, [they laid] the groundwork for many future revolutions.

<>Andreev,A. M [Andreyev]| a{}
*1971:MVA|_The Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies on the Eve of the October Revolution,March-October,1917| ((SOV))

<>Anweiler,Oskar| a{
*1968:In Pipes.RR| On *1917sp:plt idl of PGR SOV leaders
*1979:In Brower.RR| Ideal of rvs dmk
*1974:NYC|_The_Soviets: The Russian Workers, Peasants, and Soldiers Councils,1905-1921| ((rvs plt.clt rvs.SOV RREV1 RREV3 Gwrx sld

First an expansion on what a “Soviet,” is in the Russian experience. They were councils of delegates elected by workers. The first appeared during the 1905 revolution, then disappeared (via persecution) until reappearing in 1917. One could interpret them as a grassroots movement of an experiment in direct democracy; although the Soviets were dominated by the Socialist parties, they were not the creation of the parties. The delegates were subject to instant recall; this was really the only constant electoral rule in the Soviets. Delegates were chosen at the factory level and larger factories were often under represented. The rules for number of workers per delegate varied from place to place. In 1917 soldiers and sailors also formed Soviets; later still and less pervasively peasants did as well. A hierarchy of Soviets was also formed as they proliferated at the municipal, oblast and later national level. The power structure, like the electoral rules, was not well defined; the Petrograd Soviet and the various manifestations of a national Soviet competed for influence. Throughout most of the eight month period of the Provisional Government the Soviets were dominated by moderate Socialist parties who relied on the Provisional Government to carry out the Bourgeois revolution. They assumed a supervisory role, something akin to a veto power, making sure that the Provisional Government advanced the revolution on a sufficiently revolutionary path.

This book can be broken into three parts: the first part examines the intellectual roots of communes and its development in socialist ideology up till 1917. Although Marx embraced the 1871 Paris Commune for its system of government, the council movement (and the local autonomy that came with it) was the ideological domain of anarchists and utopian socialists. Even though Marx believed that the state would wither away, this would happen only a dictatorship of the proletariat. Lenin in his earlier works closely adhered to this belief and espoused a strong central government. The other radical socialist parties, the Mensheviks and the Socialist Revolutionaries, supported the Soviet movement more that the Bolsheviks did. Even so, the Bolsheviks were prominent in the Moscow Soviet in 1905.
The second section of this book examines the eight month course of the Provisional Government. It continues the intellectual history of the first section by studying Lenin, Trotsky and other Bolshevik leaders’ attitudes towards and writings on the Soviets. When Lenin arrived back in Russia in April of 1917 he published his “April Theses” and put his support behind the Soviets. “All power to the Soviets,” became the Bolsheviks catchphrase. The Soviets alone had the right to rule and should assume all power. This belief certainly was something of a departure for Lenin, and he had to fight to get broad party support for his idea. Other parties still put faith in the Constituent Assembly. The Mensheviks, Kerensky and others thought the Provisional Government would disappear after the calling of the Constituent Assembly.

The Bolsheviks made good populist politicians. Their clever agitations engendered resentment among the working class towards the Provisional Government. They had their most success getting support at the factory committee level, particularly in the traditional urban areas. Eventually the Bolsheviks gained an overall majority in the Petrograd Soviet (they had a large majority among worker delegates, but only constituted a minority of solider delegates) that they used to induce the military revolutionary committee [mlt] (a committee formed by military troops to protect the gains of the revolution from counter revolutionaries) to seize power. This was in the name of the Soviets; the Bolsheviks were not powerful enough to seize power in their name. Still there was immediate reaction against this appropriation of power. Postal and Railway workers went on strike, and counterproductively the Mensheviks and SRs walked out of Soviet meetings. The third section of this book deals with the various ways the Bolsheviks compromised the power of the Soviets after October and set up a dictatorship not of the Soviets or even of the working class, but of the Bolsheviks.

Perhaps because of how dated this work is (mid 1950s) it doesn’t seem to organize itself around a single thesis, or offer much independent analysis, but I think the author’s (never explicitly stated) opinion is that Lenin was willing to flip flop ideologically depending on what he felt was the most advantageous to his gaining power. He didn’t really want all power to the Soviets (indeed after the July days he tried to get the Bolsheviks to change their position once more) but wanted power for himself and for his cadre party.



<>Ascher,Abraham| a{1928}n{RREV1}o{}
*1953:RRe#12:235-252| “The Kornilov Affair” [wrx&REV]
*1988:1992|_The_Revolution of 1905| Volume 1:“Russia in Disarray”| Volume 2:“Authority Restored”| ((v1=1905 v2=1906-7| concl. & bbl,(re. Wbr’s optimistic words,ASS 22:353

The publication researches preconditions and results, circumstances and personalities, political leaders and parties, and the main “forces” of the revolutionary events of 1905, “birth and growth” of political conscience and culture in masses of citizens.

Political culture in Russia was essentially forbidden at the high institutional level until the Manifesto of October 17th 1905. The social political scene and Russian society was “fragmented,” the “old regime” was “under siege”, the tsar and his ministers were unable to form a united front against the opposition: the intelligentsia and peasants/workers. The political upheaval initiated by perceived weakness of the Russian state due to Russian losses in the 1904 Russo-Japanese War and catalyzed by the Bloody Sunday. The author describes the role of minorities, peasants, soldiers, Cossacks and sailors in revolutionary events (such as the reactionary measures of the government against Poland and Georgia). Strikes throughout the country in October 1905 definitely took on political rather than just economic motives and resulted in the Tsar sharing power. The Manifesto was signed and society exercised civil liberties through election in a representative Duma even though they were not constitutionally protected.

The psychology of the soldiers changed after the Tsar signed the Manifesto. Discipline as a prime virtue or in other words unquestionable loyalty to absolute authority was challenged. Ten days after its signing 4000 sailors in Kronstadt on the Baltic mutinied. An interesting and telling episode happened when a railroad strike stranded thousands of troops in the Far East. When Witte informed the Tsar of this strike the Tsar replied that all strikers should be hung. The Russo Japanese war was a drain on the Russian economy and military manpower and prestige of the regime yet troops who could have helped stabilized the country during the general strike of 1905 were stationed in Poland (250,000) which was more than were in the Far East.

The author describes the roles of different parties. The Conservatives supported the autocrats who in a reactionary way want to preserve the tsarist monarchy and his absolute rule with arbitrary authority. Political murder was not beneath the secret wing of the conservative party: the Black Hundreds. The other players in Russian politics were the Social Democrats who were the agitators organizing strikes in the factories. Influenced by Marxist thought, they were split into the tolerant Mensheviks led by Pavel B. Axelrod who wanted a workers congress to rule the Nation and Bolsheviks with Lenin who wanted a small cadre of committed revolutionaries to lead. Through illegal pamphlets or newspaper journals these groups tried to destabilize the country with the aim of bringing down the tsar and his institution forever. An important party which emerged at this time was the Party of People’s Freedom whose members were called Kadets. By 1906 they had over 100,000 members. Their liberal platform was: Democratic government, progressive taxation, an eight hour day, distribution of land and the monarchy left alone.

The revolution of 1905 was “a turning point” but the tide did recede by 1907 yet Ascher still titles the book The Revolution of 1905. Ascher asks in the introduction: “Was the overthrow of the Tsar by force feasible?” “Was the revolution bound to fail and if so why?” He answers “no”, the military was loyal. The Bolsheviks understood the answers to these questions. With the feedback from the revolution” of 1905, the military lost its loyalty after the signing of the manifesto, and notes on necessary adjustments of organization recorded, the Bolsheviks were in position to advance. 1905 was a year of climax but no resolution. The Empire was near collapse. The revolution had not yet run its course.

<>Atkinson,Dorothy|_The_End of the Russian Land Commune,1905-1930| Stanford: 1983| ((krx vlg oxo RREV1 RREV2 RREV3 NEP STL))

<>Avrich,Paul| a{}n{anx}o{}
*1967:PUP|_The_Russian Anarchists| ((

The book [..] is essentially a history of Russian anarchists both inside and outside of the country, focusing primarily on the periods before, during and after the revolutions of 1905 and 1917. The book begins by describing the political climate in Russia just prior to 1905 and all the gathering forces of resistance to the old order. The book does not really delve into Russian anarchist history prior to 1905, though it does offer brief biographies of both Bakunin as well as Kropotkin.

TThe next chapter is devoted to the issue of terrorism within the Russian anarchist movement during this time. It chronicles how various anarchist elements within Russia resorted to violence in the name of anarchy. However it makes clear the distinction between those who were motivated by ideology as well as those that committed “ex’s” or expropriations and other violent acts for personal gain but in the name of anarchism. The book discusses how in light of this, terrorism was a predominant tactic of many extremist anarchists during and after the 1905 revolution. The terrorism proved ineffective and often indiscriminate and is not considered to have advanced anarchist interests during the period of 1905. With the coming to power of Stolypin, the suppression of anarchists by the government who were both violent and non-violent following 1905 is chronicled. It is discussed how the most common form of dealing with anarchists and other radical elements was through swift military tribunals and prison sentences.

The book discusses the issue of intellectuals amongst Russian anarchists during this period. The general impression given is that there was hostility towards intellectuals or the intelligentsia among Russian anarchists during this time. This is mainly attributed to the view that Russian anarchists saw academia and indeed the entire educational establishment as part of bourgeoisie structure. Furthermore, they saw the contemporary educational system as being an exclusive weapon used against the masses in the class struggle.

Throughout the book there seem to be three predominant schools of anarchy represented among the Russian anarchists of this time. The first of these are the anarchic-individualists. They supposedly were influenced by Nietzsche (a fact I find ironic) and placed individual freedom as the sole goal of anarchy. Next were the anarchic-Syndicalists who were highly influence by the Syndicalists of France. They were anarchists however they placed particular focus on the industrial proletariat in the issue of class struggle and the coming revolution. Last were the anarchist-communists. These (at least in my opinion) were the purest anarchists. They believed in a total societal revolution in which production shifted into public hands, and an egalitarian (and often utopian) society would subsequently develop. A key point I feel where the anarchist-communists differed from other schools of radicalism is they believed that the entire populace was intricate [?involved] in bringing about the coming revolution, and not merely relying on the industrial proletariat.

With the coming of the 1917 Revolution the book discusses the anarchist’s opposition to the provisional government along with the Bolsheviks and other revolutionary factions. Though they did not engage in terror on the scale of the 1905 revolution there were sporadic incidents. During this time though there were thousands of active anarchists throughout Russia they suffered from disorganization and an overall lack of cohesiveness compared to other revolutionary groups (in particular the Bolsheviks). As a result of this, whereas the Bolsheviks gained cohesion and consolidated their influence leading up to the October Revolution, the Russian anarchists were mired in disunity and ideological differences. Every attempt to convene to form some sort of central unity failed.

With the October Revolution, the provisional government fell and the Bolsheviks came to power. Within a few years, all political opposition to the new Soviet regime had been persecuted and suppressed, including that of the Russian anarchists. Avrich’s book covers the first few years of Soviet power as well as their persecution of the Russian anarchists. Overall I found the book to be both an objective as well as a comprehensive account of Russian anarchists both inside and outside of Russia surrounding and during the revolutions of 1905 and 17

*1970:PUP|_Kronstadt,1921| ((ndr))
>Avrich,Paul,ed. Anarchists in the Russian Revolution. Ithaca: 1973| ((ndr.sbk))

<>Baron,Samuel H| a{}
*1958je:JHI#19,3:??| “Plekhanov’s Russia: The Impact of the West upon an ‘Oriental’ Society”| ((Mrx AMP))
*1963:S.CA,SUP|_Plekhanov: The Father of Russian Marxism| ((Mrx Plx RS2 RREV1 SDs noWbr))
*1970:JGO#8:320-36| “The Weber Thesis and the Failure of Capitalist Development in Early Modern Russia”| ((Wbr trx cpt ekn))

<>Barratt,Glynn|_Rebel on the bridge : a life of the Decembrist Baron Andrey Rozen, 1800-84| ((|>Barratt.Rebel DKB))

<>Becker,Seymour| a{}
|_Nobility and Privilege in Late Imperial Russia| D.IL:NIUP,1985| ((dvr transformed=elite clx of ntr plt bnk skz &ntg avc plt.clt| Did not decline; transformed for privileged lords into entrepreneurs, politicians, financiers, landed proprietors, and well-edc avc| Found INX.plt easy))

<>Blackwell Encyclopedia of the Russian Revolution. Edited by Harold Shukman. NYC: Blackwell,1988. REF dk265.b54 [99]

<>Bonnell,Victoria E| a{}
*1983:B.CA, UCP|_Roots of Rebellion: Workers’ Politics and Organizations in St. Petersburg and Moscow,1900-1914| ((rvs prl orx SPB MVA RUS3)) 
>Bonnell,Victoria E., ed| *1983:B.CA, UCP|_The_Russian Worker: Life and Labor under the Tsarist Regime| (( prm.sbk prl))

<>Bolshevik Visions: First Phase of the Cultural Revolution in Soviet Russia

<>Bond,Brian| a{}n{wrx&pbl WW1}o{
*1986:|_War and Society in Europe, 1870-1970|>Bond.WAR| ((UO|

Early historical responses to the Great War : Fortescue, Conan Doyle, and Buchan / Keith Grieves
"The real war" : Liddell Hart, Cruttwell, and Falls / Hew Strachan
Sir James Edmonds and the official history : France and Belgium / David French
Frocks and Brasshats / Ian Beckett
Sir John French and Lord Kitchener / Richard Holmes
The reputation of Sir Douglas Haig / Keith Simpson
Gallipoli / Edward Spiers
Allenby and the Palestine campaign / Newell,Jonathan [WW1b]
T. E. Lawrence and his biographers / Reid,Brian Holden [WW1b]
"Bunking" and debunking : the controversies of the 1960s / Alex Danchev
Everyman at war : recent interpretations of the front line experience / Peter Simkins

<>Bowker,Mike| a{}n{}o{
*2007:Aldershot ENG, Ashgate|_Russia, America and the Islamic World|>Bowker.ISLAM| ((TXT of chapter 1 introduction))

<>Bradley,Joseph| a{}
*1985:B.CA:UCP|_Muzhik and Muscovite:Urbanization in Late Imperial Russia| ((grd MVA))
*1991:BTsP:131-48| “Voluntary Associations, Civic Culture, and Obshchestvennost’ in Moscow”| ((OWN| dms obx cvc.pbl lgc| 131-41, well over half rtl given to judicious definition of key words in title, then “An analysis of the membership, [141/42] goals, internal and external conflicts, and political participation of Moscow’s voluntary associations is beyond the scope of a short essay, and only a tentative answer can be offered here.” The question to which Bradley referred asked whether MVA obx~ filled the need for industrious and rational [quoting Locke] ddd in place of the defeated rdx ddd~, i.e., Locke’s “quarrelsome and contentious”. The presumption here is that ntg 1st tried rvs, then rather belatedly took up small deeds and the real hard work of cvc.pbl. It seems the reverse of this is true. "ntg" tried to create cvc.pbl, was thwarted by rxn sttist suppression, and thus turned to rvs. We need closer attention to a larger canvas, one that covers a longer period and a broader geography of the old Empire. We need to look at one that does analyze “membership, goals, internal and external conflicts, and political participation”))
*1995:Taranovski,Reform:212-36| Russia’s Parliament of Public Opinion: Association, Assembly and the Autocracy, 1906-1914”| ((cvc.pbl Dmx RREV1))
*2002oc:AHR:| “Subjects into Citizens....”| ((cvc.pbl| Google search yields TXT))

<>Braudel,Fernand| a{1902}e{1985}n{fame EUR&AfroAsia }o{hstian
*1949:|_La_Méditerranée et le Monde Méditerranéen à l'Epoque de Philippe II| Translated as The_Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II|
((Pt. One : The role of the environment
The Peninsulas: mountains, plateaux, and plains
Mountains come first
Physical and human characteristics
Defining the mountains
Mountains, civilizations, and religions
Mountain freedom
The mountains' resources: an assessment
Mountain dwellers in the towns
Typical cases of mountain dispersion
Mountain life : the earliest civilization of the Mediterranean?
Plateaux, hills, and foothills
The high plains
A hillside civilization
The hills
The plains
Water problems : malaria
The improvement of the plains
The example of Lombardy
Big landowners and poor peasants
Short term change in the plains : the Venetian Terraferma
Long term change : the fortunes of the Roman Campagna
The strength of the plains : Andalusia
Transhumance and nomadism
Nomadism, an order way of life
Transchumance in Castile
Overall comparisons and cartography
Dromedaries and camels : the Arab and Turk invasions
Nomadism in the Balkans, Anatolia, and North Africa
Cycles spanning the centuries
The heart of the Mediterranean : seas and coasts
The plains of the sea
Costal navigation
The early days of Portuguese discovery
The narrow seas, home of history
The Black sea, preserve of Constantinople
The Archipelago, Venetian and Genoese
Between Tunisia and Sicily
The Mediterranean channel
The Tyrrhenian sea
The Adriatic
East and west of Sicily
Two maritime worlds
The double lesson of the Turkish and Spanish empires
Beyond politics
Mainland coastlines
The peoples of the sea
Weaknesses of the maritime regions
The big cities
The changing fortunes of maritime regions
The islands
Isolated worlds
Precarious lives
On the paths of general history
Emigration from the islands
Islands that the sea does not surround
The peninsulas. Boundaries : the greater Mediterranean
A Mediterranean of historical dimensions
The Sahara, the second face of the Mediterranean
The Sahara : near and distant boundaries
Poverty and want
Nomads who travel far
Advance and infiltration from the steppe
The gold and spice caravans
The oases
The geographical area of Islam
Europe and the Mediterranean
The isthmuses and their north-south passages
The Russian isthmus : leading to the Black and Caspian Sea
From the Balkans to Danzig : the Polish isthmus
The German isthmus : an overall view
The Alps
The third character: the many faces of Germany
From Genoa to Antwerp, and from Venice to Hamburg : the conditions of circulation
Emigration and balance of trade
The French isthmus, from Rouen to Marseilles
Europe and the Mediterranean
The Atlantic ocean
Several Atlantics
The Atlantic learns from the Mediterranean
The Atlantic destiny in the sixteeth century
A late decline
The Mediterranean as a physical unit : climate and history
The unity of the climate
The Atlantic and the Sahara
A homogeneous climate
Drought : the scourge of the Mediterranean
The seasons
The winter standstill
Shipping at a halt
Winter : season of peace and plans
The hardships of winter
The accelerated rhythm of summer life
The summer epidemics
The Mediterranean climate and the East
Seasonal rhythms and statistics
Determinism and economic life
Has the climate changed since the sixteenth century?
Supplementary note
The Mediterranean as a human unit : Communications and cities
Land routes and sea routes
Vital communications
Archaic means of transport
Did land routes increase in importance towards 1600?
The intrinsic problem of the overland route
Two sets of evidence from Venice
Circulation and statistics : the case of Spain
The double problem in the long term
Shipping : Tonnages and changing circumstances
Big ships and little ships in the fifteenth century
The first victories of the small ships
In the Atlantic in the sixteenth century
In the Mediterranean
Urban functions
Towns and roads
A meeting place for different transport routes
From roads to banking
Urban cycle and decline
A very incomplete typology
Towns, witnesses to the century
The rise in population
Hardships old and new : Famine and the wheat problem
Hardships old and new : epidemics
The indispensable immigrant. Urban political crises
The privileged banking towns
Royal and imperial cities
In favour of capitals
From permanence to change
Pt. two : Collective destinies and general trends
Economies : the measure of the century
Distance, the first enemy
For letter-writers: the time lost in coming and going
The dimensions of the sea : some record crossings
Average speeds
Letters : a special case
News, a luxury commodity
Present-day comparisons
Empires and distance
The three missions of Claude du Bourg (1576 and 1577)
Distance and the economy
Fairs, the supplementary network of economic life
Local economies
The quadrilateral : Genoa, Milan, Venice, and Florence
How many people?
A world of 60 or 70 million people
Mediterranean waste lands
A population increase of 100 per cent?
Levels and indices
Reservations and conclusions
Confirmations and suggestions
Some certainties
Another indicator : migration
Is it possible to construct a model of the Mediterranean economy?
Agriculture, the major industry
An industrial balance sheet
The putting-out or 'Verlag' system and the rise of urban industry
The system prospered
An itinerant labour force
General and local trends
The volume of commercial transactions
The significance and limitations of long distance trade
Capitalist concentrations
The total tonnage of Mediterranean shipping
Overland transport
The state: the principal entrepreneur of the century
Precious metals and the monetary economy
Was one fifth of the population in great poverty?
A provisional classification
Food, a poor guide : officially rations were always adequate
Can our calculations be checked? Economies : precious metals, money, and prices
The Mediterranean and the Gold of the Sudan
The flow of precious metals towards the east Sudanese gold : early history
The Portuguese in Guinea: gold continues to arrive in the Mediterranean
The gold trade and the general economic situation
Sudanese gold in North Africa
American sliver
American and Spanish treasure
American treasure takes the road to Antwerp
The French detour
The great route from Barcelona to Genoa and the second cycle of American treasure
The Mediterranean invaded by Spanish coins
Italy, the victim of 'la moneda larga'
The age of the Genoese
The Piacenza fairs
The reign of paper
From the last state bankruptcy under Philip II to the first under Philip III
The rise in prices
Contemporary complaints
Was American treasure responsible?
Some arguments for and against American responsibility wages
Income from land
Banks and inflation
The 'industrialists'
States and the price rise
The dwindling of American treasure
Devalued currency and false currency
Three ages of metal
Economies : trade and transport
The pepper trade
Mediterranean revenge : the prosperity of the Red Sea after 1550
Routes taken by the Levant trade
The revival of the Portuguese pepper trade
Portuguese pepper : deals and projects
Portuguese pepper is offered to Venice
The Welser and Fugger contract : 1586-1591
The survival of the Levantine spice routes
Possible explanations
Equilibrium and crisis in the Mediterranean grain trade
The cereals
Some rules of the grain trade
The grain trade and the shipping routes. Ports and countries that exported grain
Eastern grain
Equilibrium, crisis, and vicissitudes in the grain trade
The first crises : northern grain at Lisbon and Seville
The Turkish wheat boom : 1548-1564
Eating home-produced bread : Italy's situation between 1564 and 1590
The last crisis : imports from the north after 1500
Sicily : still the grain store of the Mediterranean
On grain cries
Trade and transport : The sailing ships of the Atlantic
Before 1550 : the first arrivals
Basque, Biscayan, and even Galician ships
The Portuguese
Normans and Bretons
Flemish ships
The first English sailing ships
The period of prosperity (1511-1534)
From 1550 to 1573 : the Mediterranean left to Mediterranean ships
The return of the English in 1572-1573
Anglo-Turkish negotiations : 1578-1583
The success of English shipping
The situation at the end of the century
The arrival of the Hansards and the Dutch
From grain to spices : The Dutch conquer the Mediterranean
How the Dutch took Seville after 1570 without firing a shot
New Christians in the Mediterranean))

<>Brock,Peter|_Pacifism since 1914: An Annotated Reading List| 2000:Toronto| ((8x11 WW1b pcxism))

<>Brower,Daniel| G/APL

<>Brower,Daniel, ed| a{}
*1979:St.Louis|_The_Russian Revolution: Disorder or New Order?| Series: Forum Press “Problems in Civilization”| ((>Brower.RR:| OWN ndr.sbk RREV =
Rosenberg,Instability of lbx stt
Anweiler,Ideal of rvs dmk
Von Laue,Weakness of stt
Ascher,Defeat of mlt leaderhip [wrx&REV]
Keep,in zvd
Volin,triumph of krx
Ferro,Citizen sld in REV struggle [wrx&REV]
Mints,Lnn rvs leadership
Daniels,Unpredictable REV

<>Brown,Frederick| a{1934}n{}o{}
*2014:NYC,Knopf|_The_Embrace of Unreason: France, 1914-1940|>Brown.EMBRACE ((noUO| 8x11:WW1b WW1c FRN mnt.hst= Barrès| Maurras,Charles| Daudet,Léon| Breton,André| Aragon,Luis| Drieu La Rochelle,Pierre))

<>Bukhovets,Oleg Grg*| a{}
*1986:ISSR#4:??:119| “Massovye istochniki po obshchestvennomu soznaniiu Rossiiskogo krest’ianstva (Opyt primeneniia kontent-analiza pri izuchenii prigovorov i nakazov 1905-1907 gg.)”| ((8x11/B| krx.mnt xtx

Bukhovets presents here an analysis of ca. 200 documents = peasant judgments and instructions drawn up for peasant delegates elected to the new State Duma or for public distribution. In these documents, Bukhovets identified 1120 discrete expressions of peasant attitude on some matter that illustrated “social consciousness” in Russian villages in the era of the 1905 Revolution. It becomes clear that Bukhovets might better have said “political consciousness”.

Bukhovets taxonomized these 1120 discrete expressions of attitude into 177 categories of “social consciousness”. He calls these 177 categories “variables”. Some variables were frequently expressed, many appeared only once among the 200 documents. The 29 most frequently mentioned variables (16% of the 177) represented 43% of the total 1120 discrete expressions. These 29 stand in some clear dominant position among the 177 varieties of peasant concern.

Here are Bukhovets' first 17 "variables" in descending order of frequency [SAC editor intersperses his interpretation below in CAPS] =

1. Appeal to the Duma [ID] to defend with firmness the interests of the narod [people, the whole people, the nation]
2. Amnesty for all political criminals
3. Expression of faith in the Duma and solidarity with it
4. Expression of hostility to the government, the state apparatus as a whole
5. Necessity of support for Duma in its struggle with the government


6. “Land and Liberty”
7. Four-tailed electoral procedures [i.e., election of officials by universal, equal, direct, and secret ballot]
8. Konstatatsiia [verification, guarantee condition] of those poor, hungry, or in the damaging condition of slavery
9. Abolish capital punishment
10. Democratic freedoms
11. Konstatatsiia of those with little land
12. Demand land only in accordance with the slogan “Land and Liberty”
14. Replace indirect taxes with progressive income-related [podokhodnym] tax
15. Abolish police, land captains [zemskikh nachal’nikov (ID)] and security patrols [strazhnikov]


16. Appeal to struggle for “the people’s cause” [narodnoe delo], “the good of the people” [blago naroda], etc
17. Abolish the formal heritable social structure [soslovnogo stroia]


Bukhovets offered a sophisticated statistical analysis, using regression tables that yielded numerical results to several decimal points. His goal was to create something like a precise meta-document of peasant outlook and demand, an “ideal type” or scientific-feeling composite of village discontent and hope.

Yet he glossed over the fact that 795 of the 1120 discrete expressions of concern (71%) related to political institutions and procedures. Social and economic issues were vigorously put in the documents but were less frequent.

Bukhovets in fact employed vague, even faulty, readings of the larger social/political environment from which and into which these documents sprung. For example, consider the way Bukhovets’ concept of peasant “illusions” [illiuzii] distorted his taxonomy of narrative content. The concept of illusion allowed him to denigrate certain ranges of village outlook, especially ambitious institutional demands, thus to bolster his presumptions about what was more solid or realistic. Bukhovets seems unable to absorb the heavy commitment to recognized 19th-century liberal political ideas in these peasant documents. In the colloquial expression, they "do not compute" for him. This echoes a long tradition of doctrinal pre-judgment of political platforms or goals in Russia. Reform-era Interior Minister Valuev often described a political position he disliked as “a thing impracticable” [nechto nesbytochnoe]. Nicholas II spoke at the beginning of his reign “of senseless dreams” [o bessmyslennykh mechtaniiakh] entertained by liberal activists. When Mensheviks accused Lenin of senseless dreams he replied, “We must dream" [Nam nuzhno mechtat’]

*1988:RRe#47:357-75| “The Political Consciousness of the Russian Peasantry in the Revolution of 1905-1907: Sources, Methods, and Some Results”| ((8x11/B| THIS IS AN ENGLISH-LANGUAGE SUMMARY OF THE RUSSIAN-LANGUAGE PUBLICATION JUST ABOVE| prc etc| G/Verner))

<>Burbank,Jane| a{}
*1986:NYC|_Intelligentsia and Revolution: Russian Views of Bolshevism, 1917-1922| ((mnt | EUA))

<>Burdzhalov,E. N| a{}
*1987:B.IN,IUP|_Russia's Second Revolution: The February 1917 Uprising in Petrograd| ((DK265.19b813))
*1971:MVA|_Vtoraia russkaia revoliutsiia: Moskva, front, periferiia|

<>Carr,Edward Hallett| a{1892}e{1992}n{rvs ntg gte BknM DstF irx WW2 SSR.gnr RREV krx Ntx3}o{

Haslam (GO s-field blw) summary = ...Renowned as the historian of Soviet Russia, founder of the 'realist' approach to the study of International Relations and author of the classic Trevelyan lecture series, What Is History? Haslam's biography reveals how intimately the historian's grasp of statecraft is related to Carr's own formative experiences at the centre of political events. Seconded from Cambridge to the Foreign Office during WWIb, initially to ensure trade with Ally Tsarist Russia and subsequently to administer the Allied blockade of the new Soviet Republic, and attending the post-war Paris peace talks on behalf of the British [ID], Carr witnessed at first hand the unfolding drama of RREV3 which was to become the centrepiece of his life's work. Marooned at the British Embassy in Riga during the late 1920s, Carr threw himself into a study of Russian language and literature, producing his sparkling account of nineteenth-century revolutionaries, The Romantic Exiles, in 1933 .[blw] At the Foreign Office and as Times writer during WW2 Carr was an influential opinion-maker, using the platform of Printing House Square [ID] to mount a forceful intervention for a more egalitarian policy in the rebuilding of the post-War world. Although his open-minded attitude towards the Soviet Union served to deprive him of academic posts for a decade after the war, Carr used the relative freedom to plunge into his pioneering epic of Soviet history. In his account of the creation of Carr's vast 14vv Carr.USSR [blw], Haslam reveals a major historian at his craft

*1933:LND|>Carr.rvs|_The_Romantic Exiles| ((gte rvs.ntg Hzn Ogv Bkn Nqv
The Russian political émigrés of the nineteenth century are often overlooked when studying the evolving political culture of Europe during the nineteenth century. This is not necessarily done intentionally; focus is given to the names that affected the modern political culture, which often leaves these émigrés on the sidelines. [This study] attempts to shed light on some of the notable Russian émigrés giving the majority of his attention to Alexander Herzen. Carr uses Herzen’s life as a vehicle to give background on where these émigrés came from and how the related to each other.

The Romantic Exiles is a great title for this work as it sheds light on the two key points Carr attempts to get across. Alexander Herzen as well as the major émigrés he encounters is portrayed in this work, at least partially, as products of romanticism. The title can be taken literally to a point, as much of the work focuses the love lives of the various exiles, and how this, in part, affected the theories and ideas promoted by the various émigrés. Carr uses George Sand and her works as a frame for their lives and their romantic ideals. This focus on the personal lives of these émigrés should not be understated; as this seems to be the focus of the work. The work gives little into the interpretations of these Russian émigrés’ works or ideas.

The focus on the personal lives of the émigrés is to such a point it seems to be more of a biography of Alexander Herzen, rather than a study of the exiles as émigré writers. That being said Carr does present Herzen’s life in a readable and enjoyable manner. One thing to be gathered from this work is that historical people were in fact people, with lives, friends, and families. The émigrés are not distant figureheads associated with a theory or cause but live real lives with real problems. This is something that is lacking often when we think and talk about history today, we always need to realize that leaders and historical people are people.

The focus on the personal lives shifts in the last third of The Romantic Exiles to the heart of the matter, giving an explanation, to a point of the ideas of the émigrés. It also shifts from being focused, almost entirely, on Herzen to the larger Russian émigré community, giving due time to Bakunin, Ograev, and Nechaev. The chapter that focuses on Bakunin and Nechaev’s collaborations is quite fascinating and is, in my opinion, the best written section of the book.

This look into the lives of The Romantic Exiles gives us a few, but important, keys to the lives of the émigré writers from Russia in the mid nineteenth century. It portrays these towering historical figures as people, people with problems like the rest of us. It also puts these émigrés as thinkers spawning from romanticism of their generation which gives context to their ideas and allows for a more informed understanding of their ideas. This work shines as it shifts from the life of Alexander Herzen to his ideas and the émigrés associated with him.

*1937:LND|_Michael Bakunin| ((HX915.B3c3| Bkn))
*1940:LND|>Carr.WW1c|_The_Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919-1939| ((wrx&REV))
*1949:LND|_Dostoevsky (1821-1881): A New Biography| ((DstF))
*1950:_Studies in Revolution|>Carr.REV| ((UO trx))
*1952:1979; LND|Carr.USSR|_A_History of Soviet Russia| 10 vols.,1954-1979| ((DK266.C263 1950 vols. 1-9| hst.gnr)) =
*1952:|_The_Bolshevik Revolution,1917-1923| Volumes 1-3 of title just above| 3vv|>Carr.RREV3 (8x11)|
*1959:|_Socialism in One Country| 3 vv|
*1969:NYC|_The_October Revolution: Before and After| ((DK266.c27 1969 RREVa-RREVc))
*1969:1979; |_Foundations of a Planned Economy,1926-1929| 3vv (v1 co-authored with R. W. Davies)|
*:|_Russian Revolution and Peasants| ((Proceedings of the British Academy = AS122.L5 v.49| krx rvs))
*1983:NYC|_Twilight of the Comintern,1930-1935| ((UO| Ntx3 STL))
*--Haslam,Jonathan|_The_Vices of Integrity: E.H. Carr, 1892-1982| ((UO))

<>Carrère d'Encausse, Hélène| a{}n{}o{
*:|_Islam and the Russian Empire| ((ISL ntn MPR AfroAsia))
While Russia and Western Europe received most of the attention during World War I and the1917 Revolution, a new world of political culture was coming into being in Central Asia. This is one of the central themes that Helene Carrere d'Encausse discusses in her book Islam Under the Russian Empire. While looking at how Central Asia and the Muslim peoples under the Russian Empire, focusing mostly on the people of the Emirate of Bukhara and Turkistan. Through her book, describes life in pre-Russian Bukhara and the developments of this region of the world as the Russian Empire rises, falls, and gives birth to the Soviet Union.

d’Encausse starts with a description of Bukhara before the Russian invasion was ever even a thought in the minds of the Bukharans. She describes the various inheritance laws, which were most often based on traditional and Islamic practices, as well the lives of the various classes. Much of Bukhara’s lands were roaming groups of nomadic peoples, but diversity was strong everywhere in the Emirate of Bukhara. Within the towns and cities lived peasants in an almost serf-like manner. Most, if not all, of the peasants were in debt to the various higher classes, including merchants, land barons, all the way up the emir, the ruler of Bukhara. The majority of these upper-class citizens were Uzbek Sunni’ Muslims, although a skilled artisan could make their way to the status of elite with time and impressive feats. The economy of this jewel in Central Asia was mainly based on agriculture; and due to growing population, frequent draughts and lack of properly irrigated lands, was a very difficult economy to sustain. As Russia made its way east into Central Asia building its empire, Bukhara was on the verge of political collapse with many of the population disliking the emir.

After the Russian conquest and annexation of Central Asia, Bukhara became a vassal state to the Russian Empire, keeping most of its traditional, Islamic law. While the emir and other nobles tried to keep good face with the Russian nobles that lorded over them, Russian businessmen penetrated into markets in Central Asia, finding a lot of promise the production of cotton, which soon became Bukhara and Turkistan’s key exports. Eventually, after being subjugated under the emir and the Russians, the people became unsettled. In describing the unrest of the people in Bukhara, d’Encausse looks at the various reformists that lived in Bukhara, Turkistan, and all throughout Central Asia. These reformists were known mostly as jadidists. Most of these reformists outcries concerned the strongly religious education taught in the madrasas of the time, but nationalism was also important ideal to reformists.

Secret societies of jadidists and political parties filled with intelligentsia start popping up in Central Asia around 1905, as Russia fights in the feudal Russo-Japanese War and revolution strikes. d’Encasse describes the roles of these various groups and parties as Russia’s grip on Bukhara and Turkistan slipped during the bumpy years of 1915 to 1917 and how the revolutionary spirit took hold of these groups. The emir denies their pleas for reform and after February revolution, these jadidists joined Russian political parties, one of the key groups being the Bolsheviks.

With the help of jadidists and other reformists, the soviets took a strong hold in Bukhara and eventually began to undermine the emir. As the Bolshevik Revolution and the Civil War unfolded, the Bukharan emirate fell, and the People’s Republic of Bukhara came into being. Soon after this new state was created, though, the purges began and those of any religious knowledge began starting to disappear. Stalin’s policies on ethnically divided regions eventually were the undoing of Bukhara as a proud Islamic state. The removal of the many different peoples, especially the Uzbeks, turned the Islamic state into an artificial, Soviet territory.


<>Chamberlin,William Henry GO GLOS/Chamberlin
*1935:LND|_Russia's Iron Age| ((prm trv))

<>Champagne, Duane| a{}
*1992c:S.CA,SUP|_Social order and political change: Constitutional governments among the Cherokee, the Choctaw, the Chickasaw, and the Creek| ((317p|bbl:258-301 ndx| NAm cst plt.clt))

<>Clark,Christopher M| a{}n{WW1a}o{}
*2013:NYC,Harper|_The_Sleepwalkers : How Europe went to war in 1914|>Clark.SLEEP| ((UO many rvw E-TXT~| 8x11:WW1a = EVANS rvw~

pt1= Roads to Sarajevo []
I. Serbian ghosts : Murder in Belgrade| 'Irresponsible elements'| Mental maps ; Separation ; Escalation ; Three Turkish wars ; The conspiracy ; Nikola Pašić reacts
The empire without qualities : Conflict and equilibrium ; The chess players ; Lies and forgeries ; Deceptive calm ; Hawks and doves
pt2= One continent divided
The polarization of Europe, 1887-1907 : Dangerous liaison: the Franco-Russian alliance
The judgment of Paris ; The end of British neutrality ; Belated empire: Germany ; The great turning point?
Painting the devil on the wall
The many voices of European foreign policy : Sovereign decision-makers [stt.ndp]
Who governed in St. Petersburg?; Who governed in Paris?; Who governed in Berlin? The troubled supremacy of Sir Edward Grey
The Agadir Crisis of 1911; Soldiers and civilians; The press and public opinion; The fluidity of power
Balkan entanglements : Air strikes on Libya; Balkan helter-skelter
The wobbler ; The Balkan Winter Crisis of 1912-13 ; Bulgaria or Serbia? ; Austria's troubles
The Balkanization of the Franco-Russian alliance ; Paris forces the pace ; Poincaré under pressure
Last chances: détente and danger, 1912-1914 :The limits of détente ; 'Now or never' ; Germans on the Bosphorus
The Balkan inception scenario ; A crisis of masculinity? ; How open was the future?
pt3= Crisis. Murder in Sarajevo :The assassination ; Flashbulb moments ; The investigation begins ; Serbian responses ; What is to be done?
The widening circle : Reactions abroad ; Count Hoyos goes to Berlin ; The road to the Austrian ultimatum ; The strange death of Nikolai Hartwig
The French in St Petersburg : Count de Robien changes trains ; M. Poincaré sails to Russia ; The poker game
The ultimatum : Austria demands ; Serbia responds ; A 'local war' begins
Warning shots : Firmness prevails ; 'It's war this time' ; Russian reasons
Last days : A strange light falls upon the map of Europe ; Poincaré returns to Paris ; Russia mobilizes
The leap into the dark ; 'There must be some misunderstanding' ; The tribulations of Paul Cambon ; Britain intervenes ; Belgium ; Boots
Minute-by-minute narrative examines decades of history up to 1914
Dracobly [BAL & wrl.hst WW1a setting] = pretty marvelous though I tend to think that he downplays Germany's role (Strachan reviewed it respectfully but hinted that it hadn't perhaps received the "critical" attention it deserves - I'm guessing that might allude to Clark's oddly cursory treatment of Germany and perhaps even more his reliance on the kinds of systemic analyses championed by Paul Schroeder, who has to be the only historian of repute to place a significant degree of responsibility on GB's shoulders). But Clark's work is the best overall synthesis I think I've ever read - wonderfully informative on the Balkan dimension as well as placing the 1914 situation in the context of the international system and its changes leading up to 1914

<>Claude,Inis L., Jr|_Swords into Plowshares: The Problems and Progress of International Organization| *1956:ed#| *1959:ed#2|  *1964:NYC,Random House|>Claude.SWORDS| ed#3| ((OWN| pcx irx.orx UNO = ch#2 hst background [WW1a]:17-35| ch#3 LoN:36-50 [WW1c] ))

*:|_Bolshevik Feminist: The Life of Aleksandra Kollontai| ((ndr wmn SDs(b) ))

<>Clowes,Edith W|_The_Revolution in Moral Consciousness: Nietzsche in Russian Literature,1890-1914

<>Clowes,Edith W.,Samuel D. Kassow, and James L. West, eds| a{}
*1991:|_Between Tsar and People: Educated Society and the Quest for Public Identity in Late Imperial Russia| ((>BTsP| OWN| ndr.sbk pbl ntg sSs RUS2|
“Introduction: The Problem of the Middle in Late Imperial Russian Society”:3-14
2 summary chapters =
Rieber,Alfred J., “The Sedimentary Society”:343-66
Kassow,Samuel, “Russia’s Unrealized Civil Society”:367-71
G/West,James L|

<>Cohen,Aaron J|_Imagining the Unimaginable: World War, Modern Art, and the Politics of Public Culture in Russia, 1914-1917| ((OWN WW1b mdn.clt wrx&xdj))

<>Colodny,Robert G| a{}
*1990sp:Science & Society#89,53,1:47-??| “The U.S. Political Culture of the 1930s and the American Response to the Spanish Civil War”| ((UNCOVER USA5.wrx SPN plt.clt))

<>Cooper,Sandi|_Patriotic Pacifism: Waging War on War in Europe, 1815-1914|>Cooper.Pacifism| *1991:OxUP| ((UO| WW1a pcx Excerpted TXT | ))

<>Coquin,Grancois-Xavier, ed| a{}
*1986:P.FRN|_1905: La première révolution Russe| ((UO sbk RREV1| Read,Chr,1905 & ntg:385-96| :543 re. RUS ntg interest in Wbr,rlgP Ethic))

<>Craig,Gordon| a{}n{GRM WW1}o{
*1964:|_The_Politics of the Prussian Army 1640-1945|>Craig.POLITICS| ((UO|))
*1978 and many subsequent editions to 20th-century end|_Germany, 1866-1945|>Craig.GERMANY| ((UO| gnr.txt WW1))
*1995ap20:NYR:6-9| "No More Parades"|>Craig.NO| ((8x11:WW1| rvw of Kagan,On the Origins| Gilbert.WW1))

<>Crisp,Olga, and Linda Edmondson, eds| a{}
*1989:NYC|_Civil Rights in Imperial Russia| ((ndr.sbk cvc.rgt lbx Dmx stt&pbl|
Civil rights in Russia : legal standards in gestation / W.E. Butler
Property rights, populism, and Russian political culture / Richard Wortman
Peasant land tenure and civil rights implications before 1906 / Olga Crisp
The Trojan Mare : women's rights and civil rights in late imperial Russia / William G. Wagner
Privileges, rights, and Russification / Raymond Pearson
Religious toleration in late imperial Russia / Peter Waldron
The concept of 'Jewish emancipation' in a Russian context / John D. Klier
Workers and civil rights in tsarist Russia, 1899-1917 / S.A. Smith
Freedom of association and the trade unions, 1906-1914 / G.R. Swain
Freedom of the press under the old regime, 1905-1914 / Caspar Ferenczi
Crime and punishment in the House of the Dead / Alan Wood
The security police, civil rights, and the fate of the Russian empire, 1855-1917 / D.C.B. Lieven
Was there a movement for civil rights in 1905? / Linda Edmondson
Civil rights and the provisional government / H.J. White))

<>Cross,Samuel,ed|_People Passing Rude: British Responses to Russian Culture| ((E-TXT | R&A 3rd.pzn nrd.sbk clt))

<>Cunningham,James W| a{}
*1981:Crestwood.NY,St.Vladimir's Seminary Press|_A_Vanquished Hope: The movement for Church renewal in Russia, 1905-1906| ((ChxO rlg RREV1 clt))

<>Daly,Jonathan| a{}n{plt.plc plt.crm}o{}

*1995fa:SlR#54,3:602-609| "On the Significance of Emergency Legislation in Late Imperial Russia" [TXT]
*2002mr:JMH#74,1:62-100| "Political Crime in Late Imperial Russia" [TXT] ((RUS experience within a general EUR and USA context| Final 5-page summary)))

*1998|_Autocracy Under Siege: Security Police and Opposition in Russia, 1866-1905| ((plc mlt

On July 3rd 1826 Nicholas I created Russia’s first Security policing program (Pg.12). Originally created to try and combat terrorist threats towards the government, Daly [...] goes in depth into the actual infrastructure and its inner workings about it’s operations, personnel, security Bureaus which were dispersed throughout Russia. [...] The Bureau itself begins as a very small operation that included only a handful of officials (16), operating with only around four thousand military personnel at their disposal. Russia’s security police were referred to as the Third Section of his Imperial majesty’s own Chancellery (1826-1855). The Third Section consisted of Gendarmes soldiers, which essentially is a military body that is charged with policing the public and ensuring the safety of its nation’s population.

Only lasting for around thirty years the Third Section of his imperial majesty’s own Chancellery was disbanded and absorbed into the Department of State Police which fell under the authority of the Ministry of the Interior. No longer directly under the Tsar himself, they now were authoritatively transferred to the deputy of the minister. Daly is able to go in depth and discuss the different types of policing that the security police were not only responsible for such as execution of court orders, tracking fugitives, riot control, and the detainment of “unusual” criminals. The Security police towards the latter part of the 19th century began integrating old techniques and merging them in with newer types of policing that would enable police to keep better tabs and control over possible revolutionary threats. From surveillance, using plainclothes to create subtlety to the implementation of secret informants, Security police had to adapt to the ever growing revolutionary movement. [...] Sergei Zubatov [...] from 1896-1902 was the head of security in Moscow [and] was widely known for being able to integrate traditional policing methods with new, sophisticated methods.

<>Danilov,Viktor Petrovich,et al., eds| a{}
|_Dokumenty svidetelstvuiut: Iz istorii derevni nakanune i v khode kollektivizatsii 1927-1932 gg|MVA: Izd-vo polit. lit-ry,1989| ((525p bbl|DK266.A3 D65 1989 NEP STL.skz klx svx vlg nrd krx))
|_Kooperativno-kolkhoznoe stroitelstvo v SSSR,1917-1922: Dokumenty i materialy|Moskva : Nauka, 1990| ((HD1492.S65 K62 1990 396p bbl:398 ndx| prm))
|_Krestianskie khoziaistva, kolkhozy i sovkhozy SSSR v 1924/25-1927/28 gg|MVA:AkN,Institut istorii SSSR,1977| ((619p bbl|S469.R9K73 3v Po dannym nalogovykh svodok Narkomfina SSSR))
|_Krestianskoe vosstanie v Tambovskoi gubernii v 1919-1921 gg.:“Antonovshchina”--dokumenty i materialy|SERIES:Krestianskaia revoliutsiia v Rossii 1902-1922 gg|Tambov : Intertsentr : Arkhivnyi otdel administratsii Tambovskoi obl., 1994| ((DK265.8.T3 K74 1994|332p bbl ndx TAM gbx krx rbx GWX))
|_Mentalitet i agrarnoe razvitie Rossii, XIX-XX vv.: Materialy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii, Moskva, 14-15 iiunia 1994 g|Moskva : ROSSPEN, 1996| ((HD1536.R9 M46 1996|439p bbl|Summary and table of contents also in English))
|_Ocherki istorii kollektivizatsii sel’skogo khoziaistva v soiuznykh respublikakh: Sbornik statei|Moskva : Gospolitizdat, 1963| ((558p bbl|HD1492.R9 D3))
*:|_Sovetskaia derevnia glazami VChK-OGPU-NKVD, 1918-1939 : dokumenty i materialy v 4 tomakh| ((UO has vv1-3,pt1, but no pt2 or v4))
*1970:MVA,Izd.polit.lit.|_Sovetskoe krestianstvo: Kratkii ocherk istorii, 1917-1969| ((508p))

<>Danks,Catherine|_Politics Russia| Routledge| (( Introduction to the plt development of Russia in the post-communist era| Part#1 the emergence of contemporary Russia = the end of the USSR and the move towards democratization under Gorbachev| Part#2 = overview of the executive and legislative brances of gvt| Part#3 = cvc.pbl, the role of mxx| Part#4 = policy process, from irx.plt and mlt.plt to the development of dms.plt (wlf hlt edc)| Part#5 = overall consideration the contemporary state of Russia, examining the development from Yeltsin, to Putin to Medvedev, and considers the possible futures of the region| kng contains Annotated bbl, definitions of key plt.wrd~ and short bxo~ of key figures))

*:|_V. A. Maklakov:A Russian Statesman...| ((Birn,81de17:bbt.rqt ndr stt.dmx lbx RREV1))

<>Dubnow on Jews in Russia| ((Jwx ntn))

<>Dunbar-Ortiz,Roxanne| a{}
*2014:|_An_Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States| ((R&A| NAm| gnr.hst.gph| KSOK))

<>Durman,Karel|>Durman.Ktk|_Time of the Thunderer: Mikhail Katkov, Russian nationalist extremism and the failure of the Bismarckian system, 1871-1887| ((KtkM jrn rxn.plt irx BsmO|

[This book] is a chronicle of Imperial Russian domestic politics as well as the Kremlin’s foreign policy from 1858-1887. Durman posits accurately the grand influence prominent journalist Mikhail Katkov possessed over the citizenry of Russia and thusly the policies of Russia. Katkov arrived at the burgeoning of Russian journalism and came to dominate public opinion. Katkov was the editor of the most successful Russian circulation of the era Moscow News which achieved 6,000 subscriptions and was read at many venues to the lower classes.

An early proponent of reform but through a manner similar to the English parliamentary system “Only the English have learned the art of making reforms without revolution” (Katkov qtd in Durman, 18). Katkov became a staunch defender of conservative Russian values as an extremely “Patriotic” russophile during a time of discontent with the established order in Russia. Katkov rose to prominence in the aftermath of the Polish Uprising of 1863-65 during which his vitriolic calls for the Russification of all peoples under her dominion led the ideal of Pan-Slavism in Russia into a more aggressive pro-russian foreign and domestic policy. With his name in the limelight Katkov wielded public opinion on a range of foreign policy issues from the various questions such as the Eastern Question to the role of Russia in European politics and her position in the Balkans.

Katkov was feared as well as admired by the Russian political elite. His sway of public opinion could benefit them as well as harm them and it did so in many occasions. Russia’s entry into the Holy Alliance with Prussia and Austria was highly condemned by Katkov as he feared Prussian conspiratorial designs towards pacifying Russia’s sphere of influence. Katkov through the writing of Durman was both an instrument of the Tsar and his ministers as well as an independent actor for fomenting russian nationalistic sentiments. Katkov’s relationship with the ruling elite of Russia was complicated to say the least. His campaigns wrought unwanted pressures on the Tsar’s ministers. Statist to the maximum, Katkov managed to even make those in power of the state anxious of his editorials. Katkov maintained this balancing act throughout his career. Katkov was ultimately an enshrined hero of Russian nationalists and created an image of Russian nationalism abroad that has continued to this day.

<>Edelman,Robert| a{}n{}o{
*1980:New Brunswick|_Gentry Politics on the Eve of the Russian Revolution: The Nationalist Party,1907-1917| ((gnt dvr stt.dmx ntnism cnx.plt WW1b REV2 RUS3 noWbr))
*1987:Cornell|_Proletarian Peasants: The Revolution of 1905 in Russia's Southwest| ((prl krx UKR hst.gph| Wider plt.clt not really under his purview| When he discusses krx ptn~, he notes call for cvl.rgt~ etc, but backs off saying they are all too vague. Following Emmons, he concludes that such must reflect outside interference| Trudoviki brushed off| “Agitators from a variety of political groups were active in the countryside before and after 1905. Yet no single group led or controlled peasant actions. [...] [W]hen the moment came, the peasants mobilized themselves. Their actions were spontaneous, and their militance was largely self-generated. Peasants articulated but did not emphasize auch poltical goals as contituent asemblies, universal suffrage, and fredom to organize politically. Their first concern was the land question, and when the D’uma finally began operating as part of Russia’s new semi-parliamentary system, they saw it primarily as one more instituon to which the coould address their demans on what was for them the central issue.” [What definable interest groups acted differently? How does this distinguish krx from dvr or ntg?] [87] Rumors more influential than agitators. grm read to non-grm. rrd prl spread info. vlg.sxd still a strong tUt, and that accentuated tensions between mmb~ of vlg.oxo and krx who were not

--| G/Clowes
--|_Russian Peasant Schools: Officialdom, Village Culture, and Popular Pedagogy, 1861-1914| ((krx scl vlg

Eklof’s work exhibits a comprehensive analysis of Russia’s institutional and cultural response to the issue of addressing popular peasant education in light of the Emancipation of 1861. Under the subtitle “Officialdom, Village Culture, and Popular Pedagogy, 1861-1914”, Eklof explores a variety of both top-down and bottom-up narratives of the educational experience of the Russian peasant. From national decrees, regional zemstvo policies, local village controls, and individual accounts from pupils and teachers alike, Eklof examines the education of the peasant masses in such a way that the entire Russian social and political demographic is contextually addressed. Of note is Eklof’s examination of the Russian peasant teacher, whose experiences during this time have more to do with issues pertaining to being introduced and accepted into Russian village culture than the actual practicalities of pupil education.

In 1862, Russian author Ivan Turgenev published Fathers and Sons, a quote from which is spread across the first page of the Introduction: “The Russian peasant is in truth that mysterious unknown…Who can understand him? He does not understand himself!” The Russian peasant was thus introduced to the masses. [mdn=] Throughout history, the Russian peasant has been portrayed as illiterate, incapable of modern or progressive thought, stagnant in their station. Eklof’s introduction attempts to break away this binding mold of the peasants pre-condition. Established is a less sensationalized view of the peasants not as a child-like connotation needing constant paternal guidance, but as an independent and spirited social group capable of possessing a rooted sense of ambition in the form of a long tradition of Russian village culture. Bound in the traditions of expelling the yokes of serfdom, the village culture is portrayed by Eklof as being wary of attempts by the Russian national government to instill education reforms. The concept of “education as progress” did not fully take hold in peasant village culture until the 1890’s, some thirty years after Emancipation, a decade in which zemstvos were given a much broader mandate of controlling the educational framework of peasant curriculum and instruction.

Part One, “Institutions and Sponsors”, begins with a broad overview of historical trends in the Russian education system. For an inexperienced researcher of Russian history, the first chapter outlines the education policy aspects of Russian authoritative political culture under the reigns Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Alexander I, and Nicholas I. Amidst various reforms and reactionary measures, a running trend of subverting education opportunities for peasants remained constant. Providing education for peasants lingered as a fear of the ruling political culture in the years pre-Emancipation for reasons amounting to keeping the Russian peasant classes within their Petrine station. Education provided the peasant with “notions and to a style not appropriate to their situation” (see pages 24-26). Rudimentary education was deemed reasonable for the lower Russian classes, but the ability for a peasant to excel beyond the three R’s in education institutions was rare. Possibilities for Russian universal education did not become readily apparent until the Emancipation of the serfs in 1861.

Eklof’s focus on both the 1864 Education Stature and the Zemstvo Statute of the same year provide a running parallel theme for the rest of the work. Local self control of education measures exerted through the zemstvo would become the most effective means of instituting measurable gains in student cognitive progress, outlined in Chapter 13 “Mere Learning: The Cognitive Results of Schooling.”

As a source for potential research topics, Eklof’s work provides a sufficient background for an extensive array of topics in the history of education in Russia. The experiences of Russian teachers in the peasant education system is a fascinating story, a narrative which is described in detail in Part Two, “The Outsider in the Village: Russian Teachers.” Part Three, “Peasant Pedagogy and the Emergence of a School System” explores the conditions in the Russian peasants’ classroom from the perspective of pupils and teachers. A comparison topic could emerge exploring the modern academic calendar in contrast with the Russian school year, discussed in Chapter 11, “The School Calendar: Rhythm and Intensity.” In Part Four, “The Results of Schooling”, Eklof examines the curriculum of the Russian peasant schools and just what a graduate of a peasant primary school might expect in terms of continued education in Chapter 15, “Beyond Primary School.”

The focus given to the role of zemstvo in providing a role of vital local government guidance to peasants is what drew my attention most in Eklof’s work. Emerging trends of local control and self-administration gives the reader a broader understanding of preceding political conditions that existed before both the 1905 and 1917 Revolutions. For a researcher looking for a quick introduction to the zemstvo, reference to Chapter 2, “The Great Reforms and the Zemstvos” is encouraged. I enjoyed Eklof’s work, and if a fellow researcher is debating a topic in the history of Russian education, or peasant culture in general, Eklof’s book is an excellent work that has a broad introductory scope.

<>Eklof,Ben, and Stephen Grant, eds| a{}
--|_World of the Russian Peasant: Post-Emancipation Culture and Society| ((>WRP| ndr.sbk krx RUS2 clt pbl))

<>Emmerson,Charles|_1913 : In search of the world before the Great War|>Emmerson.1913| *2013:NYC,PublicAffairs| ((wrx&clt | 8x11:WW1a = EVANS rvw|

ToC = Introduction |
pt1= Centre of the Universe: London: World City | Paris: The Eternal, the Universal | Berlin: Powerhouse | Rome: The Pope's aeroplane | Vienna: Shadows and Light | St.Petersburg: Eastern Colossus |
pt2= The Old New World: Washington DC: Republic, Nation, Empire | New York: Metropolis | Detroit: A Model Future | Los Angeles: Boom! | Mexico City: Monroe's Bequest |
pt3= The World Beyond: Winnipeg-Melbourne: Britain Abroad | Buenos Aires: Southern Star | Algiers: The Radiance of the Republic | Bombay-Durban: Tapestry of Empire | Tehran: Under Foreign Eyes | Jerusalem: Zion and its Discontents |
pt4= Twilight Powers: Constantinople [IST]: Tides of History | Peking-Shanghai: Walking Slumber | Tokyo: Rising Sun | London: Beyond the Horizon | Epilogue: The Afterlife of 1913
pbr's summary = 1913 is inevitably viewed through the lens of 1914.... Emmerson liberates the world of 1913 from this "prelude to war" narrative, and explores it as it was, in all its richness and complexity [...] a panoramic view of a world crackling with possibilities, its future still undecided, its outlook still open
*2013au30:TLS:24, Winter,Jay rvw of Emmerson.1913 = Accepts notion that great tensions preceded 1914, as in Mann's Magic Mt., as in Pasternak.DZh, as in Dangerfield.STRANGE| "the pre-1914 world held the seeds of the violent flowering to come. I share this position, and believe that Emmerson understates the degree to which imperial power showed this to be true. It was maintained by savagery that appeared strange and unprecedented to contemporaries when it came home to roost, inflicted by white Europeans on other white Europeans.))

<>Emmons,Terence| a{}n{srf.rfm krx rvs gnt dvr RS1 RREV1 stt.dmx1}o{
*1968:Cambridge|_The_Russian Landed Gentry and Peasant Emancipation|
*1973se:SlR#32:461-90| “The Beseda Circle,1899-1905”|
*1974jy:RRe1#33:269-83| “The Russian Landed Gentry and Politics”|
*1977:CaliforniaSlavic Studies#10:45-86| “Russia’s Banquet Campaign”|
*1983:CMA|_The_Formation of Political Parties and the First National Elections in Russia| ((Wbr correct (ASS 22:244) lbx “essentially brz” in Lebenshaltung,while not so in ekn conditions))

<>Emmons,Terence, and Wayne S. Vucinich, eds| a{}
*1982C.ENG:CUP|_The_Zemstvo in Russia: An Experiment in Local Self-Government| ((>Emmons.Zmv| JS6058.Z46| ndr.sbk Zmv stt noWbr|
Starr before Zmv.rfm|
McKenzie in stt|
Atkinson & krx|
Manning 864:14;& plt|
Fallows 890:14;& stt.apx qin|
Brooks edc of nrd|
Ramer,Samuel public hlt|
Johnson,Rbt avc & lbx:Zmv xtx|
Gleason VsR Union of Zmv & WW1b [ wrx&plt]
Rosenberg in 917 & SSR|
Emmons Zmv in hst perspective

<>Engelstein,Laura| a{}
--|_Moscow,1905:Working-Class Organization and Political Conflict| ((

FFirst, we must understand what life was like in urban 1905 Russia. Engelstein gives the statistics as 60% of the Moscow textile force housed in a factory with more than 500 workers, and 75% in St Petersburg under the same conditions. By no means was the number of Russian people who lived under these circumstances negligible.

In addition to factory workers, the working class also included laborers, pharmicists, railroad workers, soldiers, clerks, printers, and numerous others. These people, both men and women, shared a life marked by 13-18 hour days, and were unable to vote, hold political office, or gather legally for political purposes.

According to Engelstein, the political action of 1905 begins with the intelligentsia, not with the working class. Social Democrats, working under the principles of Marxism, have been trying to motivate the working class population to revolutionary political action with limited success. Before 1905, Social Democrats (and Anarchists) had engaged in a public awareness movement which included sending young radicals to “teach” groups of laborers.

The fruits of this labor seem to be a politically aware minority among Russian workers, but certainly not the revolutionarily active majority which the Social Democrats had hoped for. Lack of central organization, fear of state violence, and unfamiliarity with strike politics seemed to keep most of Russia's working class away from the politics of the labor movement.

Engelstein cites the formation of Zubatov Councils as one reason for the changes in Russia's work force. Zubatov Councils were typically paternalistic groups formed by the state as an outlet for worker's grievances. These councils were unintentionally politicized when Father Gapon lead a group of members in a peaceful march towards the winter palace. The marchers were armed with a list of grievances to be addressed. In this incident, state forces fired on the marchers and onlookers without discretion, wounding or killing at least 1,000 in the crowd. This act of state repression helped to politicize the workers and gain sympathy for the cause among the Russian majority. This was January of 1905.

But politicized workers are not necessarily organized workers, as Engelstein points out here. The sporadic outbreaks of strikes in January and February of 1905 fizzle due to lack of organization, experience, and unity. It seems that each person is striking for a different reason.

The September and October strikes are the prelude to the December Uprising. The September strikes are initiated by printers, without planning by intellectuals. Demands center around hours and wages. Engelstein states that these strikes have no political motivation. However, in the ranks of strikers are men and women familiar with strike tactics from January involvement. In the streets, the strikers mix with students and middle class citizens, all of whom are the targets of state sponsored violence. Under these circumstances, Engelstein argues that the strike movement snowballs.

In October, an important group of diverse workers joins the strike movement: the railroad workers. Within the railroad workers as a whole, the blue and white collar workers are united as a striking body. This striking body has the power to paralyze Russia, as Engelstien argues. Moreover, the railroad union has Social Democrats, Social Revolutionaries, Anarchists, and assorted other liberals at the helm, all co-existing.

The December Uprising is a natural event, considering (as Englestein has) the factors of a newly politicized working class, a sympathetic population, and the attempted quashing of the labor movement by an increasingly conservative city council, and the random violence of the Black Hundreds.

<>Erickson,Edward J| a{950}n{WW1b TRK.MPR mlt.hst}o{}
*2001:Westport,CT,Greenwood|_Ordered to die: A history of the Ottoman army in the First World War|>Erickson.ORDERED| ((UO| RUS.mlt:58-9 97-9 103-9 121-53))
*2003:Westport.CT,Praeger|_Defeat in detail: The Ottoman Army in the Balkans, 1912-1913|>Erickson.DEFEAT|
*2007:LND,Routledge|_Ottoman Army effectiveness in World War I: A comparative study|>Erickson.EFFECTIVE| ((UO|
The Ottoman Army evolved and maintained a high level of overall combat effectiveness despite the primitive nature of the Ottoman State. Four case studies at the operational and tactical level, campaigns involving the Ottoman Empire and the British Empire: Gallipoli in 1915, Kut in 1916, Third Gaza-Beersheba in 1917, and Megiddo in 1918. Emphasis placed on examining specific elements of combat effectiveness and how they affected that particular battle))
*2012:LND,Amber Books|_Gallipoli and the Middle East, 1914-1918|>Erickson.GALLIPOLI|

<>Erlanger,Steven| "The 100-year Legacy of World War I"|>Erlanger.100| 2014je27: NYT E-TXT| ((WW1c but article also contains E-TXT~ of newspaper front pages covering critical moments from the outbreak of WW1b to its end| Also several entries that bring WW1 issues up to the present = Bosnia [BAL] | Ypres fields still exploding [BEL] | Ukraine [UKR] Gallipoli [] Bell,Gertrude ["spy" in IRQ] | German mltism | USA untested but played critical role at Marne [] ))

<>Evans,R.J.W| *2014fe06:TLS:14-17| rvw of MacMillan.ROAD, Emmerson.1913, McMeekin.ORIGINS, McMeekin.JULY, Clark.SLEEP, Hastings.1914| 8x11:WW1a WW1

*2011:PA.P,UPP|_Portrait of a Russian province: economy, society, and civilization in nineteenth-century Nizhnii Novgorod| ((UO| NNG.gbx.hst.gph| Imagining the Russian Provinces
Soil, forest, river : ecx of gbx life
grd topography
Rhythms : the lcl.ekn
An Artisanal case study: the Southeast
Social space : numbers, images, bxo~
Managing the province : lcl.apx
The Cadastral map in the service of the Zmv
OChx and rlg
gbx clt nests
hst.gph = The idea of province))

<>Fainsod,Merle| a{}n{apx }o{
*1935:C.MA,HUP|_International Socialism and the World War|>Fainsod.scs&wrx| ((OWN 1969:pb ed| WW1 scs.mvt))
*1958:C.MA,HUP|_Smolensk Under Soviet Rule
*1962:C.MA,HUP|_How Russia is Ruled|3rd ed| ((stt SSR REV| G/Hough))
*1963:| “Bureaucracy and Modernization: The Russian and Soviet Case”| In Bureaucracy and Political Development:233-67| ((mdn))

<>Fallows,Thomas S| a{}
*1981 Harvard University PhD Dissertation| “Forging the Zemstvo Movement: Liberalism and Radicalism on the Volga,1890-1905”| (( SAR.gbx Zmv lbx rdx RREV1))

<>Farnsworth,Beatrice| a{}n{wmn}
--|Aleksandra Kollontai: Socialism, Feminism, and the Bolshevik Revolution| ((SSR scx RREV3))
<>Farnsworth,Beatrice, and Lynne Viola, eds| a{}
*1992:O.ENG|_Russian Peasant Women| (( ndr.sbk krx RUS2))

<>Fischer,Ben B| a{}
*1997:WDC,History Staff, Center for the Study of Intelligence,USA Central Intelligence Agency|_Okhrana: The Paris operations of the Russian Imperial Police| View full record| ((G/Okhrana

The publication consists of a preface written by Fischer which describes the story of the Okhrana in Paris and the recovered files. The rest is a series of organized essays written for the CIA counterintelligence by an unknown author. All of these articles had previously appeared in the journal called Studies in Intelligence, which was published by the CIA. These articles are detailed descriptions of the Okhrana's operations in Paris and all of the actors involved. Finally, the conclusion consist of a letter and the preface that inspired it which discussed the idea the Joseph Stalin was an Okhrana agent.

The preface, which is by Ben Fischer, discussed a number of issues surrounding Okhrana and the CIA. He also makes a number of conclusions with regard to the Tsarist regime and the Bolsheviks. One of Fischer's first points states that the opening of the Paris Okhrana in 1883, “a sign of both success and failure on the part of the tsarist authorities”(pg 1). The statement made reflects that Fischer believed it was more of a failure on the part of the tsarist than a success of the revolutionaries. France, especially Paris, had become a haven for the many Russian revolutionaries that had been thrown out of Russia, and these revolutionaries were able to take advantage of the west's liberties to conduct anti-regime activities.

The main body of the book consist of seven different articles written by an unknown CIA analyst. The articles are all interrelated and discuss stories of the Okhrana, its agents, and the Bolsheviks counterintelligence operations. One of the articles testifies to a Okhrana double agent during World War I. An agent named Dolin had Russian revolutionaries and the Germans convinced that he was working for them, while all along working for Okhrana. The author makes certain conclusions about the success of this operation and the fruits that it bore. The agent was able to dissuade German and Bolshevik attacks on Russia while also would give, “Okhrana regular information on the enemy's intentions, methods, and program”(pg.80). This article and statement testifies to the instructiveness of these articles and the usefulness that the CIA had for the Okhrana files.

At the end of the publication there are to texts that discuss the idea that Josef Stalin was an Okhrana agent. They both only have circumstantial evidence that Stalin was a deep cover agent. This idea had been around for a long time and many hoped that the publication of these files would shed some light. Unfortunately the Okhrana kept no official record of their deep cover agents, so even if Stalin was ever an agent there would be no mention of him in Okhrana's files in Paris or St. Petersburg. This publication provides a lot of insight into a subject that is typically very difficult to research. It provides a simple preface discussing the Okhrana and what it did while also providing detailed and interesting stories that are entertaining and educational.

<>Fischer,George| a{}
*1956:CMA|_Russian Liberalism: From Gentry to Intelligentsia| ((lbx plt gnt dvr ntg| defines lbx very broadly,but lst of lbx~ does not reach back to RS1| Billington rvw noted irony that KDs left lbx~ harkened back to 860s:rdx~:MxiNK & Hzn))
*1957:HSS#4:| “The Russian Intelligentsia and Liberalism”| ((ntg lbx))

<>Fitzpatrick,Sheila| a{}n{edc.plt STL| RREV3}o{}
On Lunacharskii
*1978:Boomington IN|>Fitzpatrick,Sheila,ed|_Cultural Revolution in Russia,1928-1931| ((LA831.8.F56. another call# DK266.4.C86 1978| clt))
*1979:SlR#38,3| “Stalin and the Making of a New Elite,1928-1939”|
*1979:ENG CUP|_Education and Social Mobility in the Soviet Union,1921-1934| ((LA831.8.F57))

*1982: & subsequent editions|_The_Russian Revolution, 1917-1932| ((

STUDENT REVIEW = Sheila Fitzpatrick examines the Russian Revolution in a new way from the popular historical interpretation. Fitzpatrick extends the revolution into Stalin’s reign from the February Revolution of 1917. From the 1860s to after the Civil War were all stepping stones toward the Revolution that all connected and linked together. Fitzpatrick even claims that revolution tendencies and legacies continued until the fall of the Soviet Union.

Fitzpatrick began her analysis of the Russian Revolution with the early stages starting in the 1860s with the Emancipation of Serfs. The Serfs and Peasants didn’t feel this was adequate enough and they felt they were entitled to more land than they had received. In 1864 Zemstvos began. These were “Elected local government bodies that were institutionally quite separate from the state bureaucracy and frequently in conflict with it” (Fitzpatrick, 23). The people of Russia were beginning to have a say in the happenings of the area, but this power began to become a conflict with the national government. The national government needed the money that the Zemstvos had collected from taxes and felt the Zemstvos had obtained too much control. Throughout the 1860s legal reformations occurred. Through these an independent court system was created. In the 1870s there was an upsurge of revolutionary terrorism. The plans thickened to destroy the autocratic Russia. These events set the stage for revolutionary ideals.

What could be considered as the first revolution had occurred in 1905. Fitzpatrick however just sees this as another step in the revolution that already had begun to surface. This entailed of urban revolution, peasant uprising and labor strikes. This appeared to be a faiure according to revolutionists “From the revolutionary standpoint it was no gain to have a façade of legal political institutions and a new breed of self important, chattering liberal politicians. It was also deeply, almost unbearably disappointing for the revolutionary leaders to return to the familiar dreariness of émigré life” (Fitzpatrick, 35). Fitzpatrick sees this as a failed attempt at a revolution and this could lead to why she does not view it as an entirely separate revolution. The presence of revolution and necessity for reform still lingered after this and lead to the next set of uprisings. After these event the stage was set for a revolution.

In February of 1917 the autocracy collapsed. A dual power of soviet and provisional government had taken over. This was another stepping stone through the revolution. “The February coup d’etat passed off so smoothly that even then one felt a vague presentiment that this was not the end, that such a crisis could not pass off so peacefully” (Fitzpatrick, 46). This revolution was not the end but only the beginning to the current revolution.

The October Revolution of 1917 was the Bolsheviks unlawful seizure of power. This was the led to the new soviet regime and laid the foundation for Stalinism. It also led to the Russian Civil war between the Anti-Bolsheviks and the Bolsheviks. This civil war devastated the economy, it depleted privatization and created inflation. The Bolsheviks found victory in the war and began their reign in Russia.

The Bolsheviks’ rise to power revolutionized many Old Russian policies. A new economic policy was put in place, the NEP. This permitted a revival of legal private trade. The intentions were to restore the devastated economy. When Stalin gained power the NEP was taken out and a Five Year Plan of centrally planned economy was put into place.

After Lenin’s death in 1924 the Communists needed to find a new leader, thus entered Stalin. Stalin’s rise to power also maintained the feeling of revolution. Stalin enforced the First-Five-Year plan and this called for lower grain prices. The Peasants were not pleased with this and Stalin forced peasants to still sell grain. He did this by barn searches and confiscated any grain found on farmer’s property, this lead to unhappy peasants.

Fitzpatrick presents the idea that there is only one Russian Revolution from 1917 to 1932. The setting included the events that occurred from 1860 to 1917. The revolution ended in 1932 with the success of the First-Five-Year plan and the somewhat stability of the economy. The revolution however maintained a legacy and revolutionary tendencies until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

<>Fitpatrick,Sheila, ed|
*1991:B.IU Press|_Russia in the Era of NEP

<>Foglesong,David S|_America's secret war against Bolshevism : U.S. intervention in the Russian Civil War, 1917-1920| *1995:CH.NC,UNCP| ((R&A WW1b Gwrx | ToC =
1. The Development of a Wilsonian Style of Intervention
2. The Origins of American Anti-Bolshevism
3. Keeping Faith with Russia: Ambassador Boris Bakhmeteff and U.S. Efforts to Restore "Democracy"
4. The British Connection: American Covert Aid to Anti-Bolsheviks in South Russia, 1917-1918
5. American Intelligence Gathering, Propaganda, and Covert Action in Revolutionary Russia
6. American Intervention in Siberia, 1918-1920: The Search for Anti-Bolshevik "Nuclei" and "Strong Men"
7. Fighting, but Not a War: American Intervention in North Russia, 1918-1919
8. Food as a Weapon against Bolshevism: American "Humanitarian" Intervention in the Baltic Region, 1919
9. The Struggle against Intervention: Soviet Policy toward America, 1917-1920
1917-1920, Woodrow Wilson's administration sought to oppose the Bolsheviks in a variety of covert ways. American and Russian archival material allows David Foglesong to chronicle both sides of this secret war| Reveals a new dimension to the first years of the U.S.-Soviet rivalry. Wilson was ambivalent about socialism and revolution before 1917| Social and cultural origins of American anti-Bolshevism. Principle of self-determination, idealistic public sentiment, and congressional restrictions, forced Wilson to rely on secretive methods to affect the course of the Russian Civil War || The administration provided covert financial and military aid to anti-Bolshevik forces, established clandestine spy networks, concealed the purposes of limited military expeditions to northern Russia and Siberia, and delivered ostensibly humanitarian assistance to soldiers fighting to overthrow the Soviet government. In turn, the Soviets developed and secretly funded a propaganda campaign in the United States designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-Bolshevik activity, promote American-Soviet economic ties, and win diplomatic recognition from WDC))

<>Footman,David| a{}
*1945|_Red Prelude: The Life of the Russian Terrorist Zhelyabov| ((UO| bxo JlbA krx rvs trr ppx NaV

STUDENT REVIEW = The main purpose of the book [...] was to give a background to the political party Narodnaya Volya that arose in the 1870’s. The book begins by giving background stories of the key members of the party. The book also outlines key people that were involved in the organizing and shaping of the ideals in which the members followed. The book is an attempt to explain why Zhelyabov and his friends abandon their original policy of reform and become revolutionary terrorist. This book also tries to explain what they did, how they did it, how the felt, and what happened to them. This book is written in terms of point of view and experience, instead of merely stating the facts of what happened on what day and who did it.

One of the key people of this book is Andrei Zhelyabov. He grew up in a poor family attended school at the University of Odessa. From the time he was a student he was active in student activism and critical thinking of the government. In 1879 he was known as an “illegal” because of his activities. Before becoming involved in the Narodnaya Voyla he was married and had a son but once he became apart of the Executive committee he abandoned them in order to protect them.

An important aspect, and due in large part to the popularity of the party, was their ability to appeal to different levels of society. They especially appealed to the student population and the working population. They accepted all who were willing to fight for change and overthrow the Emporer. Although, they may have had a lot of support that does not necessarily mean that they were active in the party. There were only about twenty who played an active role in the terrorism acts.

The main ideals of the party were outlined by Zhelyabov, “Therefore it was the duty of the Social Revolutionary party to overthrow the government and bring about a state of affairs in which such a struggle was possible. In other words the first duty of the wary was to secure political liberty, and with this it would unite with all elements capable to of political activity.” (Footman, 100) they strongly believed that only through socialist principals could humanity attain liberty, equality, fraternity, general maternity, and well-being. Zhelyabov became the leader and put into action terrorist acts against the Emperor. But that is not to say that they were only against the Emperor, they were actually against all of the wrong doing that he had done to people and they only way to end this was through killing him.

The party is known for the attempts to assassinate the Emperor Alexander II. They tried several times, once through placing dynamite on a railway and having it explode when the Emperors train passed by. But the switch didn’t ignite the dynamite. There was also another attempt to assassinate the Emperor in Petersburg but this also was unsuccessful. Finally the party was able to assassinate the Emperor on March 1. They used hand grenades, but also had a huge mine set up underneath a road. This attempt was successful and greatly rattled the country. After the assassination six individuals were arrested and tried in a court. Zhelyabov quickly admitted to planning the assassination but he was not actually involved in the actual event. While in court Zhelyabov tried to explain why they had done what they had, that it was not only to kill the Emperor but to bring justice to the people. All six were hung.

This book in important because he highlights all the different people involved, it gives a background to their lives and how they became to be apart of the party. One of the key aspects of this book is how much planning and time went into the preparations for the final event. Members set up false shops, broke people out of prison, collected funds, recruited new members, and falsified names and passports. This was not just a group of people who met once and then decided to kill the Emperor. They carefully planned and made preparations for their final event. But the key fact about the Narodnaya Volya is that they were more than just a group of people that wanted to murder Alexander II. They wanted justice brought and to end the atrocities that Alexander II had brought upon the people. They believed that he only cared for the rich and everyone else fell by the wayside. This book highlights how this new party was passionate and stopped at nothing to achieve their goal.

*1963:NYC|_The_Civil War in Russia| ((Gwrx))

<>Frank,Stephen P. and Mark D. Steinberg, eds|
*1994|_Cultures in Flux: Lower-Class Values, Practices, and Resistance in Late Imperial Russia| ((>CiF| pbl wrk prl plt.clt))

<>Freeze,Gregory L| a{}n{ChxO rlg dxv pbl.hst}o{}
*1969mr:SlR#28:81-91| “A National Liberation Movement and the Shift in Russian Liberalism, 1901-1903”| (( Zmv lbx RREV1| Emmons,Formation:232 cites re.Wbr & RUS lbx not ekn but Lebenshaltung| Freeze employs only bürgerliche Intelligenz [ASS 22:243-4] ))
--|In O&S| “Church and politics in late Imperial Russia: crisis and radicalization of the clergy”

<>Frieden,Nancy M| a{}
|_Russian Physicians in an Era of Reforms and Revolution,1856-1905| P.NJ:1981| ((|>Frieden,mdx| 5x8mdx| Prg.obx grt.rfm RREV1))

<>Friedgut,Theodore H| a{}
*1989:P.NJ,PUP|_Iuzovka and Revolution|| 2vv| ((v1=Life and Work in Russia’s Donbass,1869-1924|grn prl rvs.mvt RREV1 RREV3 NEP))

<>Frierson,Cathy| a{}
|_Peasant Icons| ((OWN|krx| ntg plt.clt))
*1987sp:SlR#46,1:55-69| Article on district courts| ((lwx.sud vls.sud krx))

<>Fröhlich,Klaus| a{}n{RREV1 plt orx cvc.pbl obx Wbr}o{}
*1981:|_The_Emergence of Russian Constitutionalism, 1900-1904: The Relationship Between Social Mobilization and Political Group Formation in Pre-revolutionary Russia| ((321n(336) notes that 22:234 explains Wbr ~~Kistiakovskii.

Klaus Fröhlich examines the emergence of a liberal-minded civil society which culminated in the Constitutionalist movements and the 1905 revolution, and seeks to answer the question of how this could have happened in the Russian political context—that is, one without a precedent of parliamentary or other democratic institutions. In this situation, we might be reminded of similar political developments in industrial Germany, and the author does indeed point out the parallels in how social/political mobilization came after industrialization and resulted in top-down reforms (seen to a much more limited extent in Russia). [mdn=] The author also cites the ideas of German sociologist Max Weber, particularly the sentiments of anti-bureaucratization (in the case of Russia, anti-autocracy as well) fueled by the demands of the (bourgeois: urbanized, educated, professional pedigree) bürgerliche Intelligenz class that had the most at stake economically in such a modernizing society run by an autocracy that granted them little to no political power.

The individuals behind the Constitutionalist movement acted in the context of the “public movement”—a broad term to encompass the activities of those involved in developing a Russian civil society following the 1860’s wave of political reforms (such as the establishment of the zemstvo system of self-government that run certain, often specific and technical, matters in provincial rural areas), with the focus on “small deeds” liberalism involving public works and pushing for marginal liberal reforms in a legal manner to limit the hindering effects of the autocracy. This mitigated the tendency in Russian politics towards drifting to the extremes of reactionary and revolutionary parts of the spectrum, and one of our author’s main themes is stressing the degree of careful political maneuvering that was necessary for the Constitutionalists to succeed in gaining popular support while avoiding the overt wrath of and crackdown by the government.

The primary forum for Constitutionalist ideas in the period before the 1905 Revolution was the journal Osvobozhdenie (Liberation), in which former “legal Marxist” Peter Struve pushed the Constitutionalist ideals (of autocracy abolishment, support for individual liberties free from violent police crackdowns, non-class representation) without calling for specific practical, organizational political action for fear of seeming too radical and non-inclusive. Although this created conflicts for the editor in the form of criticisms from fringe supporters of being too vague, abstract or non-political, the author notes that in its time the journal was indeed widely respected (or at least read) by moderates and radicals alike, as well as government officials and conservatives who saw it as a key voice of legitimate public opposition to the autocracy that demanded their attention. In facing charges of being too cowardly or too revolutionary from both sides, Struve’s editorial stance allowed a fluid and “liberal” approach to the eventual formation of the Union of Liberation in Russia. We can see one result of this in an early conference of liberals at Lake Constance Germany (where, it should be noted, all such open meetings took place at first and where the editorial office of Osvobozhdenie was located) in which the conference resulted in what Fröhlich notes as a good degree of trust and harmony on a burgeoning program of supporting a constitutional order that would eventually abolish the autocracy.

While many in the Constitutionalist movement, and primarily Struve, saw the importance of the working class and their inclusion in and support for this liberal movement, we must be reminded that many saw it as their duty as the most educated and able to dictate the terms of a Constitutionalist program in the best interests of all Russians. The essential economic privilege and high social profile that many Constitutionalists enjoyed meant that many were at first wary of involving lower-classes to an extensive degree, yet by the Second Congress meeting of the Union of Liberation in 1904, enough shifts within the movement had occurred (owing much to the gradual and open-ended approach espoused by Struve) that universal suffrage and “protection of the interests of the working masses” were now stated as key objectives of the movement (remarkable change given that at this same time the Union chose to make its existence known publicly). Thus, a movement that was initially comprised largely of educated urbanites from the metropolitan centers St. Petersburg and Moscow and members of the so-called 3rd Element (public servants that commonly comprised the zemstvo—teachers, physicians, agronomists, statisticians, etc.) now opened its doors to the voice of the proletariat, in large part due to the desire to undermine the effectiveness of more dogmatic and revolutionary socialist forces. The political ideals that drove Constitutionalist luminaries are familiar enough to those of us raised in the Western traditions of parliamentarianism and individual liberty: What was different in the case of Russia was the need for a gradual approach to Constitutional order through the elevation of guaranteed civil and political liberties over the power of the autocracy as well as its subordinate bureaucracy. This would lead, as Pavel Milyukov put it, to a political order evolving under the “laws of political biology” of representation-thru-Constitution, despite the widely-recognized crisis of “backwardness” in Russia. He saw this tendency as being inherently symptomatic of the development of higher culture and as “indifferent to national peculiarities” as the use of the alphabet, printing press, or electricity. (78) While history as cited here by Milyukov seemed to be on the side of the Constitutionalists, subsequent events and revolutions would perpetuate the legacy of Russia as a political pariah.

Another key theme that Fröhlich emphasizes in detailing the rise of the Constitutionalist movement, and one of its key strengths, is its flowering in tight-knit, domestic settings that involved politically subversive, but non-violent and undogmatic activity. The settings for many early meetings were political salons and homes, out of the public eye by necessity. Gradually this close circle of “friends”, as Fröhlich repeatedly refers to them, expanded to cooperation across physical boundaries through primarily journalistic endeavors (no less than 3 political journals including Struve’s Liberation are detailed as having a critical effect in the political mobilization of the movement) and the building of a rapport between those in the relatively indistinct “moderate” spectrum of Russian politics that would culminate in the Union of Liberation. The author also notes that the generation of those born in the 1860’s and raised in the era of industrialization along with increasing social mobilization (most constitutionalists were between the ages of 40 and 60) played a huge factor in mobilizing these individuals to demand political reform by the turn of the century. This once again reflects the notions that the rise of a “middle class” (bourgeois, bürgerliche Intelligenz, etc.) as seen in the West would lead to the unraveling of old autocratic orders restrictive to individuals and their rights. In short, the answer to the “how” and “why” of political group formation in Russia lay within the circumstances of this generation and their opportunity at social and political mobilization.

<>Fromkin,David| a{}n{pop.hst.gph}o{}
*--|_Europe's last summer : Who started the Great War in 1914?|>Fromkin.WHO| ((UO| gnr.txt WW1a| ToC | Sample E-TXT))
*1989:NYC,Holt|_A_Peace to End all Peace: Creating the Modern Middle East|>Fromkin.PEACE| ((E-TXT excerpts | OWN| WW1c AfroAsia))

<>Fussell,Paul|_The_Great War and Modern Memory| *1975| ((UO| WW1b clt blt mdnism| CF=Smith.EMBATTLED))

<>Galai,Shmuel| a{}n{RREV1 rvs}o{}
*1973:C.ENG,CUP|_The_Liberation Movement in Russia,1900-1905| ((noWbr))

<>Gal’perin,Grigorii Boris*| With Aleksei Ivanovich Korolev, and Nina Ivanovna Vasil’eva| a{}
*1975:LGR,LGR.unv|_Pervaia rossiiskaia revoliutsiia i samoderzhavie| ((DK263.v32 GRS:222| RREV1 stt| 151p| 86:quotes Reisner MA re.“absolyutizme, prinyavwem formy ljekonstitucionalizma” Wbr.idl))

<>Gaman-Golutvina,O. V. (2006). Politicheskie ėlity Rossii: Vekhi istoricheskoĭ evoliutsii. Politologiia Rossii. Moskva: ROSSPĖN.

<>Gammer,Moshe| a{}n{ISL QQN}o{}
*1994:|_Muslim resistance to the tsar : Shamil and the conquest of Chechnia and Daghestan| ((ISL AfrAsia QQN CAU))
*2006:|_The_lone wolf and the bear : Three centuries of Chechen defiance of Russian rule| ((

This is a chronicle of “Three Centuries of Chechen Defiance of Russian Rule”. The Chechens have traditionally inhabited the Caucasian mountains and its lowlands. The geographic area of the Caucasus is especially rough with forests and hazardous mountains making the land especially inhospitable. These labyrinths of dense forests and dangerous mountaintops have presented a nearly unbeatable challenge to any would-be invader- even in the 21st century.

A central theme that Gammer explores in his historical analysis is the repeated attempts at achieving unity among the Caucasian clans in an effort to resist Russian conquest. Alone the fiercely independent clans had little chance of halting the conquests of their large, expansive neighbor to the north. Islamic spiritual leaders, often sheikhs, realized early on “that in religious reform lay the one chance of preserving their cherished liberty and independence.” (Gammer, 27) The first to attempt this endeavor was Sheikh Mansur, who preached that through Sufi’ism and Sha’ria unity could be achieved and the Russians beaten back. He resisted Russian conquest using these means for a number of years though was eventually forced to surrender. His status as “’the first to preach and lead’ the struggle against the ‘Russians in the Caucasus’” made him a national hero among the Chechens. He set the trend for spiritual leaders to lead military resistance by waging gazavat, a form of Islamic holy war, against the Russian invaders and later, against the Russian occupiers. A more prominent symbol of Chechen defiance of Russian conquest was Imam Shamil who emerged some 30 or 40 years after Mansur. His military exploits won him renown and his name still maintains its legacy of defying Russia (notably through the emergence of Shamil Basayev, a more recent example of a Chechen spiritual leader attempting to unite the tribes to resist- and adopting the name of a more famous rebel before him).

Gammer’s insight into the relationship between Islam and the Chechens’ struggle offers valuable information that sheds light on the current situation in the Caucasus. While Islam became ingrained in the psyche of those struggling to resist Russian rule, it was not until later in the 20th century that Islam’s firm tie to Chechen nationalism and identity was completed. Using increasingly harsh methods to subjugate the restless Chechen and Ingush populations, Joseph Stalin “Carried out what so many Russian generals… had suggested but never dared to do.” (Gammer, 165) He deported nearly the entire ethnic populations of the Ingush and Chechen people far into Kazakhstan, where the harsh environment killed off many. It was in this extreme environment that “ethnic solidarity” was maintained through the various branches of Islam adhered to by the deported ethnicities. When sent back to their homelands in 1956 this fundamental tie between ethnic identity and religion was already firmly cemented. To this end Moshe Gammar sheds light on the current conflict by exposing the centrality that Islam plays in the national struggle of the Chechens, an event likened to Poland’s “national solidarity” being inexorably tied to Catholicism.

Russian intervention has been a central component of Chechnya’s recent history. Gammer makes note of this and puts the actions of Chechens in the appropriate context: they are simply responses to actions initiated by Russia. “It is Russia as the great power, neighbour to a small people, that has dictated the events and the agenda for more than three centuries. The Chechens have mainly reacted to Russia’s moves and policies, not initiated their own.” (Gammer, 219) The evolution of Chechen nationalism shows this point most clearly. Islam became integrated into Chechen nationalism when the first resistance leaders used it to lead their armies against Russia, becoming firmly entrenched in the national psyche as it proved its use once again in resisting Russification in the inhospitable areas of Kazakhstan. Russia has been always been a menacing neighbor to the Chechens, looming as a backdrop against which all of Chechnya’s actions are decided. To the Chechens freedom does not mean a certain type of governance aside from self-governance. Freedom to the Chechens is in an absolutely negative light, meaning simply freedom from Russian intervention. This is why people like Sheikh Mansur and Imam Shamil have been able to reach such a colossal stature among Chechens, as they embody this natural longing for a people to dictate their own actions in accordance with their own will, not the will of their more-powerful neighbors and occupiers. Chechnya represents an interesting challenge to democracy and Russia. By examining the Chechens we can see the evolution of democracy in an area concerned almost solely with their own emancipation from another’s rule. This poses special challenges to the maturation of democracy in an area driven forward primarily by the worst of external factors – war.

<>Getzler,Israel| a{}
*1967:LND| Martov: A Political Biography of a Russian Social Democrat| ((SDs(m) ))
*1983:ENG, CUP|_Kronstadt,1917-1921: The Fate of a Soviet Democracy|>Getzler.KRONSTADT| ((RREV3 Gwrx vs-SDs(b) mlt))

<>Gill,Graeme J| a{}
|_The_Origins of the Stalinist Political System|C.ENG:CUP,1990| ((JN6511.G53| ndr|STL|ch4:“The Divided Elite”:135-98 (esp:171-72) Struggle w/fxn~ [175f] Realities of fxn [185] Quotes Trt “pty always right” [187] ch8:“Elite Ravaged”:275-306|Conclusion:“Why Stalinism”:307-27))
|_Peasants and Government in the Russian Revolution|L.ENG:1979| ((B&N Imports,text edition $28.50,ISBN:0-06-492406-8| krx stt RREV2))

<>Gleason,Abbott| a{
*:|Young Russia: The Genesis of Russian Radicalism in the 1860s

<>Gleason,Abbott,Peter Kenez,and Richard Stites,eds|_Bolshevik Culture: Experiment and Order in the Russian Revolution| ((>Blw.clt| ndr.sbk))

<>Griffin,Roger| "The Meaning of 'Sacrifice' in the First World War"| ((E-TXT| WW1b An interesting search for trxic "clt meaning" what might best be thought of as mass hysteria))

<>Griffiths,Gordon| a{1914}
*1968:O.ENG|_Representative government in Western Europe in the sixteenth century: Commentary and documents for the study of comparative constitutional history| A publication of the International Commission for the History of Representative and Parliamentary Institutions| ((JN94 .R3|622p bbl| prm plt.clt stt.dmx ZmS cst))

<>Guroff,Gregory, and Fred V. Carstensen, eds| a{}
|>Entrepreneurship in Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union| P.NJ:PUP,1983| ((sbk trd kpq ekn cpt))

*1955:CMA|_Russian Marxists and the Origins of Bolshevism| ((HX313.H3))
*1964de:SlR#23: 619-42 and 1965mr:SlR#24: 1-22| “The Problem of Social Stability in Urban Russia,1905-1917”| ((Reprinted in CSH:341-380))

*1979:IUP|_The_Politics of Rural Russia, 1905-1914| ((ndr.sbk skz krx RREV1 noWbr))

<>Hamburg,Gary M| a{}
*1978:Stanford University PhD dissertation| “Land Economy and Society in Tsarist Russia: Interest Politics of the Landed Gentry During the Agrarian Crisis of the Late Nineteenth Century”| ((dvr plt ekn INX pbl))
*1979jy:RRe#38:323-38| “The Russian Nobility on the Eve of the 1905 Revolution”| (())
*1984:New Brunswick NJ|_Politics of the Russian Nobility,1881-1905| ((noUO?|dvr clx sSs| dvr sSs clx pbl.mvt plt RREV1 “Lacked a common identity” | “class analysis is generally inappropriate” Bruce Lincoln rvw SlR 44:46))
*2001:Kritika|Review of four Russian titles devoted to political conservatism

*1992:S.CA, SUP|_Boris Chicherin and Early Russian Liberalism,1828-1866| ((Qqr lbx prf MVA.unv unv svt

Until quite recently Boris Chicherin has been largely neglected by historians in their narratives of Russian political culture in the 19th Century. Compared to populist socialism and Slavophilism, the two main currents of Russian thought leading during this period, Russian liberalism appealed to neither a large section of the intelligentsia nor the broader masses. Despite its political shortcomings, however, it played a vital role in the great ideological debates leading up to the Peasant Emancipation, leaving behind a bulk of largely neglected material that has become part of an increasingly relevant “liberal tradition” in Russia. G. M. Hamburg in Boris Chicherin and Early Russian Liberalism: 1828-1866 attempts to remedy this perceived “oversight” by concentrating on the political thinking of its most prolific early commentators.

Expectedly, Hamburg starts off his study of Chicherin by giving a brief account of his childhood. Chicherin was born in Tambov, a provincial town southwest of Moscow, in 1828. He was of was of noble origins and spent his childhood in like manner. Before dedicating himself to scholarship, Chicherin spent his time among Moscow high society, frequenting elaborate balls and lavish dinner parties. Chicherin it seemed was on his way to becoming a 'superfluous man'. Fortunately, he found his way at Moscow University, coming under the spell of the great Westernizer historian T. N. Granovsky and later the readings of Hegel; both of which having a profound influence on Chicherin's philosophy of history as well as his more mature political writings.

Hamburg spends considerable time delineating the early ideological movements in Russia that would later color Chicherin's later thinking. Chicherin was at once a Westernizer, Hegelian and to a certain extent classical liberal, though his interpretation of Russian history steered him away from out and out liberal solutions to Russia's problems. Indeed Hamburg seems most comfortable defining his political philosophy as 'conservative liberalism'.
[EUA & mdn=]
According to Chicherin modern Russia was defined first and foremost by the state, which until recently didn't hinder progress but spurred it forward. The Eurasian steppe demanded concentrated government not only to resist foreign invaders but help facilitate basic social functions across vast areas. When one speaks of Russian society then, he or she is speaking not of an organic, self-perpetuating unit as was the case in Europe but a product of the state. The only actor in Russia capable of imposing meaningful reform then was the state.

These views were first laid out by Konstantin Kavelin in his largely overlook essay entitled Survey on the Juridical Life of Ancient Russia (1847). In it Kavelin advanced the theory that (1) the Russian state was a beacon of individual liberty and progress and (2) that the Petrine Transformation represented not a deviation from the policies put in place by the great Muscovite autocrats, as the Slavophiles contended, but their logical continuation. Hamburg necessarily deals with the political thought of Kavelin. Like Chicherin with whom he collaborated often, Kavelin would play a central role in the debates leading up to the Peasant Emancipation, where the term “Russian liberal” was for the first time used in Russian political culture.

Their theory of the Russian state – described today as the “statist school” of Russian historiography – tended to play down the role of representative democracy and the peasant commune (or obshchina) in Russia's historical development. Chicherin believed Russia wasn't “ready” for the former while pushing for the abolishment of the latter, seeing it as barrier to Russia's progress along liberal lines. This view enraged populist socialists, who regarded the obshchina as the foundation for Russia's future purely communal existence. Hamburg does an exceptionally good job of highlighting this early divide within Russian political culture.

Alexander Herzen of course played a crucial role in providing an outlet for these great early debates in his Free Russian Press, of which Hamburg goes into great detail, and to absolutely wonderful effect. These make for the most illuminating passages in Hamburg's study – Chicherin's run in with Herzen is especially notable, setting the tone for the rest of his work.

At worst then, Chicherin might be viewed as an apologist, even defender, of Russian autocracy, as many of his contemporaries in fact did. His political philosophy left him little immediate hope for democracy, clearly placing too much stock in the ability of the state to facilitate meaningful change. Yet Chicherin, and Hamburg would certainly attest, should not be judged too harshly. He was after all in favor of reform and left behind a considerable body of work in defense of his statist position; work that would ultimately become the basis for the political thought of later more robust liberal thinkers such as Paul Miliukov and Maxime Kovalevsky))

<>Hamilton,,Richard F. and >Herwig,Holger H., eds| *2003:C.ENG,CUP| _The_Origins of World War I|>Hamilton.ORIGINS| ((UO WW1a|

World wars: definition and causes / Richard F. Hamilton, Holger H. Herwig
The European wars: 1815-1914 / Richard F. Hamilton
Serbia / Richard C. Hall|
Austria-Hungary / Graydon A. Tunstall, Jr.
Germany / Holger H. Herwig
Russia / David Alan Rich|
France / Eugenia C. Kiesling
Great Britain / J. Paul Harris
Japan / Frederick R. Dickinson
The Ottoman Empire / Ulrich Trumpener|
Italy / Richard F. Hamilton, Holger H. Herwig
Bulgaria, Romania, and Greece / Richard C. Hall|
The United States / John Milton Cooper, Jr.
Why did it happen? / Holger H. Herwig
On the origins of the catastrophe / Richard F. Hamilton
Chronology, 1914 / Geoffrey P. Megargee
Dramatis Personae
"This work poses an easy but perplexing question about World War I: Why did it happen? Several of the oft-cited causes are reviewed and discussed. The argument of the alliance systems is inadequate, lacking relevance or compelling force. The argument of an accident (or "slide") is also inadequate, given the clear and unambiguous evidence of intentions. The arguments of mass demands, those focusing on nationalism, militarism, and social Darwinism, it is argued, are insufficient, lacking indications of frequency, intensity, and process (how they influenced the various decisions)." "The work focuses on decision making, on the choices made by small coteries, in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, France, Britain, and elsewhere. The decisions made later by leaders in Japan, the Ottoman Empire, Italy, the Balkans, and the United States are also explored."))

<>Hardt,Michael and >Negri,Antonio|_Empire|>Hardt.MPR| ((OWN| MPR mrx.trx| little re-WW1 but much on ntn.sttism and ntn.stt.ndp ~~MPR))

<>Hardy,Deborah| a{}
*1987:NYC| Land and Freedom: The Origins of Russian Terrorism| ((ZIV trr plt.clt))

<>Hart,Peter| a{1955}n{}o{
Imperial War Museum in London| Oral historian
*2008:NYC,Pegasus|_The_Somme: The darkest hour on the Western Front|>Hart.SOMME| ((UO| WW1b| Almost prm.sbk w/sld.ltr sld.dnv| ToC =

The rocky road
Armies and weapons
Moving on up
1 July 1916
The morning after
Creeping forward
Stumbling to disaster
From bad to worse
You are not alone
When push comes to shove
Hammering on
October attrition
Last shake on the Ancre
Life in the trenches [sld.vqt]
British order of battle
German order of battle
*1916jy01-1916oc:The British Army launched the "Big Push" that was supposed to bring an end to the horrific stalemate on the Western Front between British, French, and German forces
What resulted was one of the greatest single human catastrophes in the history of warfare
Scrambling out of trenches in the face of German machine guns & artillery fire, the Allies lost over 20,000 soldiers that first day
This "battle" would drag on for another four deadly months
The narrative account is drawn from letters, diaries, and first-person testimonies
*2011:NYC,OxUP|_Gallipoli|>Hart.GALLIPOLI| ((SMT| WW1b ENG [GBR] AST NZe FRN OTM.TRK| ToC =
Dodging the issue -- Navy in action -- Gathering of the forces -- Plans : countdown to disaster
*1915ap25: landings at Anzac
*Ditto: landings at Helles
*Ditto: drama at V Beach
*Ditto: Kum Kale and diversions
Anzac : the holding pen
Helles : the real fight for Gallipoli
Helles : writing on the wall
New beginnings : Hamilton's plans
*1915au: Helles sacrifice
*Ditto: Anzac, diversions, and breakout
*Ditto: Suvla Bay landings
*1915au21: a useless gesture
Should they stay or should they go?
The beginning of the end
Last rites at Helles
Myths and legends
Appendix A: A Gallipoli tour|
Appendix B: Glossary of military terms
Publisher's description = One of the most famous battles in history [...] began as a bold move by the British to capture Constantinople .... [But] from the initial landings to the desperate attacks of early summer and the battle of attrition that followed, it was a tragic folly.... [It was] destined to fail from the start. Gallipoli forced the young Winston Churchill from office, established Turkey's iconic founder Mustafa Kemal (better known as "Ataturk"), and marked Australia's emergence as a nation in its own right. [?What of New Zealand?] [The book draws] on unpublished eyewitness accounts by individuals from all ranks--not only from Britain, Australia and New Zealand, but from Turkey and France as well.... [And it presents an] astute, unflinching assessment of the leaders as well


*2013:OxUP|_The_Great War: A Combat History of the First World War|>Hart.GREAT| ((UO| WW1b (n=5) (n=4) (n=5) (n=3) ToC =

The road to war [WW1a]
[] The western front, 1914
[] The eastern front, 1914
[] The sea war, 1914-15 [mlt.nvy]
[] The western front, 1915
[] The eastern front, 1915
[] Gallipoli, 1915
[] Salonika, 1915-18
[] The western front, 1916
[] The eastern front, 1916
{] The sea war, 1916 [mlt.nvy]
[] Mesopotamia, 1914-18
[] The eastern front, 1917-18
[] The sea war, 1917-18
[] The western front, 1917
[] Italy, 1915-18
[] The Sinai and Palestinian campaigns, 1915-18
[] The western front, 1918
[WW1c pcx]A world without war?
WW1b altered the landscape of the mdn.wrl in every conceivable arena. Millions died; empires collapsed; new IDL~ and plt.mvt~| poison gas, warplanes, tanks, submarines, and other technologies. bcm grim, mature reality. [C]ombat history [focuses] on the decisive engagements... [Commanders on all sides faced immense challenges and showed strengths amd weaknesses as they responded to strategic imperatives]

<>Haskell,Thomas L., and Richard F. Teichgraeber III, eds| a{}
*1993:ENG CUP| The Culture of the market: Historical essays| ((|HM101.C933 1993|524p sbk cpt plt.clt ekn mkt))

<>Hastings,Max| a{}n{}o{"acclaimed" mlt.hstian| hugely popular armchair generalship
*2013:NYC,Knopf|_Catastrophe 1914: Europe goes to war|>Hastings.1914| ((8x11:WW1a = EVANS rvw~|

pbr blurb = [...] from the breakdown of diplomacy to the dramatic battles that occurred before the war bogged down in the trenches [...]: grinding, halting battles that sacrificed millions of lives for no territory or visible gain. Yet the first months of the war, from the German invasion of Belgium to the Marne to Ypres, were utterly different, full of advances and retreats, tactical maneuvering, and significant gains and losses. [... F]rom the diplomatic crisis to the fighting in Belgium and France on the Western front, and Serbia and Galicia to the east. [...] vivid accounts of the battles and frank assessments of generals and political leaders, [show] why it was inevitable that this first war among modern industrial nations could not produce a decisive victory, making a war of attrition inevitable. Throughout we encounter high officials and average soldiers, as well as civilians on the homefront, giving us a vivid portrait of how a continent became embroiled in a war that would change everything | ToC = 1914 chronology
The organisation of armies in 1914
'A feeling that events are in the air'
The descent to war
'The superb spectacle of the world bursting into flames'
Disaster on the Drina
Death with flags and trumpets
The British flight
The retreat
Tannenberg : 'Alas, how many thousands lie there bleeding!'
The hour of Joffre
The nemesis of Moltke
'Poor devils, they fought their ships like men'
Three armies in Poland
'Did you ever dance with him?'
Open country, open sky
Ypres : 'Something that was completely hopeless'
'War becomes the scourge of mankind'
Silent night, holy night))

<>Hausmann,Guido et al|
|>Gesellschaft als locale Veranstaltung.... | ((grd cvc.pbl|

Two imperial decrees, in 1870 and 1892, adjusted the city council [gorodskaia duma] to strengthen but also to limit urban self-administration. This book, written by German and Russian scholars, argues that deficiencies once attributed to Russian cities, and to these decrees, are largely the deficiencies of old “Western” interpretive concepts themselves. We can no longer gloss over actual bodies of self-organization and self-realization among the wide variety of home-grown urban dwellers. We can no longer ignore the poor, women, national minorities and religious communities. We should no longer premise “civil society” on the ascendancy of a unified and isolated or independent “middle class”, the reified “bourgeoisie”. Chapters then take up these topics = Moscow City Duma between 1870 and 1916; Moscow elites (owners of grand homes); Women who supported health and charitable institutions (representing ca. 80 leading Moscow merchant families); Social composition of city officials, 1893-1917, with 30 bios of mayors in Moscow, Odessa, Kiev, Riga, Kharkov, Tomsk, Kazan and Saratov; Urban governance in Siberia and the Caucasus; The “New Club” organized by Kazan merchants; Burgeoning urban wage-labor population and their organizations, and beggars. The full story suggested in the subtitle of this book -- Selbstverwaltung, Assoziierung und Geselligkeit [self-administration, association and sociability] -- requires clarification of how self-mobilization in rural Zemstvos and towns coincided and reinforced one another, and how village and rural district activation fits in. We also need to know more about the liberal and technical professions and their organizations, more than we get from the brief mention of the Literacy Committee of the Free Economic Society [116-125] and the chapter on the “New Club”. This book is mainly about the shaping effect of the 1870 and 1892 urban decrees. There is no parallel account of the remarkable decrees handed down in 1867, 1874 and 1895 restricting independent Selbstverwaltung, Assoziierung und Geselligkeit, whether in cities or anywhere else in the Empire. This mounting sequence of suffocating laws sought to criminalize all voluntary association not explicitly approved, licensed and monitored by the bureaucratic state (any group that assembled outside the jurisdiction of the police [bez vedoma policii]).

<>Henze,Charlotte E| a{}n{hlt mdx}o{
*2010:Hoboken|_Disease, Health Care and Government in Late Imperial Russia: Life and Death on the Volga, 1823-1914

Charlotte Henze looks to discuss how Russia was afflicted by cholera for much of the 1800s and early 1900s and what role government had in the spread of the disease. To better gain a frame of reference, Henze uses a case study from the southern Russian city of Saratov, which was particularly ravaged by cholera, but not unique in how the politics of cholera played out within the city.

Cholera is mostly a disease of sanitation and proper hygiene. [frequent ref. to mdn=] In today’s modern times we do not see very many outbreaks of cholera because of our relatively advanced sanitation measures. In Russia, and the rest of the Westernized world, however, modern sanitation was not widely in effect when the first worldwide outbreak struck in 1823. Because of the lax sanitation and hygiene measures cholera, therefore, was able to rapidly infect the populous. In Russia, however, cholera remained a savage disease, and it killed over 2 million people between 1823-1914 in four major epidemics. Cholera claimed more lives in Russia than it did in any other country. Despite the fact that Russia had, as Henze notes, the most prolific anti-cholera campaign out of any other European country, it was unable to successfully fight the disease as effectively as other nations.

This book looks to explain the reasons why Russia failed to stop cholera’s lethal wrath. Henze argues that a lack of willingness to modernize was the driving force that caused Russia’s cholera epidemics to be so devastating. Although the fundamental reason cholera was so brutal was because of an unwillingness to embrace modernity, other issues were involved including a fear of government from the peasantry, an economically driven government, an unwillingness to listen to the medical community, and a breakdown in communication between the Imperial government and local authorities.

The book begins with a brief history of cholera in Russia and how the disease’s progression compared with the rest of Europe at the time. When cholera first came to Europe in 1823, most of Europe, including Russia, implemented the same disease fighting tactics on cholera as it had done with the plague centuries earlier. For the most part this meant military and government backed quarantine. Because of cholera’s epidemiology, keeping people densely enclosed is the least ideal way to combat the disease. Most European governments soon realized that harsh quarantine efforts were not effective and eased up on the directive, but not Russia. Henze argues that because of Russia’s unwillingness to modernize, the useless quarantine measures were kept in effect.

The people soon became wary of the strict measures, and tried to leave their enclosures. Additionally, the quarantine measures often unnecessarily targeted the country’s poor. This led to mass confusion and fear within the general population, and soon the people began to flee, mostly along the Volga. The flight of the people further perpetuated the disease’s reach and more people became ill as a result.

While these strict quarantine measures appeared to be in good faith to save the populous, Henze argues that it was mostly economically motivated. When it became clear that traditional quarantines were not working, the government decided to ban the sale of wares from businesses, yet, quite paradoxically allowed for ships to continue trading with other nations. Permitting ships to trade with other nations allowed for the government to maintain its income. Many people’s livelihoods were destroyed when they were banned from selling their wares, and this further perpetuated the people’s hatred and fear of the government. This notion of retaining wealth further illustrated, according to Henze, that the government was unwilling to embrace modernity.

Not only was the government keen on retaining its wealth, but it was also unwilling to listen the medical community on ways to combat the disease. While it is true that at the beginning of the cholera epidemics little was known about the disease, by the time of 1892 (the worst years of cholera in Russia) there was a consensus from the medical community that cholera could be treated with better sanitation and hygiene. Despite the advice from European doctors, Russia’s government was unwilling to listen to the advice. Henze argues that this was most likely due to the fact that the government was fearful that this would empower the people in a time when the autocracy was trying desperately to reign in power.

This isn’t to say, however, that the government didn’t have a plan of action when cholera outbreaks did occur, on the contrary, actually. By 1892, Russia’s government had a very specific plan of dealing with cholera. Unfortunately, however, because of Russia’s immense size, it was often difficult for government-backed directives to be properly implemented. When the outbreak of 1892 began, local officials often were hesitant to publicly admit that cholera was in their cities. Naturally, then, they did not implement the government’s directives.

The 1892 cholera outbreak was the worst to date. It was particularly devastating because so many people assumed that the previous outbreaks were the worst to come and couldn’t imagine cholera wreaking more havoc than before. When people were dying in record numbers, Russia slowly began to allow for positive change that helped successfully combat the disease. This was mainly accomplished by empowering physicians and for local governments to implement the doctors’ mandates.

Before the 1892 epidemic, doctors were seen as “servants of the state” and yielded little power. But, in late 1892 the government gave the local zemstva power to rule the medical profession. As a result, the zemstva gave the local doctors the political power needed to effect change. This eventually allowed for the doctors to treat cholera and they helped to stop the savagery of the 1892 epidemic.

Many cities began investing in better infrastructure and sanitation measures as a result of advice from the medical community. It is important to note, however, that the modern sanitation efforts were mostly funded by cities alone and not by the Imperial government. However, the efforts for better hygiene proved to be successful and cholera’s spread was eventually quelled.

Because of cholera’s ease of prevention, when there are epidemics, it is usually a symptom of political failure. Starting from the mid-1800s Russia’s government was in a decline and was desperately trying to cling onto power. This unfortunate political position allowed for cholera to run rife throughout the country in four major epidemics from 1823-1914. Because the government was enacting policy based on trying to “save-face” rather than on trying to save the people, cholera’s spread through the empire was the worst in any European country during that time.

<>Herrmann,David Gaius| a{1962}n{WW1a mlt.hst mltism wrx&mfgR MIC}o{}
*1996:P.NJ,PUP|_The_Arming of Europe and the making of the First World War|>Herrmann.ARMING| ((UO|

*1904:European armies
*1905-1906:European armies and the first Moroccan crisis
*1906-1908:Military effectiveness and modern technology
*1908-1911:Bosnia-Herzegovina annexation crisis and the recovery of Russian power [] No Russian sources
*1911-1912:Second Moroccan crisis and the beginning of German panic []
*1912-1913:Balkan Wars and the spiral of armaments []
*1914:European armies and the outbreak of the First World War
[Summary=] Land-based military power influenced international affairs during the series of diplomatic crises. The naval arms race has been extensively studied, now documentary research in military and state archives in Germany, France, Austria, England, and Italy [shows] previously unexplored effects of changes in the strength of the European [land] armies during this period. Contributes to debates about the causes of the war but also an account of how the European armies adopted the new weaponry of the twentieth century in the decade before 1914, including quick-firing artillery, machine guns, motor transport, and aircraft [but failed to fully integrate these new technical features with old concepts of military tactics and strategy. As everyone notes, the greatest strategic error was the assumption that the war would be over quickly]
Changes in the balance of military power explains why the war began in 1914 = Russia was incapable of waging a European war in the aftermath of its defeat at the hands of Japan in 1904-5, but by 1912 Russia regained its capacity to fight, and an unprecedented land-armaments race began. Consequently, when the July crisis of 1914 developed, the atmosphere of military competition made war far more likely than it would have been a decade earlier

<>Hildermeier,Manfred| a{}
*1978:Koeln-WEN|_Die Sozialrevolutionäre Partei Russlands: Agrarsozialismus und Modernisierung im Zarenreich (1900-1914)| ((noUO| SRs RREV1| rvs))
*1989:Frankfort|_Die_russische Revolution 1905-1921|| ((UO| RREV1 RREV2 RREV3)

<>Hochschild.Adam|_To End All Wars: The Story of Loyalty and Rebellion|>Hochschild.END| ((WW1a WW1c pcx vs-wrx.mvt| ch2 "A Man of No Illusions" [Milner,Alfred], more passim| ch20 Backs to the Wall [includes PRS.pcx] ))

*1993:IUP|>Forging Revolution: Metalworkers, Managers, and the State in St. Petersburg, 1890-1914| ((prl RREV1 mfg ekn.apx stt plc.scx?))

<>Holquist,Peter| a{}
*1997jy:RRe#56,3:445-50| "Anti-Soviet /svodki/ from the Civil War: Surveillance as a Shared Feature of Russian Political Culture"| ((plc.spy Gwrx))

<>Hough,Jerry F| a{}n{SSR mfg.apx KPS Twrl trx CWX R&A}
*1969:|_The_Soviet Perfects: The Local Party Organs in Industrial Decision-Making|
*1986:|_The_Struggle for the Third World: Soviet Debates and American Options|>H.Twrl|

<>Hough,Jerry F., and Merle Fainsodr|
*1979:C.MA,HUP|_How the Soviet Union is Governed| (( ndr gnr.txt| CF=Fainsod| SSR|Chapters 2-5 have hst of plt,frm RREV3 to STL))

<>Hull,Isabel V| a{}n{WW1}o{
*2005:I.NY,CUP|>Hull.DESTRUCTION|_Absolute destruction : military culture and the practices of war in Imperial Germany| ((UO| WW1a GRM mltism mlt.mnt, tUt weaknesses| WW1b defective ddd))
*2014:I.NY,CUP|>Hull.SCRAP|_A scrap of paper : breaking and making international law during the Great War| ((UO| WW1b wrx&irx))

<>Hunt,Barry and >Preston,Adrian|_War Aims and Strategic Policy in the Great War, 1914-1918|>Hunt.AIMS| *1977:| ((WW1b WW1c| noRUS
Soldiers, strategy and war aims in Britain 1914-18 / John Gooch
French war aims and the crisis of the Third Republic / Douglas Johnson
Sir Robert Borden and Canada's war aims / Robert Craig Brown
The American military and strategic policy in World War I / Edward M. Coffman
War aims and strategy: the Italian government and high command 1914-1919 / John Whittam
German war aims 1914-1918 and German policy before the war / Fritz Fischer

<>Hutchinson,John| a{}n{pbl.hlt mdx}o{}
*1990:B.MD,JHUP|_Politics and Public Health in Revolutionary Russia, 1890-1918

<>Hutchinson,John and Smith,Anthony|>H&S.NTNism | *1994:OxUP|>Nationalism| ((ntnism ntn.stt ndr.sbk

pt1 = The question of definition [ntn.stt trx]
Qu'est-ce qu'une nation? / >Renan,Ernest [E-TXT]
The nation / Joseph Stalin
The nation / Max Weber [ntnism.trx]
Nationalism and social communication / Karl W. Deutsch
Primordial and civic ties / Clifford Geertz
The nation as power-container / Anthony Giddens
A nation is a nation, is a state, is an ethnic group, is a ... / Walker Connor
pt2 =  Theories of nationalism
Nationalism and self-determination / Elie Kedourie
Nationalism and modernization / Ernest Gellner
Nationalism and high cultures / Ernest Gellner
The maladies of development / Tom Nairn
The nation as invented tradition / Eric Hobsbawm
Élite competition and nation-formation / Paul R. Brass
Imagined communities / Benedict Anderson
A socio-biological perspective / Pierre Van Den Berghe
The sources of nationalist ideology / John Breuilly
The crisis of dual legitimation / Anthony D. Smith
Cultural nationalism and moral regeneration / John Hutchinson
pt3 = The rise of nations
Old and new nations / Hugh Seton-Watson
Regnal sentiments and medieval communities / Susan Reynolds
Nations before nationalism / John Armstrong
The origins of nations / Anthony D. Smith
When is a nation? / Walker Connor
pt4 = Nationalism in Europe
Western and Eastern nationalisms / Hans Kohn [zpd&EUA ntnism]
Types of European nationalism / Liah Greenfeld
Nationalism in Eastern Europe / Peter Sugar
The rise of ethno-linguistic nationalisms / Eric Hobsbawm
Ethno-regional movements in the West / Michael Hechter and Margaret Levi
pt5 = Nationalism outside Europe [Twrl]
Creole pioneers of nationalism / Benedict Anderson
Dark gods and their rites / Elie Kedourie
National history and its exclusions / Partha Chatterjee
Islam and nationalism / Francis Robinson [ISL AfroAsia ntnism]
Ideologies of delayed development / Mary Matossian
The colonial construction of African nations / Crawford Young [MPR ntn.stt AFR Twrl]
State and nation in African thought / Benyamin Neurberger
Economic nationalism in new states / Harry Johnson
pt6 = Nationalism and the international system [ntnism & tntn.gvt]
Three phases of nationalism / Edward H. Carr
The rise of the nation-state system / Alfred Cobban
Europe and the international state system / Charles Tilly [wrx&irx wrx&ntn.stt irx]
War and nations / Michael Howard [wrx&ntn.stt]
Ethnic conflict in the West / Arend Lijphart [ntn.vs-ntn]
The logic of secessions / Donald Horowitz [ssd.dms.plt]
Irredentist and secessionist challenges / James Mayall [rrr&ssd >rrrist rrr.irx.plt >ssdist ssd.dms.plt| ?~devolution]
Towards a post-communist world / John Armstrong
pt7 = Beyond nationalism?
Ethnic nationalism and post-industrialism / Anthony H. Richmond
Reasserting the polyethnic norm / William H. McNeill
Narrating the nation / Homi Bhabha
Women and the nation-state / Floya Anthias and Nira Yuval-Davis
Europeanness : a new cultural battlefield? / Philip Schlesinger.

<>Husband,William B|
*1990:O.ENG|_Revolution in the Factory: The Birth of the Soviet Textile Industry,1917-1920| ((256p))

<>Ignatieff,Michael| a{}n{}o{}
*2014jy10:NYR:53-5| "Are the Authoritarians Winning?"| rvw~ Haass,R Foreign Policy Begins at Home....| Posen,Barry R, Restraint: A New Foundation...| Micklethwait,John and Wooldridge,Adrian, Fourth Revolution...| and Steiglitz,Joseph, Reforming Taxation to Promote Growth and Equity| ((8x11:WW1 (even tho re.21st.c), deals with big issue =| dms&irx plt MIC))

*1993:EKB|_Istoriia Rossii: Khrestomatiia| ((OWN prm))
*1955-1960:MVA|_Istoriia russkoi ekonomicheskoi mysli| 2vv,2 parts each| ((rfr ekn idl|1,1=Feodalism 1,2=800:861 2,1=pre-monop.cptism 2,2=rest))
*1958:MVA|_Istoriia russkoi kritiki| EBy B. P. Gorodetskii| 2vv+?| ((crt blt))
*:|_Istoriia sotsialisticheskikh uchenii: Sbornik statei| ((UO| sbk scx idl| StSC))

<>Jasny,Naum| a{883}e{967}n{}o{ekn.hst
*1940:Stanford|_Competition among grains|| ((grn.trd))
*1961:CHI|_Soviet Industrialization,1928-1952| ((SSR STL.mfgR))
*1972:Cambridge|_Soviet Economists of the Twenties: Names to be Remembered| ((NEP ekn.svt))
*1976:KS.Lawrence,UPofK|_To_live long enough : the memoirs of Naum Jasny, scientific analyst| EBy Roy and Betty Laird| ((vsp R&A))

<>Johnson,Robert Eugene| a{}
*1979:|_Peasant and Proletarian: The Working Class of Moscow in the Late Nineteenth Century| ((HD8530.M62.J63| krx prl clx))
|>avc & lbx:Zmv xtx [Emmons,Zemstvo]

<>Jones,Adrian| a{955
}m{LaTrobe unv
|>Late-Imperial Russia, an Interpretation: Three Visions, Two Cultures, One Peasantry| Bern, etc:Peter Lang,1997| ((noUO| rfr txt mnt.hst plt.ekn nrd.svt.e xtx: krx| mnt&ddd:ntg, stt & krx all speak))
|>rtl~ ~~FREV w/ RREV

<>Jones,Anthony G/LRF

<>Jones,Robert Edward| a{}
*1973:|_The_Emancipation of the Russian Nobility, 1762-1785| ((
Some interpret Catherine's "emancipation" of the nobility [ID] as a confirmation of their status as a "ruling class". Jones does not. The gentry, as gentry, was not the ruling class in Russia. The emperor and high state officials (chinovnichestvo) were the true ruling class. Chinovniki were those who earned or were granted chin [rank] on the Table of Ranks [ID]. Aristocrats had "insider advantage" in these matters, but aristocrats were not, as aristocrats, the ruling class. Those who held official administrative rank were the ruling class, and the higher the rank the greater the degree of "rule". Catherine simply put land-owning gentry [pomeshchiki] out to pasture, so to speak. Yes, they had lordly ascendancy over villagers out there in the provinces, and these serfs were bound to them. But most pomeshchiki had very few serfs and few of them prospered. If pomeshchiki wanted back in the capitals in an active role, they would have to choose to go the route of state service. They were now no longer legally obligated to do so, but most found it an economic necessity. As one mid-19th-century public figure put it, a non-serving pomeshchik was as rare as a white crow.

<>Josephson,Paul| a{}
*1991:BUC|_Physics and Politics in Revolutionary Russia| ((scs fzz plt.clt 917:41;LGR STL.clt))

<>Julicher, Peter| a{}
*2003:NC Jefferson, McFarland and Co.|_Renegades, Rebels and Rogues under the Tsars| ((

This is a course textbook about tsarist political authorities and their opponents over a 370-year period preceding collapse of the Romanov dynasty in 1917. Colorful and menacing characters gather on all sides -- tsar Ivan IV and Prince Andrei Kurbskii, more than one false Dmitrii, Ivan Bolotnikov, Patriarchs Filaret and Nikon, Archpriest Avvakum, Boyarina Feodosiia Morozova, Regent Sofiia and elite military police, the Strel’tsy, and several Cossack leaders, Stepan Razin, Kondratii Bulavin and Emiliano Pugachev. Later Sergei Nechaev appears as “one of the fiercest revolutionary fanatics in Russian history” [189]. Then terrorists in Narodnaia Volia assassinated tsar-liberator Alexander II. Action is anchored in political institutions and governmental policies. Tsar Aleksei and the disorders of 1648 are understood together. The devastating schism among Russian Orthodox believers is associated with state policy. Aleksei, son of Peter I and heir to the throne, died under torture because of dealings with political opposition. Dissatisfied high state functionaries were leading conspirators against Empress Anna and helped murder emperors Peter III and Paul. Officers of the massive imperial armed forces were dominant figures of political opposition in the 19th century. Father Gapon, labor leader on “Bloody Sunday”, and Dmitrii Bogrov, Prime Minister Petr Stolypin’s assassin, were police agents as well as associates of the terrorist underground. And finally in the catastrophic era of World War One, Grigorii Rasputin and the Empress Alexandra symbolized squalor at highest bureaucratic-administrative levels.

Julicher concludes that the rise of an imperialistic military and police state [mlt], financially insecure and jealous of its prerogatives and thus unwilling to tolerate an independent public sphere, caused and conditioned these episodes [255-9]. Old-Believers arose from the same larger institutional matrix that promoted terrorism in the Social Revolutionary Battle Organization. The Decembrists and Nicholas I might be thought of as peas from the same pod.

Julicher’s intended audience appears to be US citizens of high-school age. [mdn=] The book presumes a casual grasp of “democratic traditions necessary for a modern state” [v]. While “principled dissidents” (implying a distinction not spelled out) have been harassed and vilified in America and “other western countries”, still opposition there has been respected and has sometimes succeeded. In Russia, however, “such cases are non-existent” because no “loyal opposition” has been possible. Political powers have treated criticism and resistance as treason; officials attacked opponents with militant ferocity [5].

Casual reference above to “traditions” detracts from the book’s more discrete emphasis on institutions and policies. And the conventional but deceptive word “western” might create the erroneous impression that military/police statism and vigorous, extreme resistance are altogether unique to Russia, or characteristic of the “non-western” world alone. In order to judge these issues, young people need to know more about “democratic traditions” and the ups and downs of “Western” values. The Thirty Years War, for example, could provide context for judging Russian 17th century politics. Similarly comparison of English treatment of the Irish, and Irish response, with Russian treatment of its imperial subjects, and their “roguish” response, might prove suggestive. Julicher finesses 20th and early 21st century issues. He opens with a brief history of the Soviet Revolution, and he more than once lightly associates violence and outrage up to 1917 with the extremes of subsequent Stalinism and Communist Party rule. But what of the last twenty years, from Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin to Vladimir Putin? It might be best to think of these as discussion points that could be raised with students fortunate enough to be taught by Julicher or his textbook.

The publisher must be scolded for second-rate proof reading. Many misspellings and typographic errors mar this presentation: Karakazov for Karakozov, and Prizhkov (etc.) for Pryzhov, just to mention two. Nechaev is a big part of the story, but he does not make it into the index. Many excellent illustrations are taken from Russian-language sources, but these are often identified in imprecise transliteration. Three-fourths of the endnotes cite no sources. They simply extend the main narrative, back where students will not read them. To counterbalance this, a good map [xi] helps locate most of the action and underscores the wholesome awareness throughout the text that the frontier plays a vital role in the story. Bibliographies reveal Julicher’s debt to The Modern Encyclopedia of Russian and Soviet History, and they guide students to useful additional reading.

<>Kahan,Arcadius| a{}
*1965:CHI| In Education and Economic Development| “The 'Hereditary Workers' Hypothesis and the Development of a Factory Labor Force in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Russia”| ((krx-prl wrk clx))

<>Kappeler,Andreas| a{}
*2001:|_The_Russian Empire: A Multiethnic History| ((

Andreas Kappeler's book [...] is an ambitious attempt at presenting the history of Tsarist Russia from the perspective of the Empire's ethnic minorities. Other standard texts, such as Nicholas Riasanovsky's "A History of Russia" or George Vernadsky's book by the same name, are invaluable for gaining an understanding of the broad sweep of Russian history, including accounts of the reigns of various monarchs, the plight of serfs, and the challenges that the Empire faced in its attempt to modernize and survive the era of liberalization and industrialization. Such accounts, however, can in some ways be called truly "Russian" -- or at least Russo-centric -- histories. That is to say that even large ethnic minorities such as the Poles and the Ukrainians are treated in a somewhat cursory fashion and they only enter the narrative when they become important to Russians or the Tsarist government. Other, smaller ethnic groups are frequently given an even more summary treatment: in the edition of Vernadsky's "A History of Russia" on my desk (Fifth Edition), for examples, the country Georgia receives only one mention in the index, and "Georgians" as a people receive two; the Caucasus as a whole warrants only twenty-three mentions in a nearly five-hundred page monograph.

Kappeler's book, by contrast, seeks to turn this situation on its head. As the title suggests, this is an account of Russian Imperial history that places the Empire's ethnic minorities at the center, which is not unreasonable given that by the time of the 1897 census (which is given a reasonably thorough treatment -- see Kappeler, Ch. 8) Russians comprised only 44% of the total population (Kappeler, 397).

The book begins in the 16th century, when Ivan IV ("The Terrible") began to conquer the various Khanates that had descended from the Golden Horde and incorporate their territory into Muscovy. By the end of the third chapter, the reader has arrived at the 19th century. Poland, Ukraine, Bessarabia and Belorussia have been added to the Russian lands and Muscovy has become the Russian Empire. [mdn=] The steppe tribes have been mostly subdued and the first expeditions into Siberia have been undertaken. Chapter four pauses for a moment to take stock of the situation, ending with a section entitled "The Character of the Pre-modern Russian Multi-ethnic Empire."

As Kappeler's narrative progresses through the 19th century, more and more territory, including the Caucasus and Central Asia, as well as the Far East, are incorporated into the Russian Empire. Unfortunately for Russia, these territorial additions temporally coincided with the awakening of nationalist sentiment in the Empire, which arose first among the Poles and eventually spreading to the Georgians and Armenians as well as the various groups of Caucasian and Central Asian Muslim groups.

The final four chapters of the book, then, detail the challenges that newly self-aware national minorities posed to the stability and cohesiveness of the Russian state, as well as the various means by which the Imperial government sought to defuse or suppress nationalist sentiment. Kappeler does a reasonable job in discussing the inconsistencies in policies toward national groups: some were subject to intense "Russification,"and banned from learning their own languages in schools while others escaped relatively unscathed. Some, like the Jews, became victims of insidious propaganda and violence. Kappeler also shows how these policies varied in degree over time, with some areas like Finland and Poland suffering periods of relative repression only to have restrictions later relaxed.

During the revolutionary period and continuing into the First World War, the national question became even more vital, as national minorities were frequently seen as undermining the stability of the state, even after the so-called "Springtime of the Peoples" after 1905, when national groups were able to form political parties and have representation in the Duma. In large part, this was due to the fact that peripheral areas were frequently the sites of elevated levels of unrest and violence. In the Duma, national groups as a whole represented somewhat less than one-half of the total, and Kappeler points out that in many cases national representatives were unable to even attend proceedings, meaning that their power was further diluted. Nevertheless, Jewish, Ukrainian, and Polish groups were able to have their grievances aired in the Duma, even though their demands were seldom met. Increasing Russian nationalism meant that, by the time of the Third Duma, the institution was explicitly conceived of as a "Russian" institution.

If Kappeler's book succeeds due to its broad focus -- and I would argue that it does, if only for the fact that it fills a gaping hole in general "Empire-wide" historiography on Tsarist Russia -- it also fails because of it. Too often the book almost falls into the trap of listing events and its wide sweep means that there is little space for lengthy discussions of particular personalities or policies. This means that the book is mostly useful for getting a general sense of Russian history from a "minority" perspective. Unfortunately, its utility as a jumping-off point for further research is also inhibited by the fact that the vast bulk of its bibliography is in German and Russian. Non-German or Russian-speakers, especially at the undergraduate level, will therefore find themselves frustrated by both the book's lack of depth and the fact that it provides few clues as to where to go next to pursue more comprehensive research.

These caveats aside, "The Russian Empire: A Multi-ethnic History" is nevertheless a valuable addition to the literature and a useful counterpart to the more Russo-centric accounts of Russian history one finds in other standard texts.

<>Kassow,Samuel D| a{}
*--GO Cowles,Between

*1989:BUC|_Students, Professors and the State in Tsarist Russia| E-TXT| ((480p| unv prf std stt RUS2 mainly 899:901;unv.rbx thru RREV1|unv as tUt threat to principles of stt [14-15]

[This book] details the politics and policies of the University systems under tsarist control. Through this model, Kassow explores the causes behind the revolution, as well as attempts to define the identity of each branch involved. Students centers mainly on the time period 1899 through 1917, but it also delves heavily into the events that lead up to this period of reform.

The book begins by describing the alienation and fear held by the state towards the professorship, and visa versa. As Kassow aptly explains, “The government tended to take a utilitarian view of higher education.” The government saw the university system as an opportunity to train loyal civil servants who would move on to become patriotic members of society, such as lawyers or doctors. Within this structure there were several types of universities such as “closed schools, military academies, specialized institutes, women's institutes, polytechnic institutes, commercial institutes, private universities and institutes such as Moscow's Shaniavskii University, and state universities.” The majority of these institutions fell under the rule of the Ministry of Education. By the 1860s, the policies and politics of the Russian education system had become intertwined in the growing dissonant movements.

Kassow describes that the government was unsure as to how to continue to deal with education. Conservatives wanted to turn the universities into closed institutions, while others held up the example of Oxford and Cambridge, where the main goal of the university experience was moral education. Their first attempts at a laissez-faire system of control over the universities through the 1863 Statute was short lived. This was quickly replaced by the University Statute of 1884, which stripped many academic freedoms from the hands of professorship and put them firmly in control of the Ministry of Education. Despite the tightening grip of the government on the education system, it wasn’t until the mid 1900s that schools would completely lose their autonomy and become satellites of the Ministry.

The student movements of the 1850s, leading up to the 1905 revolution are presented as a prominent factor in the evolution of the education system. Kassow describes, “Russian universities were the incubators of a student subculture, a meeting place where thousands of provincial youth, often poor but having little in common with the popular masses and even less with the ruling elite, joined a proud new social group, the studenchestvo, and then left to become teachers, doctors, lawyers, civil servants, or, in a few cases, embittered revolutionaries.” Some individuals within the student body believed that there needed to be a balance between self-interest and the self-sacrificing ideals of the collective. As the 19th century came to a close however, there were a growing number of students who believed that the whole idea behind studenchestvo was false. They saw the role of the student as an individual set on their own path, each being vastly different from one another. In other words, studenchestvo began to be seen as, “an exercise in self-delusion, a last chance to play with idealism and courage before the students became judges, civil servants, and comfortable lawyers.”

Students does an excellent job outlining the knife’s edge that the professorship walked during the 1850s-1910s. Suspected by both the student body (for being too soft) and the government (for planting the seeds of revolution in the mind of the students), the professors strode to define their own roll in the education system. Many of the professors saw themselves as researchers whose success lay in, “the need for academic freedom, secure power within the academic structure, and a free hand in enforcing internal university discipline.” While Kassow asserts that professors wanted academic freedom, they were frustrated by the student movements, and would have been content to stay within the boundaries set by the government, as long the government didn’t completely impede day to day teachings.

Kassow places the student movements, specifically the events which lead to Bloody Sunday as a paradigm shift in Soviet history. “Bloody Sunday was a turning point for both students and the teachers. The scale was much larger than previous uprisings as well as the scope which included the professorship.” In some sense Bloody Sunday forced the hand of the professorship to side with the students. From here Kassow explores the last days under the tsar and the role that higher education played throughout.

This book is an excellent resource to help understand the conflicts of natal and assigned identity within each section of the Universities. I would recommend this book to anyone who is looking for information pertaining to the student movements of 1899-1905. Finally, this book contains a great amount of raw data concerning the make up of university enrollment. A great and insightful read overall.

<>Katsainos,Charles T|>Katsainos.PSLV| *1951:WDC,Georgetown University Dissertation|_The_Theory and Practice of Russian Panslavism (in the Light of Russia's Expansion in the Balkans until 1912)| ((UO| mnt idl IDL irx BAL WW1a| G/APL/Ignat'ev,N))

<>Kazemzadeh,Firuz| n{irx MPR CAS}o{}
*1968:NH.CN,YUP|_Russia and Britain in Persia, 1864-1914: A Study in Imperialism| ((IRN ENG WW1a
*2010:|_Borba za Zakavkaz'e: 1917-1921| ((CAU))

<>Kedourie,Elie|_Nationalism| *1961| ((UO| ))

<>Keegan,John| a{}n{}o{mlt.hstian}
*:|_The_First World War|>Keegan.WW1| ((OWN))

<>Keep,John L. H| a{}n{}o{}
*:| “The Bolshevik Revolution: Prototype or Myth?| In Anatomy of Communist Takeovers: 46-60| ((xrx HX518.S8A522))
*1976:NYC|Keep.RREV|_The_Russian Revolution: A Study in Mass Mobilization
*1977:Coliumbus OH| “The Great October Socialist Revolution”. In Samuel H. Baron and Nancy W. Heer,eds., Windows on the Russian Past: Essays on Soviet Historiography since Stalin: 139-56
*:|_Power and the People: Collected Articles and Essays on Russian History| ndr plt.clt
*:|_Soldiers of the Tsar: Army and Society in Russia, 1462-1874| ((mlt))

<>Khristoforov,Igor G|
--|_“Aristokraticheskaia” oppozitsiia Velikim reformam....| (( Alan Kimball review [E-TXT] Daniel Field review [E-TXT]))

<>Kingston-Mann,Esther| a{}
*1985:O.ENG| Lenin and the Problem of Marxist Peasant Revolution| ((OWN Mrx Lnn krx|Is there a NYC:1983 ed.? noWbr))
>Kingston-Mann,Esther and Timothy >Mixter eds|_Peasant Economy, Culture, and Politics of European Russia| ((ndr.sbk krx vlg))

<>Knight,Amy W| a{}
*1977:L.ENG| The Participation of Women in the Revolutionary Movement in Russia from 1890 to 1914|Dissertation...??| (( wmn RREV1))
*1988:B.MA| The KGB: Police and Politics in the Soviet Union| ((hv8224.k57| plc USA5))

<>Kochan,Lionel| a{}
*1966:L.ENG|_Russia in Revolution, 1890-1918| (( gnr.txt RREV Wbr))
*1970:O.ENG|_The_Jews in Soviet Russia since 1917|Kochan,ed| ((ndr gnr ntn Jwx))

<>Koenker,D., and W. G. Rosenberg, and R.G., Suny, eds|_Party, State, and Society in the Russian Civil War: Exploration in Social History| *1989:B.IN,IUP| ((Gwrx ndr.sbk))

<>LaFore,Laurence|_The_Long Fuse: An interpretation of the origins of World War I| *1965:Ph.PA,Lippincott| ((UO| WW1a ToC =
The lost utopia
The Austrian anomaly
The Europe of the armed camps
The "encirclement" of Germany
The bones of a Pomeranian Grenadier
The third man falls sick
The breakdown of Europe))

<>Lampert,Evgenii| a{}
*1965:Oxford|_Sons Against Fathers: Studies in Russian Radicalism and Revolution| ((Qrn Dbr Psr idl

The eighteen sixties was a turbulent decade as the effects of emancipation rippled through society. In Sons Against Fathers, E. Lampert provides an analysis on how people, philosophies and events contributed to the revolutionary thought and the recognition of a need for change immediately after the emancipation of serfs. Although action would not be taken until Russia was on the brink of revolution, the inspiration for revolution was deeply rooted in the discontent from this era. This book dissects some of the main emerging philosophies, and gives context to their formation.

The political setting prior to the emancipation of the serfs in 1861 was “top heavy” with bureaucratic weight. The rigid system left little room for the society to adjust with changing times and a continually expanding world. There was an immense potential for development as Tsar Alexander II ascended to the throne, but with a lack of direction the possibilities were thrown away. Attempting to be proactive, emancipation was granted before it was taken by force. This political move proved ineffective, and hindered government control rather than motivated it to advance Russia into the next steps of reform. With a glimpse of freedom, the government could no longer keep such immense reigns on the public, and the influence of public opinion began to play a greater role.

The immediate reaction to emancipation was a calm somberness as new concerns for society arose, and a need for solutions emerged. With a slowly growing need for industrial workers and an accumulation of debt due to redemption payments, jobless peasants were unable to adapt to their new status. The few gains made on an intellectual level with an increase in public opinion were retracted with the tsar’s subsequent reactionary measures, which inhibited the ability to publish unapproved documents or meet publically. Lampert views this response as not only failing to fix Russia’s growing problems, but it became a “symptom of the disease” itself.

With continuing countryside rebellions and an expansion of Russian philosophical thought, Tsar Alexander’s attempt to consolidate autocratic power merely provoked opposition. Lampert argues that distinctly opinionated groups formed - conservatives, liberals, radicals, and the church. Each division exposed deeply rooted dilemmas, and are all proof of the inadequacies of an unyielding system. Once formed, public opinion expressed through these groups could not be removed from society. The fundamental bases of the formation of these groups allowed a continuing recognition of a need for change, and provided the inspiration for it to take place.

To show the formation of opinions and how they fit into this setting, Lampert describes the intellectual product of the eighteen sixties through three men. Their contributions helped to shape the period, and they each took a stand outside of government consent. The first of these individuals is Nikolai Chernyshevsky. A muckraking journalist who wrote for the Contemporary, Chernyshevsky identified with the characters he wrote about, and appealed to logic as well as emotions. In a time where the influence of literature was crucial for the intellectual and social evolution of Russia, he contributed to the hopes for a revolution, and fueled discontent with the condition of politics. Lampert identifies the draw of people to Chernyshevsky was their ability to relate to his characters – he appealed to understanding on an intellectual level as well as a moral. The topics of his work mirrored the situations of society, and Chernyshevsky was able to make his own impact.

Similar to Chernyshevsky, Nikolai Dobrolyubov was a literary critic and journalist, and wrote for the Contemporary as well. He presented few original ideas due to his close relationship with Chernyshevsky, but he still managed to have an impact of his own. He is known for being a social analyst, and disagreed that a society of sympathizers was ideal. He instead maintained that hope itself would lead to greater understanding. He asserted that history was created by the conflict of the rational progressive and the irrational reactionary, and sided with progress because a stagnant society would be incapable of movement. The driving force of movement would come from the unsteady base of society – the peasantry.

Finally, the last character Lampert discusses is Dimitry Pisarev. Differing greatly from Dobrolyubov, he focused on individual behavior as opposed to inspiring the masses. Labels such as “liberal” and “westerner” failed to characterize men, but instead imposed uniformity on an individual. He believed that a model for mankind would be a “new man,” someone that would not reflect unoriginal principles, but rather have spontaneous and genuine morality. Merely four years after his death, Pisarev’s work was the popular source of debates amongst the younger generation, in part due to the fact that he was a crystallizer of thought, rather than an original thinker. He strongly based his beliefs in science, and as a writer he aimed to teach rather than provoke emotion.

Lampert’s analysis removes the stigma of radical liberalism often associated with these three intellects. By doing this, he is able to provide insight into the true contribution of their philosophies on the rapidly changing political culture. Due to the mass growth of opinion, the eighteen sixties had a continuing im+pact on progressive thinking and presented issues that would challenge conventional attitudes, laying fertile ground for revolution.

<>Lane,David Stuart| a{}n{xtx bxo SDs pbl clx RREV1| cvc.pbl SSR Grb Prs}o{}
*1969:Assen|_The_Roots of Russian Communism: a Social and Historical Study of Russian Social-Democracy,1898-1907|
*1992:LND,Rutledge|_Soviet Society Under Perestroika| Complete revision of original 1990 edition| ((dk288.L36))

<>Lane,David Stuart,ed|>LRF| a{}n{ndr.sbk Prs G.rfm}o{}
*1992: Aldershot ENG,Edward Elgar|_Russia in Flux: The Political and Social Consequences of Reform|
Lane on SSR elites|
Rahr,Alexander on Top Leadership(MVA & gbx)
Slider,Darrell on gvt in gbx|
Mitrokhin,Sergei on pbl grp~ & new dmk (CF:plt.clt table abv)|
Jones,Anthony on avc|
Tolz,Vera on jrn & mxx|
Teague,Elizabeth on prl|
Abrahams,Ray on fmy skz in EST|
Riordan,Jim on chd|
Browning,Genia & Armorer Wason on wmn & plt|
Kryshtanovskaia,Olga on bzn elite|
McAuley,Alastair on bdn grp~|
Andrusz,Greg on dms.rfm & cvc.pbl conflict

<>LaPierre,Brian|_Hooligans in Khrushchev’s Russia: Defining Policy and Producing Deviance during the Thaw| ((

After the death of Stalin, the period of Russian rule under Khrushchev, who much like Stalin used tactics of detainment and punishment as means to garner order and control within Russia. The book itself is divided into: introducing the existence of hooliganism within Russian culture, Private Matters or Public Crimes, the Campaign against hooliganism, the Krushchev-Era campaign to mobilize obshchestvennost (the fight against Hooliganism), and the rise and fall of the soft line on petty crime.

The introduction serves the purpose of the Russian government collectively assimilating all crime under the banner of hooliganism, whether it is murder, animal cruelty, and or domestic abuse. The introduction focuses on the induction of hooliganism in Europe in contrast towards how Russian policies altered its perception on hooliganism over the course of the 20th century. At the start of the introduction, LaPierre suggests the creation of the terminology of hooliganism within Europe: “in modern English, ‘hooligan’ is a term for ‘young street tough or member of a street gang… In the Soviet Union, hooliganism (khuliganstvo) was more than a violent soccer-based subculture. It was a crime: the serious crime of showing disrespect to the values of Soviet Society” P.1-2). Over the course of the Krushshchev era, Russian authorities arrested millions of Soviet citizens for crimes of hooliganism. Much like the Great Fear under Stalin, millions of Russians were arrested for actions deemed to be dangerous against the state. LaPierre suggests that one of twenty-five Russians were arrested for acts of hooliganism, thereby leaving the entire state under constant fear of detainment. Overall, LaPierre introduction offers to find social and rational reasons for the overwhelming acts of hooliganism. By explaining cultural and historical trends of Russian history, LaPierre opts to discover hooliganism not as a new trend emerging during the Krushchev era but rather a continued existence through the Soviet Union.

The first chapter explains the way in which the Soviet government came to rationalize and collectivize hooligans. The chapter identifies numerous ways the Soviet government saw hooliganism, and the initial practices set to discourage hooliganism throughout the state.

The second chapter, explains the evolution of hooliganism during the Krushchev era. The chapter focuses on how hooliganism within Russia evolved from public acts of discourse towards private. This evolution according to LaPierre was a drastic change within Soviet culture as result the borders of prosecution were not clear, therefore leaving prosecuting offenders unclear. What emerged was a more controlled state regarding domestic affairs.

The third chapter explains Soviet authorities attempts to influence and hopefully halt crimes of hooliganism. LaPierre states that the Soviet state instead of becoming a more regulated government against these crimes loosened their punishments, leaving harsher punishments for the more serious crimes. This can be seen with the creation of the term ‘petty hooliganism’ for crimes of cursing and drinking in public. These guidelines of hooliganism offered less severe punishments for the offenders, however, instead of curbing the advancement of hooliganism the creation of petty hooliganism bore witness to millions of Russians charged with the offense.

The fourth chapter explains the emergence of the fight against hooliganism. The chapter focuses on how Soviet citizens opted to fight the system of hooliganism, through grassroots and local efforts. Chapter 5 focuses on the next evolution of Krushchev policy following the first attempt at petty hooliganism. Unlike the first introduction of petty hooliganism, the new ‘soft-line’ approach opted to avoid prison sentences for offenders and rather re-educate and or re-form the criminal. LaPierre uses both the accession and demise of the soft-line punishment: it was created to allow Soviet citizens to return to their work and families faster than before, however, it created a system in which judges and officials used the new policy to not punish severe punishments to create better statistics of crime throughout Russia.


<>Laqueur,Walter| a{}
*:NYC,Harper/Collins,??|_Black Hundred: The Rise of the Extreme Right in Russia| ((B100 rxn plt.mvt))
*1968| “Revolution”|International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 13:501-507

<>Laruelle,Marlene| a{}n{EUA}o{
*:|_Russian Eurasianism: An Ideology of Empire

As has been pointed out in multiple recent monographs on the topic, Eurasianism has long been an under-examined aspect of the history of Russian political thought, at least in monograph form. Marlene Laruelle’s Russian Eurasianism: An Ideology of Empire, is one of the first English language attempts to rectify this deficiency. Having already written on other aspects of Eurasianism, including its origins, Laruelle here seeks to examine more contemporary strains of what she calls “Neo-Eurasianism,” a movement that she argues is distinct from the thought of the interwar Eurasianists.

Laruelle’s primary research purpose in this work is to discover the origins of contemporary Eurasianist theory, and to ascertain what influence it has on contemporary Russian and Eurasian political discourse, and more importantly, how it built its influence. To this end, she first briefly establishes the origins of Eurasianism in the 1920s, before examining three prominent thinkers associated with contemporary Eurasianism, before finally moving into a discussion of Eurasianism’s broader impact within Eurasia itself. This last part focuses on Russian Muslims, Kazakhstan, and Turkey.

For the interwar Eurasianists, geography, and not any other marker of identity, was the most important element of Eurasia and Eurasianism. Eurasianists believed that the common heritage of the steppe united the peoples of the former Russian Empire, and was a more important identifier than nationality, ethnicity, or religion. This ideology was well suited to the world the interwar Eurasianists found themselves thrown into after the collapse of the Russian Empire.

One of the main arguments Laruelle makes is that contemporary Neo-Eurasianists are not, in fact, directly linked to their forbears in the interwar Eurasianist movement. On the contrary, she argues that the original Eurasianist movement was a response to a very specific set of circumstances (Italian Fascism, the Russian Revolution, and the “Decline of the West” theories popular at the time), while the contemporary movement, while formed in somewhat similar circumstances, came into being in a very different ideological context. This argument leads into one of her most interesting contentions, that interwar Eurasianism as a philosophy is not indigenous to Eurasia, rather, it is a “Western” philosophy, that owes more to ideas such as fascism and the philosophy of Hegel. She argues that this is also true of many contemporary strains of Neo-Eurasianism as well. While men such as Alexander Dugin may not agree with the conclusions of work such as Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations, they accept many of its premises, such as cultural determinism.

Laruelle also argues that the Eurasianists were never able to reconcile their desires for a unified Eurasia, as well as their stated respect for other regional institutions, such as “Eastern” religions, with their desire to view Russia, and Russians themselves, as the leading partner in Eurasia. While they argued for Eurasia as a natural, independent construct, they were unable to truly give up their feelings of Russian Nationalism. Contemporary Russian Neo-Eurasianists frequently hold even stronger views on the subject, though Laruelle notes that Dugin has been willing to promote economic Eurasianism within Turkey while downplaying his more Nationalist Russo-centric views. This flexibility (some might say tendency towards contradiction) is part of why Eurasianism remains important, even if in a very different form from its original interwar roots.

Ultimately, Laruelle is successful in showing that contemporary Neo-Eurasianism, while occasionally influenced by the original interwar movement, is a recent ideological development. Just as the interwar Eurasianist movement was designed to meet the ideological requirements of the Russian émigré community, Neo-Eurasianism, both in its Russian and non-Russian forms seeks to meet the needs of contemporary Russia, Kazakhstan, and Turkey. That Eurasianism has been adopted outside of Russia, however, can be seen as a sign of the interwar Eurasianist’s success in crafting a flexible ideology that provides an alternate framework for viewing the world.


<>Leonard, Carol|
*:|_Agrarian Reform in Russia: The Road from Serfdom| ((UO| Stp.rfm krx skz| NB! Skidelsky, Road from Serfdom))

<>Lerner,Warren|_Karl Radek: The Last Internationalist| ((Ntx3 RREV3 Gwrx))

*1963mr:JGO#??:??| “Russian Bureaucratic Opinion in the Wake of the 1905 Revolution”
*1965de:JMH#??:??| “Peter Arkad'evich Stolypin: A Political Appraisal”| ((Stp stt.srv RREV1 Dmx2 Dmx3))
*1940:CN.YUP| The Second Duma: A Study of the Social Democratic Party and the Russian Constitutional Experiment| ((SDs))
*1973:CN Hamden|_Third Duma, Election and Profile| ((Dmx3

After the collapse of the Second Duma, Russia was a nation of changing ideas and many fundamentally different political philosophies. Among the large, frustrated peasant base was a growing call for Marxist and Socialist beliefs. Already viewing the parliamentary system as nothing more than a compromise with the people, the Tsar sought to assure that the Third Duma would be a more conservative body cleansed of these “untrustworthy elements” that had caused the dissolution of the previous two Dumas.

With this purpose in mind he issued the Election Laws on June 3, 1907 to vastly limit the elections and, by means of a system of gerrymandering and limiting registration to property owners, create the envisioned conservative Duma. This law decreased the peasantry's electoral strength by one half. This caused many people of the lower class to become apathetic of the political process now that there was little chance of getting their voice heard.

The Law also had an effect on the political parties of Russia. There was a multitude of different political parties, yet most that were elected to Third Duma seemed to be struggling with the same problem: maintaining stability. While conservatives were struggling with maintaining the status quo, parties like the Octobrists were struggling with maintaining social stability in a time when liberals seemed to be creating a revolutionary situation in Russia. After June 3 1907 popular opposition to the government voiced by the Duma became “unthinkable”. As a result, while many in the Octobrists secretly wished for reforms, they instead spent most of their energy cooperating with the regime and limiting excessive speech that would hurt the image of the Duma. For this reason, among liberals, they were known as the party of “sad necessity”.

Levin states that “Only Social Democrats stayed strongly opposed to the government”. Landlords mobilized under the idea of defeating the ideas of the reformers while many liberal parties struggled with intra-party struggles. Violations at the polls and low turnout from the lower classes aided the conservative victory, to the satisfaction of the Tsar. More than anything, the election and the election results clarified a growing problem in Russia: growing government repression and irreconcilable differences between the peasantry and Russian State.

<>Lewin,Moshe| a{}n{krx STL.skz Lnn NEP}o{}
*1968:NYC|_Russian Peasants and Soviet Power: A Study of Collectivization|
*1985::NYC:|_The_Making of the Soviet System: Essays in the Social History of Interwar Russia|
--|_Lenin's Last Struggle| ((Contains critical 1921:1924; primary documents))
--|_Political Undercurrents in Soviet Economic Debates| ((full Soviet era))
--| Social Background of Stalin [Tucker,Stalinism]
*2009:| Essay on the Russian and Soviet past and its meaning for the future

>Lincoln,W.Bruce on SBR GO/bbl/REV

<>Lipkes,Jeff|_Rehearsals : The German Army in Belgium, August 1914| *2007:Leuven U.P| ((UO| WW1b BEL|
Detailed narrative history of the 1914au:German invasion of Belgium [SAC] as it affected civilians. Based on extensive eyewitness testimony| Events in and around the towns of Liège, Aarschot, Ardenne, Tamines, Dinant, and Leuven, where the worst of the German depredations occurred. Without any legitimate pretext, German soldiers killed nearly 6,000 non-combatants, including women and children, and burned some 25,000 homes and other buildings))

<>Macey,David A. J| a{}n{stt&krx tUt StpP S.rfm RREV1}o{}
*1987:D.IL,NIUP|_Government and Peasant in Russia,1861-1906: The Prehistory of the Stolypin Reforms|

<>Maiolo,Joseph|_Cry Havoc: How the arms race drove the world to war, 1931-1941| ((8x11:WW1 where 1931 rejected as starting point = Better (1)WW1 mfgR wrx [w/its pre-wrx MIC] (2)WW1 ekn collapse (3)Malicious and dysfunctional Versailles trt (4)Then comes 1930s MIC| NB! all the debate on role of WW1a MIC))

<>Matossian,Mary| a{}n{trx mfgR ekn.bkwess Twrl}
*1958ap:Economic Development and Cultural Change#6,3:217-28| Reprint in KtsJH.PC:252-64| “Ideologies of Delayed Industrialization: Some Tensions and Ambiguities”|
In VP9

<>Male,D. J| a{}
*1971:C.ENG, CUP|_Russian Peasant Organization before Collectivization: A Study of Commune and Gathering, 1925-1930| (( vlg.o krx orx vlg.sxd NEP))

<>Masur,Gerhard| a{1901}e{1975}n{}o{
*1970:NYC,Basic Books|>Masur.BRL|_Imperial Berlin| ((UO| BRL grd MPR wrx&clt| ToC =
To the Brandenburg gate
From kingdom to empire
The boom years
Berlin society
"World city? perhaps"
Writers, journalists, and scholars
Berlin and the arts
War and revolution:257-95 [wrx&REV WW1] G/1912no04))

<>Matern,Frederick| "The Discourse of Civilization in the Works of Russia’s New Eurasianists: Lev Gumilev and Alexander Panarin" [E-TXT] ((EUA))

<>May,Timothy Michael|>May.MONGOL|_The_Mongol conquests in world history| *2012:LND,Reaktion| ((UO|
The Mongol Empire (c. 1200-1350) can be seen as marking the beginning of the modern age, and of globalization as well. While communications between the extremes of Eurasia existed prior to the Mongols, they were infrequent and often through intermediaries. The rise of the Mongol Empire changed everything; through their conquests the Mongols swept away dozens of empires and kingdoms and replaced them with the largest contiguous empire in history. While the Mongols were an extremely destructive force in the premodern world, the Mongol Empire had stabilizing effects on the social, cultural and economic life of the inhabitants of the vast territory, allowing merchants and missionaries to transverse Eurasia. This book examines the many ways in which the conquests were a catalyst for change, including changes and advancements in warfare, food, culture, and scientific knowledge. Even as Mongol power declined, its influence continued. The memory of the Empire fired the collective imagination of the region, such as the desire for luxury goods and spices that launched Columbus's voyage to the land of the Khan, the unification of China for the first time in 300 years, and the innovations in art that were manifested in the masterpieces of the Renaissance. This book offers coverage of the entire empire [?THE empire?], rather than a more regional approach [IE=MNG~ a unitary MPR]

<>McCaffray,Susan Purves| a{}n{RS2 RREV1 mfg obx nrg.c tkh ntg, cptists w/RUS face }o{}
*1996:D.IL:NIUP|_The_Politics of industrialization in tsarist Russia : The Association of Southern Coal and Steel Producers, 1874-1914| ((RUS2 1874:Represented nearly 60 firms responsible for RUS most nrg.c and steel production in south))

<>McDaniel,Tim| a{}
*1988:B.CA, UCP|_Autocracy,Capitalism, and Revolution in Russia| ((HD8526.M385| trx stt cpt rvs RREV|Wbr??))

<>McDonald,David M| a{}
*1992:C.ENG,CUP|>McDonald.UNITED|_United Government and Foreign Policy in Russia, 1900-1914| ((RREV1 WW1a GO/SAC/1909au03 for irx&dms.plt Prime Minister Petr Stolypin [StpP] vs-Imperial insiders and their influence on Russian foreign policy| Foreign Minister A.P. Izvol'skii [>IzvAP] ))

<>McKean,Robert B| a{}n{Dmx3 Dmx4 cst prl
*1977|_Russian Constitutional Monarchy, 1907-1917
*1990|_St.Petersburg Between the Revolutions: Workers and Revolutionaries, June 1907-February 1917

<>McMeekin,Sean| a{1974}n{WW1a}o{
*2011:C.MA,HUP Belknap|_The_Russian Origins of the First World War|>McMeekin.ORIGINS| ((8x11:WW1a = EVANS rvw~| WW1b = ch8 "Partitioning the Ottoman Empire" [] & ch9 "1917: The Tsarist Empire at Its Zenith" [] pp. 194-233

In Yavuz.WAR

*2013:NYC,Basic Books|_July 1914: Countdown to War|>McMeekin.JULY| ((UO 8x11: WW1a = EVANS rvw~| CF=Otte

[*1914je28:] Sarajevo: Sunday, 28 June 1914 -- Reactions. Vienna: anger, not sympathy
St. Petersburg: no quarter given
Paris and London: unwelcome interruption
Berlin: sympathy and impatience
[*1914jy05:jy06;] Countdown. The Count Hoyos mission to Berlin: Sunday-Monday, 5-6 July
[*1914jy07:] War council in Vienna (I) : Tuesday, 7 July [#1]
[*1914jy08:jy17;] Radio silence: 8-17 July
[*1914jy18:] Enter Sazonov: Saturday, 18 July
[*1914jy19:] War council in Vienna (II) : Sunday, 19 July [#2]
[*1914jy20:] Poincaré meets the Tsar: Monday, 20 July
[*1914jy21:] Sazonov's threat: Tuesday, 21 July
[*1914jy22:jy23;] Champagne summit: Wednesday-Thursday, 22-23 July
[*1914jy23:] Anti-ultimatum and ultimatum: Thursday, 23 July
[*1914jy24:] Sazonov strikes: Friday, 24 July
[*1914jy25:] Russia, France, and Serbia stand firm: Saturday, 25 July
[*1914jy26:] Russia prepares for war: Sunday, 26 July
[*1914jy27:] The Kaiser returns: Monday, 27 July
[*1914jy28:] "You have got me into a fine mess" : Tuesday, 28 July
[*1914jy29:] "I will not be responsible for a monstrous slaughter!" : Wednesday, 29 July
[*1914jy30:] Slaughter it is: Thursday, 30 July
[*1914jy31:] Last Chance Saloon: Friday, 31 July
[*1914au01:] "Now you can do what you want" : Saturday, 1 August
[*1914au02:] Britain wakes up to the danger: Sunday, 2 August
[*1914au03:] Sir Edward Grey's big moment: Monday, 3 August
[*1914au04:] World war, no going back: Tuesday, 4 August [GBR ENG joins fray]
The question of responsibility.
When a Serbian-backed assassin gunned down Archduke Franz Ferdinand in late June 1914, the world seemed unmoved
Even Ferdinand's own uncle, Franz Josef I, was notably ambivalent about the death of the Hapsburg heir, saying simply, "It is God's will"
Certainly, there was nothing to suggest that it would lead to conflict much less a world war of such massive and horrific proportions that it would fundamentally reshape the course of human events
July 1914, WW1 might have been avoided entirely had it not been for a small group of statesmen who, in the month after the assassination, plotted to use Ferdinand's murder as the trigger for a long-awaited showdown in Europe
The primary culprits, moreover, have long escaped blame. While most accounts of the war's outbreak place the bulk of responsibility on German and Austro-Hungarian militarism, the author draws on new evidence from archives across Europe to show that the worst offenders were actually to be found in Russia and France, whose belligerence and duplicity ensured that war was inevitable
Whether they plotted for war or rode the whirlwind nearly blind, each of the men involved, from
Austrian Foreign Minister Leopold von Berchtold and
German Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg to
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Sazonov and
French president Raymond Poincare
[they all] sought to capitalize on the fallout from Ferdinand's murder, unwittingly leading Europe to war
An innovative account of WW1a, this book tells the story of Europe's countdown to war from 1914je28 to Britain's final plunge on 1914au04
In single month, a handful of men [?!] changed the course of world history))

<>McReynolds,Louise| |_The_News Under Russia's Old Regime: The Development of a Mass Circulation Press| ((UO| tpg mxx))

>Mearsheimer,John J| GO/EREV

<>Mehlinger,Howard, and John M. Thompson| a{}n{Wtt RREV1 stt.srv}o{}
|_Count Witte and the Tsarist Government in the 1905 Revolution| ((noWbr

The breakdown in Russian politics did not just happen instantly, but was merely a slow erosion of relations with the upper class bourgeoisie, peasantry, and ruling elite. The declining state of affairs in Russia’s political atmosphere led Nicholas II to turn to Sergei Witte to help rescue Russia from its declining state of affairs. Many people are familiar with Witte because his “Witte System” was a mix of financial and economic policies, which were in essence a trial run in state capitalism. People, though, tend to overlook Witte’s role in the Russian government in the early 20th century, which is an interesting time period because of the ensuing elections and new laws being drafted by the Russian government.

One of the main points Mehlinger and Thompson want to emphasize is that the relationship between Witte and Nicholas II was anything but fine and dandy. Witte believed that Tsar Nicholas II only had two options: one was to move along a path of reform and the other was to choose a dictator and try to end the civil unrest by forceful repression. The question of reform and progress has come up many times in Russian history before the early 20th century example. One instance of this comes from Russian serfs and the abolishment of serfdom in 1861. Under Nicholas II and Witte, we now see these former serfs requesting more rights and liberties because of their working conditions and breakdown in government leadership. Witte believed that only by creating situations in which the peasants could exercise their own initiative, could Russian agriculture flourish.

Witte faced many challenges in trying to implement his reform plan because he needed to find a middle ground in policy-making. Witte was caught between two imperatives: one was to see order restored and the other to initiate the reform platform on which he had gained power. The Manifesto of October 17, 1905 saw many mixed reactions between the Russian citizenry, but primarily they were mass demonstrations. Witte’s obstacles were due to some unforeseen circumstances because he far left and right groups would have their qualms about the Manifesto, but he wasn’t expecting such a critical and demanding reaction from the people in the middle. Witte, himself, is at partial blame for this response to the Manifesto because he appointed some leaders that were not going to help his cause and cause more grief instead.

Mehlinger and Thompson use the first chapter of the book to introduce the situation and the man that was ultimately given the responsibility to fix the conditions in Russia, Sergei Witte. They move on to describe the October 17 Manifesto and the first few weeks of Witte’s government, where he puts his government and cabinet together. The reader begins to realize, at this point, that the Russian government was full of factional politics and no matter who Witte relied on, others would have valid arguments against them. The second half of the book deals with the peasant question and the different strategies and reform plans Witte went over to deal with the peasant problem. Additionally, the book deals with the “loan” that saved Russia in 1905, when the Russian government borrowed a half million francs from the French. Mehlinger and Thompson believe that this loan was somewhat a temporary fix to a larger financial problem, which would all come down to the eventual 1917 revolution. The book ends with the actual results of the election to the first duma and how the whole process worked. I found the election process very confusing and jumbled because the authors bring in some groups that were never mentioned, until the election chapters. However, the election data and chapters show how wide the split was between political groups and the importance of the people that voted and/or were eligible to vote in the election.

Overall, one must understand the situation Witte was in. Witte was a man that believed in autocracy, but realized that Russia needed to become more democratic to achieve progress. Mehlinger and Thompson’s book does a good job of emphasizing the role Witte played in running Russian politics and how that led to the elections of the First Duma. In trying to balance inside government influence and doing what was right for the Russian populous, Witte was put in a sticky situation and was basically destined to face criticism, no matter which side he supported more.

<>Melancon,Michael| a{}n{ppx SRs RREV}o{
*1984su:SSH#23,1| “The Russian Revolutions of 1917 in the Eyes of Soviet Historians: Orthodoxy vs. a New Flexibility”| Edited
*In O&S| "Neo-populism in early twentieth-century Russia: the Socialist Revolutionary party ... "
*1990:C.OH,TOSUP|_The_Socialist Revolutionaries and the Russian anti-war movement, 1914-1917 |>Melancon.SRs-vs-WW1| ((SRs WW1b vs-wrx.mvt))

<>Merkle,Judith |>Riley,Judith Merkle|_Management and ideology: The legacy of the international scientific management movement|>Merkle| *1980:B.CA,UCP| ((UO| E-TXT
ch#6:172-207 (esp. pp. 174-77, 183-192 and 199-207) "SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT AND GERMAN RATIONALIZATION"

<>Meyer,James H|_Turks Across Empires: Marketing Muslim Identity in the Russian-Ottoman Borderlands|>Meyer.TURKS|
*:OUP| ((TRK ntnism WW1a| Pan-Turkists, Muslim activists from Russia, gained international notoriety during the Young Turk era of Ottoman history [SAC LOOP] | Yusuf Akçura, Ismail Gasprinskii [W-ID] and Ahmet Agaoglu were the forefathers of Turkish nationalism, but in the decade bfr WW1, officials in Russia and Europe thought them dangerous Muslim radicals| ToC = 1: Trans-Imperial People| 2: Insider Muslims| 3: Activists and the Ulema after 1905 [Islamic website ID | W-ID]| 4: The Great Muslim Teacher Wars| 5: The Politics of Naming| 6: Istanbul and the Pan-Turkic Scene))

<>Miller,Steven E., ed|_Military Strategy and the Origins of the First World War: An International Security Reader|>MS&WW1a| *1985:P.NJ,PUP| ((UO| ndr.sbk| WW1a and WW1c [WW1 & late 20th-c CWX "international security" mnt] ToC =
Intro / Steven E. Miller
The First World War and the international power system / Paul Kennedy [ID]
Men against fire / >Howard,Michael [G/EUR.REV]
The cult of the offensive and the origins of the First World War / Stephen Van Evera [W-ID]
Civil-military relations and the cult of the offensive, 1914 and 1984 / Jack Snyder [wrx&pbl]
Windows of opportunity / Richard Ned Lebow [W-ID]))

<>Mints,II| *1967-1973:MVA|_Istoriia_Velikogo Oktiabria| 3vv|>Mints.RREV|

<>Mironov,Boris N| a{}
*1975:LGR| Istorik i matematika:matematicheskie metody v istoricheskoi issledovanii| ((D16.M66| xtx trx|svt pst on Khlebnye tseny v Rossii za dva stoletiia,XVIII-XIX vv. LGR:1985 & Vnutrennyi rynok Rossii vo vtoroi polovine XVIII--pervoi polovine XIX v. LGR:1981(HF3625.M57)))
*1984:LGR| Istorik i sotsiologiia| ((HM36.M66| xtx trx))
*1985fa:SlR#44:438-67| “The Russian Peasant Commune After the Reforms of the 1860s”| ((krx.rfm vlg.o))
*1989:MVA, Progress| V chelovecheskom izmerenii:226-46| “Sem'ia: Nuzhno li ogliadyvat'sia v proshloe?”| ((Several subtitles: Perestroika: glasnost' demokratiia sotsializm; Vyite iz korolevstva krivykh zerkal; Demograficheskii isk; Instituty dlia liudei ili liudi dlia institutov?| xrx fmy vlg.o krx Grb))
| Sotsial’naia istoriia Rossii
|The Social History of Imperial Russia, 1700-1917| ((

Reginald Zelnik review [2001de:AHA#106,5] = Hard as it is to summarize so long and rich a scholarly work, the thread that seems to run through the story Mironov wants to tell looks something like this: [mdn=] Russia was, at least potentially, a “normal” European country, but a European country that was not lacking in important peculiarities, including what is sometimes described as the relative backwardness of its economic, social, and political development. To use Mironov's language, Russia experienced all the important developments in these areas, but they were “a-synchronic” (asinkhronnye) in the way they evolved. Russia's peculiarities, most of which are familiar to specialists, are not presented as virtues (in Slavophile style) but as obstacles or impediments to a broad and balanced “social modernization,” an outcome whose positive value Mironov has no wish to deny. But these were obstacles that could be mastered with time, and Mironov goes to great pains to help us follow the sometimes tortuous but nonetheless rapid processes that suggest that the obstacles were being genuinely if (on the eve of world war and revolution) incompletely overcome. At the same time, he is too honest a historian to ignore the contradictory, more depressing, “pessimist” evidence of incomplete modernization and continued, even growing, social tension and political crisis, so much so that one can read whole paragraphs—his discussion of the civilizing of the Russian village versus the partial “peasantization” of the Russian city is a good case in point—that seem to take opposite positions, or at least to produce conflicting moods and expectations in the reader as one moves from page to page. In the still contested (if by now somewhat hoary) debate over the degree of influence of close peasant background on the social and political volatility of industrial workers, Mironov judiciously explains the case for each side but ends up with something resembling a neo-Menshevik position: that peasant disrespect for private, individual wealth, and peasant attachment to collectivist institutions and habits help explain the rapid rise of working class radicalism and indifference to market-based liberalism in the early twentieth century. For this and many other reasons, Mironov's admittedly forceful case for Russia's evolution toward a “normal” European form of social and political life is undermined by an equally forceful if at times reluctant recognition of significant evidence to the contrary. If, as he concludes, the October Revolution was in some respects an “anti-modernist” [vs-mdn] rebellion, then popular resistances to the Europeanizing processes that he values weaken the case for the approaching advent of “normality.”

<>Mohrenschildt,Dmitri| a{}
*1978oc:RRe#37,4:387-404| “Shchapov: Exponent of Regionalism and the Federal School in Russian History”| ((WwaAP hst.gph gbx fdr))
*1981:Rutherford, Farleigh Dickinson UP|>MTU|Toward a United States of Russia: Plans and Projects of Federal Reconstruction of Russia in the Nineteenth Century| ((USA2.cst fdr plt.clt lbx))

<>Moorehead,Alan| a{1910}e{1983}n{}o{pop.hst.gph
*1956:NYC,Harper|_Gallipoli||>Moorehead.GALLIPOLI| ((UO| WW1b| When Turkey unexpectedly sided with Germany in World War I, Winston Churchill, as Sea Lord for the British, conceived a plan: smash through the Dardanelles, reopen the Straits to Russia, and immobilize the Turks. On the night of March 18, 1915, this plan nearly succeeded -- the Turks were virtually beaten. But poor communication left the Allies in the dark, allowing the Turks to prevail and the Allies to suffer a crushing quarter-million casualties. A vivid chronicle of adventure, suspense, agony, and heroism, Gallipoli brings fully to life the tragic waste in human life, the physical horror, and the sheer heartbreaking folly of fighting for impossible objectives with inadequate means on unknown, unmapped terrain. [But does the book make us believe that Churchill did it all for his esteemed ally Russia?]

<>Moyer,Laurence|_Victory Must Be Ours: Germany in the Great War, 1914-1918|
|>Moyer.VICTORY| *1995:NYC,Hippocrene| ((SMT| 8x11:WW1b=pp.50-4 re. 1909:1913; Hollweg appointment [ID] and RUS threat to GRM))

<>Munck,J. L|_Kornilov Revolt: A Critical Examination of Sources and Research| Coronet Bks,1987 ((WW1))

<>Nechkina, M. V., ed| a{}n{}o{}
*1953:M.AnnArbor, UMP| Russia in the Nineteenth Century| v2 of the History of Russia| DK188.8.N418 1976| ndr.txt| hst.gph RUS2))

<>Nekrich,Aleksandr M| a{}
*1968:Columbia SC|_June 22,1941: Soviet Historians and the German Invasion| Compiled by Vladimir Petrov| ((D742.R8.N43| PetVxr WW2 hst.gph wrx))
*1979:L.ENG|_Otreshis’ ot strakha: Vospominaniia istorika| ((DK275.N4.A3|xtx part in hst.gph 8x11| prm vsp hst.gph WW2 inx))
*1978NYC|_The_Punished Peoples: The Deportation and Fate of Soviet Minorities at the End of the Second World War| ((DK33.N44| ntn WW2 STL tlng. of Nakazannye narody. NYC:1978))
*1986:|_Utopia in Power: A History of the USSR from 1917 to the Present| ((DK266.G3713 [RUS orig=DK265.H45]| gnr Hrgt.mvt RUS3| tlng. of Utopiia u vlasti: Istoriia Sovetskogo soiuza s 1917 goda do nashikh dnei))
*:|In Aksyonov,Glasnost

*1993:Berkeley|_Hooliganism: Crime, Culture, and Power in St. Petersburg, 1900-1914| | ((crm RREV1))
*1994| CiF

<>Nichols, Robert L., and Theofanis G. Stavrou, eds.Russian Orthodoxy under the Old Regime. Minneapolis:1978. BX491.R87| ndr.sbk

<>Nochlin,Linda| a{}
|__The_Politics of Vision: Essays on Nineteenth-century Art and Society| ((91de:to be rvw- in TLS| gnr.txt obx plt.clt.gnr xdj.plt))

<>Nove,Alec| a{
*1986:LND,Harwood|_Marx and "Really Existing Socialism"| ((SMT 56pp| Mrx&R))

<>Obolonskii,Aleksandr Valentin*| a{
*1987|:MVA, Nauka|_Chelovek i gosudarstvennoe upravlenie| ((KM.O1274c 1987 | 252p lwx plt.clt stt.apx))
*1994:MVA, In-t gosudarstva i prava [RAkN]|_Drama rossiiskoi politicheskoi istorii: Sistema protiv lichnosti| ((DK61 .O26 | bbl:339-52| tlng into ENG!| plt.clt stt&pbl))
--|_The_Drama of Russian Political History

<>Odom,William E. and Robert Dujarrie|_Commonwealth or Empire? Russia, Central Asia, and the Transcaucasus|*1995:?B.IND,IUP?| ((CAS S.CAU ?fdr or MPR? ntn))

<>Otte,Thomas|_July Crisis: The World's Descent into War, Summer 1914| *2014:C.ENG,CUP|>Otte.JULY| ((WW1a| CF=McMeekin.JULY| ToC =

Principal dramatis personae; The Sarajevo assassins; Introduction
1 Prelude: the road to Sarajevo; The Bosnian visit []
Young Bosnia and its discontents
Apis and "BlackHand"
The Archduke inspects his troops
St Vitus's Day at Sarajevo
The Belgrade connection

*1914je28:jy05; A week =
2 Sarajevo and its echoes: 28 June to 5 July
"Music everywhere": the reaction in Vienna
"Opportunity for a destructive strike"
"War, war, war": the "war party" unleashed
Count Berchtold declares for war. The Emperor is not quite sure of Germany. Count Tisza calls for calm deliberation
Berlin counsels moderation
Intrigues at the German embassy in Vienna
The Kaiser intervenes
Count Hoyos goes to Berlin
Szögyény and Hoyos perform a double act
The chancellor confirms the "blank cheque"
"The dancing bear" takes stock
"The little misunderstanding" returns from his honeymoon

*1914jy06:jy21; Two weeks =
3 The triumph of tactics over strategy: 6 to 21 July
The ponderous political apparatus moves
Count Tisza is isolated
The view from St Petersburg
Calculations at the Choristers' Bridge [Pevcheskii most]
M. Shebeko sends reassuring reports
Nikolai Genrikovich Hartwig visits his Habsburg colleague
Scandals and stability: the French perspective
The "man of Lorraine" and Russia
M. Paléologue warns of German intrigues at St Petersburg
In calmer waters: Britain in June 1914
Sir Edward Grey issues an early warning
Events seem to indicate an Anglo-German détente
Count Tisza performs a u-turn
Baron Conrad intervenes
Count Mensdorff tries to influence the fourth estate
Prince Lichnowsky intervenes
Herr von Jagow abdicates an independent German policy

*1914jy19:jy23; Five days =
4 Localizing the crisis: 19 to 23 July
The Marchese has a price
Sazonov takes note
Sir Maurice de Bunsen learns a secret
Pašićis alarmed
The Strudelhof meeting
Sir Edward offers to mediate
M. Poincaré sails to St Petersburg
Count Benckendorff issues a warning
Zimmermann and Jagow contemplate the situation
Count Berchtold contemplates the past and the future

*1914jy23:jy26; Four days =
5 The ultimatum: 23 to 26 July
Baron Giesl calls on the Belgrade government
Count Hoyos thinks of Alexander the Great
Pašić contemplates a trip to the sea and returns home
[mxx tlf] Sazonov makes two telephone calls
Sazonov demands mobilization and confusion ensues
Poincaré and Viviani are at sea
Grey receives the most formidable declaration
Grey and Sazonov seek to gain time, and Horace Rumbold fears a general bust-up
Count Mérey takes to his bed
Baron Giesl leaves Belgrade
Conrad postpones war

*1914jy26:jy28; Three days =
6 Localizing the war: 26 to 28 July
Sazonov and Count Pourtalès take the same train
Sir Edward goes fishing
Bethmann Hollweg takes charge
The skirmish that never was
Sir Edward is irritated
Sir Edward makes a statement and Jules Cambon lights a firework
Jagow issues a second "blankcheque"
Sazonov confuses everyone
Count Berchtold sends a telegram to Bucharest

From CUP blurb = Europe’s tragic descent into a largely inadvertent war in the summer of 1914. Why a century-old system of Great Power politics collapsed so disastrously in the weeks from the ‘shot heard around the world’ on June 28, 1914, to Germany’s declaration of war on Russia on August 1st. The descent into war was not a result of the failure of abstract concepts such as the ‘balance of power’ or the ‘alliance system’. Europe descended into world war as a result of the near-collective failure of statecraft by the rulers of Europe. From the ministerial palaces of Berlin and Vienna to Belgrade, London, Paris and St Petersburg, the decisions made by hawks and doves led to a war that would define a century and which still reverberates today. Otte draws parallels with current international politics through its focus on enduring realities of political decision-making

<>Owen,Thomas C| a{}n{RS1 tpg| ekn cptism pbl kpq dvr MVA RUS3}o{
*1975:JGO#23,1:26-38| “The Moscow Merchants and the Public P??,1858-1868”| ((kpq tpg))

*1981:C.ENG, CUP|_Capitalism and Politics in Russia: A Social History of the Moscow Merchants,1855-1905| ((|>OCP| part xrx 8x11| p22 (uses Wbr def. of cpt & says it fits wltiest 1 & 2 gld kpq of RUS| Quotes General Econ History [NYC:1927]:276-8 dealing w/MVA kpq & mfg discontent w/autocracy frm 890:91;famine ~~w/Zmv lbx grew| [mdn=] “In Weberian terms, the rationalism implicit in modern cptism--the need for impartial and predictable rules--more and more conflicted with the arbitrariness of the autocratic system.” [166]

STUDENT REVIEW #1 = The prestige of the merchants and manufacturers in Russia steadily grew in the late 19th and early 20th century despite an economy heavily depended on its agriculture. To understand the growth of the industrial elite from the traditional agrarian state, I chose to read Thomas C. Owen’s Capitalism and Politics in Russia. To sum up the overall economic picture prior to 1858, out of a total population of 62 million persons, only 6 to 10 percent comprised of merchants (Owen 2). Yet, in the mid 19th century, a transformation began with the leading merchant families as economic education progressed throughout the generations. To better break down the evolution, Owen’s breaks down the progress into three stages: from the first traditional merchants, to capital merchants and finally after the Revolution of 1905, a class-conscious bourgeoisie.

The traditional merchants struggle in the early 19th century was ultimately a result of lack of education. Unlike the West at this time, the Russian merchants shunned both commercial education and modern management techniques. The furthest point of education was said to end at the book of Psalms. As a result, business practices were backwards, unethical and simply idiotic. Owen’s reported that they kept their business numbers in their heads without any system of bookkeeping. The traditional merchant society as a whole struggled in the early 19th century. In the end, it took a rude awakening for any progress to be made.

The next transformation, to capital merchants occurred in 1854 as the British and the French invaded the Crimea, part of the Russian homeland. The Russians found their fleet of sailing ships to be no match for the British and French steam-powered gunboats. On top of this, Russians lack of railroad to the Crimea prevented any reinforcements from reaching the battlefront (Owen 30). The disastrous war opened the eyes of the merchant elites and it became clear that change was needed. As a result, Russia turned to the Slavophile intellectuals with the goal to modernize Russia’s backwards economy (Owen 43). Following the war, commercial, financial, light industrial and transportation enterprises flourished with governmental aid (Owen 53). As the economy began to improve, the merchants began to wish for their economic independence from the state. However, for their continued prosperity, the merchants increasingly grew dependent on the state because of the protective tariff, financial support for corporations and banks, and subsidies for shipping companies and railroads (Owen 69). Yet, the drive towards self-sufficiency continued while the state’s policies began to shift in the merchants favor.

By turn of the 20th century economic progress continued to prosper due to the states continued support of the railroad systems and increased tariffs. For the first time, merchant children were born into as high of a pedigree as the nobles (Owen 139). However, as the industries capitalized on the success built off the state, trouble began to arise. Issues over labor rights became a hot topic as strikes turned violent throughout many factories across all of Russia. On top of this, by 1904, merchant leaders occupied positions all along the political spectrum across the state government. Success arose because of the state, but new ideology began shifting the playing field.

The beginning of 1905 began fiery times. On January 9, 1905 innocent workers were shot down at a peaceful protest outside of a factory in St. Petersburg. As a result of the fatal shootings, famously known as “Bloody Sunday”, erupted political movement among the merchant elite. The autocratic state did help the merchants rise to power, but at the same time, they felt the states’ tight control was holding them back. Change was near as the liberal elite, all the way to the radical elite, allied together to rid the obstacle of the Russian state towards economic and social progress. The solution outlined was to create a constitutional monarch led by a legislative Duma to ultimately overrule the supreme power. The Tsar was pushed against the wall. As a result, Sergei Witte wrote the October Manifesto to destroy the united opposition by promising a new order based on full civil freedoms (of speech, press, religion, assembly, association, and personal inviolability, universal suffrage, and a Duma with the power to approve or reject legislation and to supervise the bureaucracy (Owen 191). Tsar Nicholas II quickly signed the manifesto. Violent revolution was averted.

Lives were saved as a result of the manifesto. The united politicians were overcome with joy. Owen’s claimed older members in the Duma broke down in tears when they heard the news (Owen 192). The majority of the population believed in the new system as the right step needed towards a progressive, successful future. At first the industrialists targeted to overthrow the Tsar, in the end though, it was they who salvaged his power and his life.

The Revolution of 1905 brought together the generation of merchant leaders, as Owen’s calls as a new “mature, class-conscious bourgeoisie” (Owen 206). However, the bourgeoisie knew their struggle was not over because of the dominant economy of Western Europe. The merchants still had to rely on the state to protect their own markets by the use of tariffs and the continued aid of the developing railroads. It is true they did not become completely independent. However, in the end the merchant elite came together and gained the rights that were needed to prosper into the 20th century.

The merchant class of Russia developed into a class with a bit of political influence. The rise of the merchant class, as well as their influence, acted as a catalyst for many political as well as social struggles within Russia in the period before and during 1905.

Before 1855, the Merchant class of Russia was based upon a system of patriarchal business tradition. The heads of merchant families conducted day to day business based on person to person relationships rather than practical commercial transactions. These men were the head of the family, which meant they had the last say in every matter that had to do with business or the family. Their educational background was based upon Orthodox religion rather than business or commercial practices. An obligation to run for public service and the potential to lose one's trade license due to unpaid guild fees, discouraged the early merchant class from breaking with traditional business practices, which retarded the estate's growth. However, a healthy backing and promise of protection from the Russian government helped the Russian merchants not fall to the competition of the European markets.

In 1855 this all began to change. The old, traditional, patriarchal merchant class gave way to the sons of that generation who began to take over the head of the household. These new merchants were better educated, more savvy in the ways of business, and did not hold as true to the distrust of Western commercial technology. This catapulted the Russian merchants into a period of growth and innovation. Over the next 40 years, economic growth continued and the merchant class only grew stronger politically as the government realized that it needed to heed the merchants' demands, since their economic growth was essential to national power. Signs of an emerging bourgeois were apparent. Merchants were becoming increasingly critical in Russian society because of the money they controlled. They would never become as powerful as the Western bourgeoisies, mainly because of their numbers, but nevertheless had vast wealth.

The increase in industry and economy led to the emergence of a social class new to Russia, the paid laborer. Disputes arose between the lower classes and their employers and soon political lines were drawn. The merchants largely wished to rely on the repressive might of the government to put down disturbances, whereas the liberals were willing to cede concessions to the workers. These struggles and calls for social reform would continue all the way into the early 1900's and would dominate Russian political culture for 50 years.

“Capitalism and Politics in Russia” was an eloquent portrayal of the rise and development of the merchant class as a social and political force in the mid and late 19th century. Owen concentrates on the process of change the merchants go through from before 1855 into the early 20th century, but he also dedicates much of the book to the development of the political ideology within the merchant class and its effects on Russia and her social classes.

*1995:O.ENG|_Russian Corporate Capitalism, from Peter the Great to Perestroika| [Excerpt TXT]

<>Petro,Nicolai N| a{
*1990su:WWQ#14,3:114-122| “Toward a New Russian Federation”| ((dms| Grb fdr ntn plt.pty stt&pbl| See also:21 rvw of Tismaneanu))
*1995|_Rebirth of Russian Democracy: An Interpretation of Political Culture| ((UO| cvc.pbl ToC=

1. Political Culture and the Failure of Sovietology
2. Constrained Autocracy in Russian History
3. Orthodoxy's Symphonic Ideal: The Russian Church in Search of Tradition
4. The "Russian Idea": Forging an Alternative National Identity
5. Russia's Alternative Political Organizations: The Re-emergence of Civil Society ["re"emergence? cvc.pbl]
6. Back to the Future of Russian Politics
Petro says = The West cld have better prepared for the fall of communism and gained a clearer picture of Russia's new political landscape by cultivating an awareness of the deep democratic aspirations of the Russian people since Muscovite times. Petro traces the long history of those aspirations[...]. The Russian Orthodox Church [&] its long history of support for opposition sentiment during both Tsarist and Soviet times and its support for democracy today [are positive signs]. Contemporary Russian nationalism [originated in] the neo-Slavophile national identity that took its shape as a challenge to Bolshevik oppression. Russia's postcommunist political parties [are rooted] in prerevolutionary times and this continuity makes Russian political aspirations far more predictable than is commonly assumed))

<>Peunova,Marina| [bbl and TXT~] ((neo-cnx plt.idl EUA))

<>Pipes,Richard| a{}
*1954:C.MA,HUP|>Pipes.FORMATION|_Formation of the Soviet Union: Communism and Nationalism,1917-1923| 1968:Revised ed| ((OWN| WNWW1b Gwrx ntn))
*1955ap:WoP#3/7:371-401| “Max Weber and Russia”| ((D839.W57| OWN xrx| Wbr RUS| Mommsen,WbrP:56| Rests heavily on Mayer,Wbr| :22,re. patrimonial dominance (Wbr,Theory:318; & W&G)| Here Wbr seen as a more finished Hobbes| Dominance based on tradition,but highly personal| “Sultanism” in its most extreme form| “...the economic element absorbs,as it were,the political.” [Earlier:20,Wtt model fully misunderstood,set aside| Pipes takes gnr proposition of Wtt & ignores WOD,chs. 9-10,where specific applications to RUS--“semi-Asiatic”--fully spelled out.] Another Pipes citation:198,Wbr on city:None in RUS but NVG & PSK))
*1960:RRe#19,4:316-337| “Russian Marxism and Its Populist Background: The late Nineteenth Century”| ((Mrx ppx SDs))
*1963:C.MA|_Social Democracy and the St. Petersburg Labor Movement, 1885-1897| ((HX312.P55| SDs prl SPB Mrx))
*1964:SlR#3:441-458| “Narodnichestvo: A Semantic Inquiry”| ((OWN ndr ppx hst.gph))
*1968| “Origins of Bolshevism: Intellectual Evolution of Young Lenin”| In Pipes.RR ((chd.Lnn))
*1970:1980; C.MA|_Struve| v1: “Liberal on the Left,1870-1905”| v2:“Liberal on the Right,1905-1944”| ((lbx RREV1 Mrx plt| xrx re.Wbr))
*1981c:|_U. S. Soviet Relations in the Era of Detente| ((prm CWX))

*2005:|_Russian conservatism and its critics: A study in political culture| ((>Pipes.cnx idl plt.clt[W review#1 | W review#2]

This piece was published shortly after Russian Political Scholar Richard Pipes delivered his lectures to an audience at Harvard University. This particular publishing touches on the inevitable tension and reality that was conservatism in Russian Political Culture. Pipes is credited to being one of the main scholars that focuses on this notion of conservatism. And it is important to remember that during the time of the mid-nineteenth century, Russia’s Political scheme (and social structure) was influenced and ultimately defined by this sense of Conservatism among the state.

At the beginning of his lectures, Pipes clearly explains to his audience the definition of “Russian Conservatism,” as contrasted to other familiar worldwide definitions. Where the US state defines conservatism as “applying less government” into the political agenda, the Russian culture during the mid-nineteenth century saw conservatism as applying “more government” into the political scheme. This is the focal point that we must remember when studying the big picture behind Russian political culture leading up to the 1905 and 1917 revolutionary eras.

However, throughout his lectures Pipes jumps to many points that are seemingly supposed to defend this point of Russian conservatism. This makes the lectures hard to follow, read, and draw together for our own understanding. Throughout his lectures, Pipes discusses the role of the individual state powers (including Alexander II), the church, and even the rural classes in response to the increasing autocratic government. This proves as a flaw in his presentation because it makes it increasingly harder to point out the significant points that proved Russian political culture to be what it was. If there were anything that could be rendered in the publication, it would have to be organization. Although, in a lecture setting it would be difficult to organize it in an ideal manner so we must work with what we have.

With every main argument there is a root or theme that ties the whole effort together. And so when studying the big picture behind Russian Political Culture, it is imperative to ask ourselves, “What is the main point we must reference back to when painting the giant picture?” Pipes states this point that Russian conservatism is clearly marked by the increase in government policies in the land. This ultimately led several outbreaks in the rural classes including the rise of the intelligentsia, Litfond, Literary societies, and the Primary Education advocacy groups. And so, Pipes’ lectures serve the purpose of providing us with a landmark of where we can draw back on when explaining the big picture behind Russian Political Culture.

<>Pisotkin,MI| a{}
*1988:MVA| Sotsializm i gosudarstvennoe upravlenie: Uroki istorii i perestroika| ed#2| ((HC335.P428 |335p| Grb stt.apx tUt gvt hst.gph plt.clt))

<>Poe,Marshall| a{}n{RUS&wrl.hst mdn}o{
*2003:P.NJ,PUP|_The_Russian Moment in World History| ((gnr.txt wrl.hst MPR mdn| 3 main points (Do these also explain post-SSR RUS?) =

  1. For centuries, Russia was the only non-Western power to defend itself against Western imperialism [Then came JPN]
  2. Russia carved out for itself the only non-Western path to modern society, neither European nor Asian but distinctly Russian and based on autocratic governmental authority and command economics [IE=Not "Marxist"]
  3. The Soviet era must be seen as a natural continuation of Russia's long-term past, IE=points one and two [IE=zakonomernost']

<>Pomper,Philip| a{}
*1970:NYC|The Russian Revolutionary Intelligentsia| ((rvs ntg idl RUS3))
*1972:C.IL|Peter Lavrov and the Russian Revolutionary Movement| ((rvs ppx RS2 LvrP bxo))
*1979:NJ New Brunswick|Sergei Nechaev| ((rvs RS2 NqvS))
*1990:CUP|Lenin,Trotsky, and Stalin: The Intelligentsia and Power| ((|446p| Lnn Trt Stl RREV STL rvs.ntg RUS3))

<>Porter, Thomas Earl| a{}
|_The_Zemstvo and the Emergence of Civil Society in Late Imperial Russia, 1864-1917| Edwin Mellen Press| ((Four titles by Porter in SUMMIT, including UW dissertation and a 2001 DWT Papers pbc| Zmv cvl.pbl))

<>Pospielovsky,Dimitry| a{}n{plc.scx prl unx RREV1| RChx SSR.vs-rlg}o{}
*1971:LND|_Russian Police Trade Unionism: Experiment or Provocation?|
*1984:|_The_Russian Church under the Soviet Regime,1917-1982| 2vv

<>Putnam,George| a{}n{lbx idl cnx RREV1 ntg.vs-Mrx}o{}
*1965je:SEER#43,101:335-353| “Russian Liberalism Challenged from Within: Bulgakov and Berdyayev in 1904-5”|
--|Russian Alternatives to Marxism

<>Radkey,Oliver| n{RREV1 RREV2 RREV3 SRs gbx krx Greens Tambov}o{}

<>Raeff,Marc| a{}n{rxn lbx KtkM ntg| }o{
*1952jy:RRe#11:157-67| “A Reactionary Liberal:M. N. Katkov”| stt.tUt apx qnv| stt&pbl| gte| trx plt.clt
*1959jy:RRe#18:218-30| “Some Reflections on Russian Liberalism”| ((Must distinguish:rdx lbx cnx rxn| How avoid blur:219-20| Different approaches| Discount rigid definition or absolute def:220-21| Likes “pragmatic methods” but has to discard it:221-2| In RUS lbx gnry meant vs-dmk & bureaucracy [vs-mnx TSR qin srv| NB! R does not list here ChxR] Method may be best def yet:therefore it is negative in RUS [anti this & that] & tended not to be able to distinguish itself frm rdx~))
*1971:NYC|_Imperial Russia, 1682-1825:The Coming of Age of Modern Russia| Series:Borzoi History of Russia, v4| ((DK127.R24| OWN| ndr gnr.txt))
*1979ap:AHR#84:399-411| “The Bureaucratic Phenomena of Imperial Russia,1700-1905”|
*1984:NYC|_Understanding Imperial Russia: State and Society in the Old Regime| TBy Arthur Goldhammer| Foreword by John Keep| ((trx stt&pbl))
*1990:O.ENG|_Russia Abroad: A Cultural History of the Russian Emigration,1919-1939| ((256p))
*1993:Political studies#41 spec:93-??| “The People, the Intelligentsia, and Russian Political Culture”|
--|_Collected Historical Articles and Essays| 2vv

<>Raleigh,Donald J|_Revolution on the Volga: 1917 in Saratov (Ithaca NY: 1986)

<>Read,Christopher| a{}n{ntg clt rvs rlg cnx idl RREV1 SSR}o{}
*1979:Totowa NJ|_Religion, Revolution and the Russian Intelligentsia,1900-1912: The Vekhi Debate and its Intellectual Background| ((|??Excerpt in Coquin,1905:385-96

The Russian intelligentsia of the late 19th and early 20th c centuries was a circle within the educated classes that was committed to creative work, critical thought and the addressing the conditions of the oppressed classes. By the 1890s, the majority of the intelligentsia had moved from populism to Marxism and had adopted a revolutionary stance which included atheism, socialism and within the Kadet Party, constitutionalism. There had been a euphoric response to the revolution of 1905 and the resulting October Manifesto but that response gave way to despair with the autocratic crack down in 1906. The intelligentsia was at a crossroads. No one accepted the status quo of the autocratic state and all were agreed in the goals of social justice but the intelligentsia was split over the tactics to accomplish the transformation of society. The Vekhi essays challenged the religious and philosophical presuppositions of the intelligentsia.

Vekhi (Landmarks) was a small book comprised of seven essays written by previous Marxists who were critical of revolutionary solutions. The writers were: Berdyaev, Frank, Bulgakov, Izgoev, Kistyakovsky, Struve and Gershenzon. Read insists that this was not a conservative book but was often treated as one. The writers attempted to persuade the intelligentsia to re-examine their uncritical faith in the ability of socialism to transform society by changing social structures and institutions. Each writer, in his own way, proposed spiritual change (the individual's inner life) as the source of revolutionary transformation of society. Most of the writers argued that Marxism was a religious position; the worship of the people, the saving of the people and ultimately (messianic qualities) the perfectibility of the people. This notion was called mangodhood or godbuilders. Vekhi insisted that this ideology of the intelligentsia was as religious, dogmatic, intolerant and fanatical as Orthodoxy. The Vekhi writers can be separated into three groups: the new religious consciousness, Kadet Party, and despisers of the revolutionary underground.

In the first years, Vekhi sparked interest from liberals and socialist. The interest was almost entirely negative. Discussion groups packed meeting halls throughout Russia. Lenin used Vekhi for propaganda purposes. He connected Vekhi with the Kadet Party and accused them of counter revolutionary liberalism which only served the interest of the status quo. By 1910 the interest in Vekhi had waned. Many historians see Vekhi as an attempt to raise the political dialogue and construct an authentic political response to the times; one that acknowledged the religious quality of the Russian people and addressed the class oppression.

There is a great deal of detail in this account. Read describes the various groups in the new religious consciousness. He goes into a lot of detail in his discussion of Berdyaev and Bogdanov and their concept of Godmanhood. He is able to demonstrate the ability Lenin had to keep the party focused and disciplined while being attacked from both the right and the left. Anyone interested in the political thinking of artists in this time period will enjoy reading excerpts from Gorky, Minsky and Merezhkovsky (pp.121-140.)

*1990:B.ENG, M|_Culture and Power in Revolutionary Russia: The Intelligentsia and the Transition from Tsarism to Communism| ((DK266.4.R43| ntg clt RREV SSR RUS3| 266p)

<>Reichman,Henry| a{}n{RREV1 rrd prl}o{}
|_Railwaymen and Revolution: Russia,1905|

<>Reshetar,J. S.,Jr|_The_Ukrainian Revolution,1917-1920: A Study in Nationalism|>Reshetar.UKR| *1952:Princeton| ((ntn UKR RREV3 Gwrx))

<>Reznikov,A| a{}
*1984;MVA|_Comintern and the East: Strategy and Tactics in the National Liberation Movement| ((HX11.I5 R478| Ntx3 CMN CASA MPR ntnism v-MPR.REV))

<>Riasanovsky,Nicholas| a{}
*1976:O.ENG|_A_Parting of Ways: Government and the Educated Public in Russia, 1801-1855

The early 19th Century is a time period when Nicholas Riasanovsky sees the first signs of divide in the relationship and discourse between Russia’s autocratic government and the nation’s intellectual elites that eventually fed the climate of upheaval and revolution that characterized much of Russia’s 19th and early 20th century political culture. In A Parting of Ways, Riasanovsky traces the origins of this split beginning from the Petrine reforms of the early 18th century when Peter the Great’s westernizing reforms signaled to Riasanovsky the beginnings of modern Russian educated opinion. This period also represented the beginning of enlightened despotism in Russia as tsarist rule became influenced by the European enlightenment and was closely aligned with the growth of the intellectual gentry as both groups shared common progressive goals and outlooks. Being a part of this educated class meant being aware of European ideas and systems and represented only a small fraction of Russian society as both the merchant and peasant classes were excluded from this characteristically aristocratic group.

With the second wave of enlightenment, that occurred in 1801 with the ascension of Alexander I to tsar, hints and promises of serf reform and most importantly a Constitution further increased expectations among the educated gentry. However, Riasanovsky notes the initial rift in the relationship between the government and educated public occurred during the second half of tsar Alexander’s rule as his initial hints at major reforms failed to come to fruition as the ideology of enlightened despotism increasingly became reactionary. This initial rift caused by the inaction to live up to the anticipated reforms was highlighted by the Decembrist societies, whose members were culturally educated leaders of elite military regiments [mlt] who radically responded with revolting force in response to the failed promises of constitutionalism that ultimately resulted in the disastrous 1825 Decembrist revolt. The mutual alignment in the relationship and aspirations between the two sides that characterized the period of enlightened despotism, soon gave rise to subsequent alienation, as reaction and restoration became the official ideology.

Riasanovsky denotes much of his analysis to the reign of tsar Nicholas I whose conservative rule of reaction and restoration further split the discourse and sense of allegiance between the government and the educated public. Nicholas’s rule was termed Official Ideology as emphasis was placed on restoring the three principles of religion, authority, and tradition in efforts to quiet the intellectual segment of Russian society. The policies of Official Ideology under Nicholas’s rule represented an important theme in Riasanovsky’s examination as he highlights the intensive steps token by the Russian autocracy to reassert dominant control over Russian society. Revolutionary events throughout Europe and the 1825 Decembrist Revolt contributed to Nicholas’s desire to restore the divine and unalienable appearance of the autocracy. Among the steps of restoration noted by Riasanovsky included the controlled curriculum in schools that were taught to the tsar’s specifications and education was advised not to exceed one’s social position. Additionally, the Official Nationality ranked the Russian public in order as Christians, loyal subjects, and Russians, reasserting the autocracy’s control over Russian society as well as loyalty to the tsar.

However, the conservative policies of Official Ideology further fueled the alienation of the educated gentry as Riasanovsky notes a changing ideology among the group. Detachment from western European culture and ideas, growing concerns over the system of serfdom serving as the center of the Russian economic system, and a growing university and journalistic system that inspired and spread added criticisms toward the government were among the new concerns of the educated elites that estranged them from the government. Romanticism is also an important ideology that took prevalence in the educated gentry discord as early ideology from the Age of Reason were replaced by romanticism goals that spoke to people’s hopes and became a driving force in calls for revolution and change.

The inaction and policies of restoration on the half of the autocracy and the changing ideology of the educated gentry are reasons cited by Riasanovsky for the severing in the discourse and alignment between the two sides that had existed from the time of the Petrine reforms until the second half of Alexander’s rule. Riasanovsky thus provides the outline and reasoning for the initial rift between the influential Russian educated gentry and the government.

<>Rice,Christopher| a{}n{SRs plt.pty RREV1 scx rvs prl krx wrk}
_Russian Workers and the Socialist-Revolutionary Party through the Revolution of 1905-07|

<>Richardson,Paul E., ed|
*2011:Vt.Montpelier|_The_Best of Russian Life| v#1= History and Culture | v#2 = Biographies| ((ToC & ndx| sbk rtl~ selected from *1990-2010:Russian Life jrn which UO has))

<>Rigby,T. H|
*1979:ENG CUP|_Lenin's Government: Sovnarkom, 1917-1922| ((RREV3 Gwrx tUt SOV))

<>Riha,Thomas| a{}
--|_A_Russian European: Paul Miliukov| ((MlkP lbx KDs

This biographical piece serves as a chronicle of the life of prominent political moderate and founder of the Kadet party, Pavel (Paul) Miliukov. Riha allows his readers to glean insight on Miliukov’s career by having his audience view him as a dynamic and complex figure. As the reader comes to know Miliukov in this work, two men emerge: Miliukov the Historian, and Miliukov the Politician. Miliukov’s identity as a Russian European – after the 1917 revolution – is here realized as an amalgamation of his academic and political character.

The beginning of Miliukov’s political career ostensibly began while he attended Moscow University. During that period of time he became chairman of the student court, and found a journalistic home in the periodical Russkaia Mysl. While at the University he also wrote a well received piece (his dissertation) on Peter the Great and the ways in which he came to be Europeanized. He later transitioned into the wider realm of Russian politics whereupon he came to be viewed as a figure of restraint, caution and compromise. He ultimately comes to be viewed by Riha as a politician of moderate tendencies who ‘flip-flops’ between allegiances that best tend to suit his liberal intentions during the periods of (and in between) revolution.

Riha divides Miliukov’s political life into three phases: “the revolution of 1905-7, the decade following, and the year 1917” (Riha 333). His began his career looking for ways to remedy domestic problems within Russia and then, when the problems he sought to rectify (e.g. the implementation of a constitution that allowed co-operation between the monarch and a legislative assembly elected under restricted suffrage) turn to naught, he began to look toward issues involving foreign policy. He developed pacifistic views regarding aforementioned policy, but these views proved to work to his detriment politically by the year of 1917. During the period of the Balkan Wars, Miliukov’s leftist foreign sentiment began to gravitate to a more right-wing belligerency, as he came to favor the war. Some interesting questions here were raised in the text: was Miliukov a hypocrite in this respect? Where did his interests lie?

As it seems evident in Rhia’s work, Miliukov’s factional allegiance ultimately lied with his liberally inclined group, the Kadets, but he and the Kadets had a fickle tendency to shift their perspective along the political spectrum as moderates. As Miliukov was a moderate at heart, when the Duma would come to view an issue from an overtly right-wing or, alternatively, revolutionary standpoint, he would often promote a stance that would try to remedy/moderate the right or left-wing excess. Miliukov stated himself: “[o]ne of the common phenomena of these revolutions is the successive passage of power from the hands of the moderate factions to those of others, with more extreme ideas” (Riha 327). Part and parcel of Miliukov’s job as a politician (and the Kadets’ job as a political force) was to attempt reconcile all of the fractional chaos present during and between times of revolution. As they could not lead because of their impartiality, Riha states, “[c]aught in the middle the Kadets could at best mediate” (Riha 337). So at the time of their disbandment, the legacy they (and Miliukov) left behind was one that both attempted to counter the revolution and extremism; their purpose was to democratize (Europeanize?) Russia using mutual agreement as a precept. A Russian European is a work that looks at a history of factionalism and also, of failure, both realized and reconciled through an important look at the self proclaimed rationalist Pavel Miliukov.

*2013:O.ENG,OUP|_Saving the City : The Great Financial Crisis of 1914|>Roberts.SAVING| ((E-TXT| 8x11:WW1a fnc bnk LND ENG| ToC =

1. House Closed
2. Bolt from the Blue
3. Worst Days
4. Bankers' Scheme
5. Treasury Views
6. War Conference
7. Reopening the Banks
8. Heroic Intervention
9. Fixing the Foreign Exchanges
10. House Open
11. Global Financial Crises
12. The Unknown Financial Crisis
In London, the world's foremost financial centre, the week before the outbreak of the First World War saw the breakdown of the markets, culminating with the closure for the first time ever of the London Stock Exchange on Friday 31 July.
Outside the Bank of England a long anxious queue waited to change bank notes for gold sovereigns.
Bankers believed that a run on the banks was underway, threatening the collapse of the banking system--all with the nation on the eve of war

<>Robinson,G.T| a{}
--|Rural Russia under the Old Regime| ((krx

Robinson begins the history of the Russian peasant situation in the 16th century. At this point in time serfdom was rearing its head as a result of increasing numbers of people being bound to the land in some way or another. Omitting the vast amount of details Robinson includes up to the end of the 18th century that have no relevance to our time period of focus, I started summarizing the book where the author describes the peasant conditions of the early 19th century. Landowners were allowed to make serfs work three days a week except Sunday and holidays according to the recent work week law passed by the government. Around this time period the redistribution of lands to communes begins “a manifestation of collectivism,” in Robinson’s view. By the middle of the century serfs were seen as a necessary element in order to keep the land producing. This caused an interesting phenomenon that is noted in the time period from 1854-59. The sale of lands with serfs greatly exceeds those of lands without serfs. At this point politicians and Russian national leaders (and even some serfs who were catching on) are beginning to see the balance of leverage shift towards the peasantry. Seeing the writing on the wall, Tsar Alexander II, proclaims in 1856 that “It were better that emancipation come from the top as opposed to the bottom.” The ramifications and implications of this statement are somewhat straight forward. The peasant force was being viewed as a group that was going inevitably to receive concessions from their oppressive brothers. In 1861 the peasants are emancipated, but this does not necessarily mean that there quality of living changed as a group. Other things did change though. A good example of this is their participation in the national and local governments. Because of economic disparities and hierarchies within the local governments there begins to be some degree of separation within the peasant class. Some could argue that emancipation also caused a large enough group to come together in order to allow the possibility of several factions. Despite this, and who is to say it is necessarily a bad thing, the peasants begin forming Volosts, which are the heads of groups of communities in the same regional volost. The leaders from the volosts would represent the peasants in the Zemstvos which were institutions put in place by the Tsar. Between 1861 and 1905 the peasantry undergoes many social and political changes. At this point in the book (Ch 5, 6, 7) Robinson is basically saying they became more proactive in their own political interests and organized along social lines. During this forty-five year time period the peasant bloc is experiencing resistance from the nobility and the Tsar. In fact it is more complicated than that. The Tsar and the nobility are more or less struggling to gain the support of the peasantry against the other. This creates a three way interaction between the groups. Also in regard to some legislation the Tsar and the Duma or earlier, the nobility, team up to pass various reactionary laws in order to slow the collection of power by the peasants. These included economic as well as political maneuvers. This is a gross oversimplification of this topic, but Robinson does a good job with the material.

One other very large concept or movement that Robinson dissected was the Agrarian movement. He argues that some historians believe that the revolution of 1905 was a continuance of the grievances of 1902 that spilled over into later years and was never really solved one way or (politically speaking) the other, until 1917. The basic and fundamental cause was a lack of grain or food. Unfortunately this caused the peasants to react violently. During times like these (when the peasants forcibly took control of manor houses and massacred the families) the government would attempt to give concessions or placate the peasantry, but the main problem with this strategy was that could not determine what would3 please them as a whole without giving them the whole country. By and large the peasants wanted more land. This does not mean that giving some peasants land made other peasants complacent. In fact in some instances more problems arose from peasants feeling that as members of the same class the government could not treat them differently. This is where the concept of communism comes into historical orbit. Robinson indirectly questions whether the communes’ organization and establishment decades previous had anything to do with this idea of one class.

Robinson conveys his belief that there are two critical time periods that contributed to social and political of the peasantry. The first is from 1861-1905 and the second is from 1905-1917. When I first read this I sort of thought it should just be one time period considering its chronological position in time, but after I read more Robinson states multiple reasons why these two time periods are different and without the first one the second would never have materialized. Without the social organizations from the 1860’s and 70’s the turn of the century political parties of the peasants would not have existed. Another major change was the communication between the various classes and authorities. This allowed the Bolsheviks to ally with the peasants the correct government agencies in order to survive the revolution.

<>Roeder,Philip G|
*1991ja01:WoP#:| “Soviet Federalism and Ethnic Mobilization”| ((UNCOVER ntn fdr))
*1993:P.NJ, PUP|_Red Sunset: The Failure of Soviet Politics| ((jn6511.r44 plt.clt:14-16| Roeder “privileges” politics, he is “objectivist” [his term] looking at tUt~ rather than “subjectivist” who privileges plt.clt IDL & learning))

<>Rogger,Hans| a{}n{cnx rxn FSC vs-Jwx}
*1964:CSS#3:66-94| “The Formation of the Russian Right,1900-1906”
*1964de:JMH#36:398-415| “Was There a Russian Fascism? The Union of Russian People”
*1966je:JGO#14:195-212| “Reflections on Russian Conservatism”
*1966de:SlR#25:615-29| “The Beilis Case: Anti-Semitism and Politics in the Reign of Nicholas II”
*1975:CSS#8:15-76| “Russian Ministers and the Jewish Question, 1881-1917”
*1976ja-mr:CMR#17:5-25| “Government, Jews, Peasants and Land in Post-emancipation Russia”
*1983:|_Russia in the Age of Modernisation and Revolution, 1881-1917| ((gnr.txt mdn))

<>Roosa,Ruth A| a{}n{mfg obx prl rfm.rvx RREV1}o{}
--| RUS trd & future: Idl re.ekn dev,1906-17 [Curtiss,Essays]
*1975:RHi#2,2:124-148| “Russian Industrialists, Politics, and Labor Reform in 1905”| ((Wbr??))
*1997:|_Russian industrialists in an era of revolution : the Association of Industry and Trade, 1906-1917| ((SUMMIT| G/Owen))

<>Roosevelt,Priscilla|_Lifie on the Russian Country Estate: A Social and Cultural History| ((gnt.lnd clt))

<>Root,Hilton L| a{}
|_Peasants and King in Burgundy: Agrarian Foundations of French Absolutism| ((Melton recommend| gnr obx krx lnd mnx stt|Confirms Tcq argument that stt replacd dvr as primary plt force|Unlike Tcq,R sd strong stt “actually increased the power of the community” [12] Royal apx promoted collective ownership of prperty & collective responsibility fr debts in order to extract good and service frm krx|“the crp vlg became a vital component of the centralized stt structure” [10]))

<>Roslof,Edward E|>Roslof.RED|_Red priests: Renovationism, Russian Orthodoxy, and revolution, 1905-1946| ((OChx dxv RREV1 RREV2 RREV3 WW1

The book [...] discusses the changing politics and climate of the Russian Orthodox Church and the surrounding Russian political scene during the Russian revolutions of 1917. The Russian Orthodox Church entered into the twentieth century seeking to evolve and therefore sever its bonds with the state. Some church members felt that the Russian Orthodox Church was “a mere governmental ministry for religious affairs” and who therefore “equated the loss of ecclesiastical sovereignty with the spiritual decay they perceived in their nation” (p 3). Furthermore they believed that “restoring the church’s sovereignty was indispensable for Russia’s spiritual revitalization” (p 3). This early push for reform that [...] illustrates a clear desire by some in the Church to break away from pre-established norms which are themes that reverberate during the Russian revolution.

The Russian Revolution swept in new ideas on religion and its place in society. The vanguard of the revolution, Lenin, stated that while he believed that the Church should be separate from the state so “that everyone shall have the full and unrestricted right not only to profess whatever religion he pleases, but also to spread or change his religion” (p 17), he also believed in religion’s inherent weakness to logic, reason and science. Lenin therefore desired to “fight religious fog using only ideas and ideological weapons, namely our press and our words” and under this pressure [his party] believed that “religion in Russia would rapidly wither away” (p 17). However, this was not the case and the Russian Orthodox Church did in fact continue to survive after the Bolshevik rise to power in October of 1917. The Church’s resistance to the state proved that more volatile measures were necessary in order to weaken the Church’s power and influence. The new programs that were then instituted by the Bolshevik government challenged the Church by stripping it of its wealth, and as we will see the Church was not able to sustain itself through the eventual stalemate with the Bolshevik party and was completely helpless in halting the changes that the Bolsheviks ushered in.

One of the immediate impacts that the revolution had on the Church was that “the government began to expropriate church property” often “ignoring the fact that these institutions served the surrounding communities” (p 22-3). The nationalization of the Church’s assets meant that the parish clergy “were totally dependent on their parishioners for support” and it also served to eliminate “all sources of independent funds for the hierarchy” (p 23). During a famine in 1922 the Russian state’s desire to strip the Church of its wealth reached a crescendo. The desire to marginalize the Church and limit its power was fueled by the hunger that was felt by millions of Russians. The program ordered “local soviets to seize immediately all valuables made of gold, silver, and precious stones found in the church property used by believers” (p 41). This program angered the Church leadership who felt that this “unilateral decision violated their understanding of the newfound working relationship between the church and state” (p 41). This battle that the Church had with the Russian state weakened a once powerful institution, and it began to create some divisions within the Church that were then exploited in a “play to ‘divide and conquer’ the church” (p 48).

This plan focused on dividing the clergy by favoring priests who were loyal to the Bolshevik cause and to “hold clergy opposing seizures responsible for any ‘excesses’” (p 49). This faction eventually turned into a movement that became known as Renovationism. This movement took many different forms as an influx of differing ideas began to shape the movement, however, the ideas that stood out from the others were the ones that argued that “the status quo were to be replaced by new Christian ethics that condemned capitalism and any other forms of economic exploitation” (p 59). These types of Renovationist movements were clearly aligned with the Bolsheviks and were in fact modeled after them (p 62). These new divisive movements that came into being directly threatened the established Church and its hierarchy, and the proposals that were put forth by some clearly modeled the Bolshevik party and their radical beliefs.

--|RRe#24:4| “Religious and Mystical Trends in Russia at the Turn of the Century”| ((rlg Silver Age))

<>Sablinsky,Walter| a{}n{RREV1 prl plc.scx}
*:|_The_Road to Bloody Sunday: Father Gapon and the St. Petersburg Massacre of 1905|

<>Schapiro,Leonard| a{}n{ntg idl Vxi cnx rlg}
*1955de:SEER| “The Vekhi Group and the Mystique of Revolution"| ((Reprint in HRR,2))

<>Schneiderman,Jeremiah| a{}
*1976:Ithaca, CUP|_Sergei Zubatov and Revolutionary Marxism: The Struggle for the Working Class in Tsarist Russian| ((ndr plc.scx prl unx G/Pospelovsky))r

<>Shatz,Marshall S| a{}
*1989:Pi.PA|_Jan Waclaw Machajski: A Radical Critic of the Russian Intelligentsia and Socialism| ((HX313.8.V65 S5 |272p| bxo anx ntg 866:926;Makhaiskii plt.clt scx rvs RREV1))

<>Sked,Alan|_The_Decline and Fall of the Habsburg Empire, 1815-1918| *1989:LND,Longman|>Sked.DECLINE| ((UO| OST WW1a [maybe 11-25 & 246-69 cld be xrx-]| ch1:11-25 (Metternich system) | ch6:239-69 conclusion unravels issue of OST fixation on BAL.stt~, the only target of opportunity for an expansionist fmy operation, which the Habsburg's were| CF=Tunstall.BLOOD for WW1 consequences))

<>Smith,C. Jay,Jr|
*1958:GA Athens|>Finland and the Russian Revolution,1917-1920| ((ntn FIN RREV3))

<>Solov'ev,KA|_Zakonodatel'naia i ispolnitel'naia vlast'' v Rossii: Mekhanizmy vzaimodeistviia (1906-1914) | *2011:MVA,R.plt.entsiklopediia| ((UO ndx 8x11(xrx to p17) ndx RREV1 plt.clt TSR&Dmx tUt| esp. attention paid to informal contacts among elx- representatives & GoS| How were things cooked up in the RUSn "political kitchen"?))

<>Starr,S. Frederick|
*1983:O.ENG|_Red and Hot: The Fate of Jazz in the Soviet Union,1917-1930|

<>Stavrou,Theofanis G., ed|
*1983:B.IN,IUP| Art and Culture in Nineteenth-Century Russia|>Stavrou.ART| A&AA NX556.A1 A74| ndr.sbk

<>Steinberg,Mark D| a{

*1954-1956:BRL| Die Auswirkungen der ersten russischen Revolution von 1905-1907 auf Deutschland| 2vv| ((HD8443.A76 ndr RREV GRM noWbr in v2))

<>Stites,Richard| a{}n{pop.clt wmn rvs
*1978:|>Stites.wmn|_The_Women's liberation movement in Russia : feminism, nihilism, and bolshevism, 1860-1930| ((SDs(b) nhl

Richard Stites’ book […] is a comprehensive, if not ambitious, retelling of the history of Tsarist Russia all the way through to mid-twentieth century Soviet Russia, through the frame of women’s liberation. As compared to many other standard texts that give sweeping conclusions of the political, nationalistic, or ideological results of the Russia during revolutionary times, Stites account tracks the ideological progression of, specifically, women’s liberation—which includes the many and varied concepts of what women’s liberation would look like.

Beginning during the early nineteenth century detailing the average life of the gentry women who would very quickly assume the leadership roles for others to follow into feminism. To detail where Russia was at as far as Western feminism was concerned, in 1836 the Code of Russian Laws detailed that “The women must obey her husband, reside with him in love, respect, and unlimited obedience, and offer him every pleasantness and affection as the ruler of the household” (7). Writers, poets, philosophers, and general intellectuals of the era began to develop the ‘woman question’ in their minds during the early-to-mid-nineteenth century. Stites puts a lot of focus on the literature of the middle half of the century as one of the main locomotives of spreading ideas of women’s liberation, emancipation, and equality. Authors such as Georg Sand, Mikhail L. Mikhailov and Nikolay Chernyshevsky, as well as many others, that were incredibly influential not only on the female Russian intelligentsia, but on the Russian intelligentsia as a whole.

Following these chapters, Richard Stites details in three chapters, respectively, the responses of Feminists, Nihilists, and Radicals. Of feminists, Stites elaborates that they were the first organized group to enunciate a philosophy and initiated specific action [65]. They’re activity most usually consisted of philanthropic charities and organizing with other gentry women of means. “The feminist solution was classically liberal, deriving unconsciously from the 18th century English Whig tradition of liberalizing from the top and slowly spreading the benefits of reform down the social ladder” [88].

Of nihilists, Stites has to say that, “If the feminists wanted to change pieces of the world, the nihilists wanted to change the world itself…their display of will and energy was more visible; and their attitude towards mere charity was similar to that of Thoreau—that is was better to be good than to do good” [101]. Nihilism as a distinct and separate way of life from radicalism faded in the 1860’s. Those who were of the nihilist persuasion in the 1860’s usually either picked to join the revolution or to pass back into mainstream of Russian life.

Of radicals, Stites notes that they tended to subsume the “woman question” with the “human question” [124-125]. The great crusade “to the people” that began in the spring of 1874 was the first large-scale manifestation of what came to be called ‘populism’ [138]. Following the 1860’s and 1870’s there was not much more that could said about the general problem of women’s liberation—beginning in the mid 1890’s two organized women’s movements began: one socialist and one feminist. Joining in and supporting the 1905 Revolution, feminists and socialists alike petitioned the State Duma for their general emancipation—but each time a decision was to be reached, the Duma was dissolved.

The women’s suffrage movement entered its doldrums at the end of 1907 with its unanswered decision from the State Duma. The Great War revived interest and support of women’s emancipation. Following the February Revolution of 1917—the newly created Provisional Government reviewed the question of women’s suffrage and on July 20 the government ratified its decision to give the vote to all adults over twenty years of age. The torch of ‘feminism’ would then be held, following the October Revolutions, by the ‘Bolshevik feminists’.

Stites makes it incredibly clear how convoluted and complex the eventual conclusion of women’s emancipation was in pre-revolutionary and revolutionary times. While women understood a common cause of women’s liberation, they all came from differing ideological backgrounds that came with their own baggage. Inevitably, when these ideological factions came into power during, especially, the era of the Provisional Government, all of the factional lines became much more glaringly apparent and difficult to ignore. In the end, the Bolsheviks and the Communist Party had the longest-running and by far the most efficient organization at the time of the October Revolution and simply stepped in its place and began, basically the same goals—as far as women’s emancipation and equality was concerned—just from their own ideological standpoint.

*1989:OxUP|_Revolutionary Dreams: Utopian Vision and Experimental Life in the Russian Revolution| ((RREV3))
*1992:|_Russian Popular Culture: Entertainment and Society Since 1900| ((pop.clt))
*1995:IUP|_Culture and Entertainment in Wartime Russia| ((ndr.sbk WW2 pop.clt))

*1966:BRX| Russia Before 1917|Series: Bibliographical Introduction to Legal History and Ethnology| ((KM.5997r rfr bbl))
*1976:BRX| The Russian Constitution of April 23,1906: Political Institutions of the Duma Monarchy| ((noUO ndr stt.dmx1 RREV1 tUt))

<>Tang,Philip E|_Russian and Soviete Policy in Manchuria and Outer MOngolia, 1922-1931|

<>Thaden,E. C| a{}
*1964:S.UW|_Conservative Nationalism in Nineteenth-Century Russia| ((ntg ntn cnx idl mdn

STUDENT REVIEW with emphasis on the "Pochvenniki" =
Enthusiasts of the Soil| The pochvenniki emerged in Russia in the latter half of the nineteenth century as a group of conservative nationalist advocators who could meet the intellectual challenges that faced Russian society at the time. The group’s name derived from “soil” to illustrate their yearning for a “unique organic unity and was devoid of the class antagonisms of Western Europe” (62). Believing that a gap had generated that separated the intellectual elite of the country from the common people the pochvenniki strived to create and promote unanimity among all of Russia. They believed that the Emancipation of the Serfs in 1861 paved the way for a new world. However, they also believed that the emancipation inundated the country with alienated, vulnerable masses. There was a great fear among conservative nationalists at the time that the newly freed common people of Russia would look to the Western world for solutions to their societal woes. It was a main objective of the pochvenniki to push the masses in the direction of a singular, cohesive Russian identity.

This group knew the importance of national cohesion in modern society. In order to achieve this cohesion, properly spread it’s word, and close the gap between commoners and intellectual elites the pochvenniki produced two important journals called Time and Epoch. The group intentionally strove to eliminate any party labels from their journals and tried to act as a middleman between Westernism and Slavophilism. This, of course, was yet another effort to produce solidarity among Russians, but members of the pochvenniki themselves seemed to be divided on the matter. Some sympathized with the Slavophile views, while others believed that it was too radical and thus supported what they believed to be the more realistic perception of the West. Some, like Fedor Dostoevskii, appreciated what they referred to as “pure liberalism”, that is the support of abstract ideas pertaining to freedoms (speech, thought, etc.) when no other course of action could be administered. They believed that these Western ideals could be adapted to any social or political system. The works in both the Time and Epoch reflected these ideals, but coupled with nationalist undercurrents. The work of the pochvenniki’s was merely a collection of the opinionated expressionist sentiments of Russian culture at the time, and carried no political or economic weight.

Although the pochvenniki emphasized and instilled the nationalist feeling it failed, according to Thaden, to produce and offer specific examples of the ways in which political and economic renovations needed to be dealt with. Their call for industrialization and development of Russia in the 1860s was a noble idea, but they lacked rationalization and understanding of the requirements that intense modernization demanded. The group advocated for reforms in principle, but underestimated the difficulty of modernizing an underdeveloped country to vie against a superior Western society. Thaden gives examples for some of the minimum requirements necessary to even begin to undergo a transformation of this amplitude, “Capital must be accumulated; technicians, specialists, and leaders must be trained…the land is not cultivated intensively and labor productivity is low…” (61). In this arduous process, the peasant would be left bearing the brunt of the load as the demands for a growing labor force increase, but pay and housing opportunities remain low “because the workers’ initial lack of the skills and training required by modern industry puts them at a disadvantage in dealing with their employers” (62) ))

*1971:NYC|_Russia Since 1801: The Making of a New Society| ((gnr))
*1981:P.NJ| Thaden,et al|_Russification in the Baltic Provinces and Finland,1855-1917| “Dilemmas of Borderland Policy in the Era of Great Reforms: Poland and Finland,1855-1881”| ((DK511.B3 R77| MPR ntn FIN POL irx gbx BLT RS1 irx stt))

<>Theen,R|_Lenin: Genesis and Development of a Revolutionary| ((OWN chd.Lnn))

<>Thompson,Arthur William| a{}
*1970:|_The_Uncertain Crusade: America and the Russian Revolution of 1905| ((noUO| R&A))

<>Tobias,Henry J|_The_Jewish Bund in Russia: From Its Origins to 1905| ((Jwx.Bund prl.mvt RREV1))

<>Treadgold,Donald. Warren| a{}
*1955:NYC|_Lenin and His Rivals: The Struggle for Russia’s Future, 1898-1906| ((RREV1 Lnn| Explores “1st popular front” KPS infiltration))
*1957:P.NJ|_The_Great Siberian Migration: Government and Peasant in Resettlement from Emancipation to the First World War| ((TXT Excerpts | SBR krx Stp R&A2 RUS3))
*1987:Acta Slavica Iaponica,5:1-20| "Soviet Historians' Views on 'The Asiatic Mode of Production' " [E-TXT]| ((AMP hst.gph))
--|_Twentieth Century Russia| Several editions| ((gnr.txt REF))
--| In Adams.RR
--| In Stavrou.RU
--| In VP9

<>Treadgold,DW,ed|>TDU| *1964:|_Development of the USSR: An Exchange of Views| ((ndr.sbk))

<>Tuchman,Barbara W| a{}n{}o{
*:|>Tuchman.GUNS|_The_Guns of August, The War That Ended Peace| ((WW1b))
*1966:NYC,Macmillan|>Tuchman.PROUD|_The_Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World Before the War, 1890-1914| ((WW1a| ch8="The Death of Jaurés":407-462))

<>Tucker,Robert C| a{}n{Mrx scx idl KPS REV| rvs chd Stl NEP Gwrx}o{}
--|Image of Dual RUS [Black,Transformation]
*1970:L.ENG|_The Marxian Revolutionary Idea| ((rtl on stt&rvs))
*1973:NYC|_Stalin as Revolutionary 1879-1929: A Study in History and Personality|
*1987:|>Tucker.plt.clt|_Political Culture and Leadership in Soviet Russia: From Lenin to Gorbachev| ((
Links plt.clt to clt in gnr, but makes no functional distinction between clt & CIV, as does SAC| Tucker (cites Edward Tylor’s 1871 Primitive Culture where clt defined: “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, mrl~, law custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (Tylor influenced by Gustav Klemm’s 1843-52, Allgemeine Culturgeschichte der Menschheit)| A.L. Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn, Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, list 164 definitions & summarize: “all cultures are largely made up of overt patterned ways of behaving, feeling, and reaction. [What could be the meaning of "overt" "feeling"? EG=Smile or frown?] But cultures likewise include a characteristic set of unstated premises and categories (‘implicit culture’) which vary greatly between societes. [...] culture is a product; is historical; includes ideas, patterns, and value; is selective; is learned; is based upon symbols; and is an abstraction from behavior and the products of behavior.” [Tucker:1] Dismisses Geoffrey Gorer and John Rickman’s “swaddling” psx trx, The People of Great Russia: A Psychological Study [LND:1949]) He might have mentioned Nathan Leites US-Air-Force-supported studies of “operational code” of Politburo; he does mention Fülöp-Miller|

*1990:NYC|_Stalin in Power, 1929-1941|
--|Autocrats & Oligarchs [Lederer,Rus For Pol]
--|RUS total.stt [TDU]

<>Tucker,Robert C., ed| a{}
*1977:NYC|_Stalinism: Essays in Historical Interpretation| ((>Tucker.STL| HX313.S683 OWN sbk|
Cohen,S,STL &SDb-ism|
McNeal,R,Trotskyist Interpr|
Rigby,T. H.,Mono-Organizational Society|
Tucker,Robert,REV frm abv|
Lewin,Moshe,Social Background|
Erlich,Al,Mrx-n Growth Models|
Sharlet,Robert,SSR lwx clt|
Clark,Katerina,Utopian Anthropology as a Context of STL.blt|
Medvedev,Roy,New Pages frm STL plt bxo|
Brus,Włodzimierz,“People’s dmk-cies”|
Skilling,H. Gordon,CZC plt clt|
Kolakowski,Leszek,Versus Mrx-sm?|

<>Verner,Andrew M| a{}
*1990:P.NJ|_The_Crisis of Russian Autocracy: Nicholas II and the 1905 Revolution| ((DK258.v44| N-2 RREV1 stt| quotes FMV:239 & 236| Verner,Crisis:51(FMV:239); 54(FMV:236); 77(re. Macht & Herrschaft; potestas & auctoritas); 89(Rechtsstaat); 293(Charisma of N-2)))
*1995ja:RRe#54,1:65-90| “Discursive Strategies in the 1905 Revolution: Peasant Petitions from Vladimir Province”| ((krx ptn))

<>Von Laue,Theodore| a{}n{REV mdn mfgG Wtt}o{}
*1956:JGO#4,2:138-58| “Die Revolution von aussen als erste Phase der russischen Revolution 1917”| ((Places RREV in category with rvs in "backward countries" Twrl| Shows how impulses for REV came from without from zpd rather than from internal sources| S&U lgc))
*1961mr:JEH| “Russian Peasants in the Factory, 1892-1904”| ((krx nds))
*1961jy:CSinSH| “Imperial Russia at the Turn of the Century: The Cultural Slope and the Revolution from Without”| ((CF=Wright,Mary))
*1963:NYC|_Sergei_Witte and the Industrialization of Russia| ((ekn mfg RUS3))
*1964:Ph.P|_Why Lenin? Why Stalin? A Reappraisal of the Russian Revolution, 1900-1930| ((UO| gnr RREV STL mfg MPR rvs CIV RUS3 Wbr:34n & 42| originally pbd 1960??))
*1965:SlR#24:34-46| “The Chances for Liberal Constitutionalism”| ((lbx cst RREV1))
*1969:Ph.PA|_The_Global City: Freedom,Power and Necessity in the Age of World Revolutions| ((CB425.V64| REV.trx wrl.hst idl CIV))
*1981:Soviet Union/Union Sovietique#8,1:1-17| “Stalin among the Moral and Political Imperatives, or How to Judge Stalin?”| ((off-print frm VL OWN STL clt.clt mrl hst.gph))
--|stt & ekn [Black,Transformation]
--|Weakness of stt [Brower.RR:]
--|Crises in RUSn polity [Curtiss,Essays]
--|Prb~ of mdnion [Lederer,Rus For Pol]
--|Prb of mfgR [STL]

<>Vucinich,Wayne, ed| a{}
*1968:S.CA| The Peasant in Nineteenth Century Russia| ((|>VP9| OWN krx ndr.sbk|
Matossian,Mary.krx Way of Life|
Emmons,Terence & krx.rfm|
Treadgold & rlg|
Curtiss,J. S. & mlt|
Watter,Francis M. & vlg.o|
Zelnik & zvd|
Petrovich,Michael. in 19th c. hst.gph|
Fanger,Donald. in blt|
Riasanovsky,N. V. Afterword:Prb of krx

<>Waites,Bernard|_Europe and the Third World: From Colonisation to Decolonisation, c. 1500-1998| *1999:NYC,St.Martin's P| ((UO| MPR Twrl| Good definition and etymology of wrd EUR (Enlightenment concept) and wrd Twrl))

--|_The_Controversy over Capitalism: Studies in the Social Philosophy of the Russian Populists
--|_The_Slavophile Controversy
--|_A_History of Russian Thought … to Marxism

<>Warth,Robert D|_The_Allies and the Russian Revolution: From the Fall of the Monarchy to the Peace of Brest-Litovsk| *1954:D.NC,DUP| ((VRM RREV3 WW1b Gwrx irx))

<>Watters,F. M| a{}
*1966:University of California, Berkeley, PhD Dissertation| “Land Tenure and Financial Burdens of the Russian Peasant,1861-1905”| ((krx ekn skz RREV1))

<>Weissman,Neil B|
|_Reform in Tsarist Russia: The State Bureaucracy and Local Government,1900-1914|New Brunswick NJ:1981| ((JS6061.W44 ndr stt rfm srv zmv RREV1 noWbr))

<>West,James L|
*1991:BTsP:41-56| “The Riabushinsky Circle: Burzhuaziia and Obshchestvennost’ in Late Imperial Russia”| ((Rbw.krj RbwPP brj cvc.pbl))

<>Wilford,Hugh|_America's Great Game: The CIA's Secret Arabists and the Shaping of the Modern Middle East| *2013:NYC,Basic Books| ((SMT 8x11:WW1=pp.3-9| AfroAsia R&A))

<>Williams,Stephen| a{}n{Stp.rfm krx fxx}o{}

*2006:S.CA,HoT|_Liberal Reform in an Illiberal Regime....

Williams evaluates events leading up to and through the 1906 Stolypin land reforms. He begins by providing an explanation for his understanding of what “liberal democracy” is and whether the Stolypin land reforms were working to promote this definition or not. He also attempts to address the potential for these reforms to be considered a “revolution from above”. Williams proceeds to provide a basic history of early Russian peasant life immediately following their emancipation from serfdom. He introduces the reader to this period of Russian history from the perspective of property rights.

Williams explains both the pros and cons of open plots, repartition, and family vs- individual household management. He proceeds to discuss the restrictions commune members experienced when attempting to leave the commune or sale/exchange property. He points to various government enforced restrictions as well as communal restrictions such as the initial requirement for a peasant to have commune approval before exit of the commune would be permitted. From here Williams provides a short history of the early attempts at reform and the effects they had on the commune. He discusses the political aspects of land reform and the conflicts between governmental parties, the tsar, and the duma. Williams explains the motivation of these interest groups including the incentives for the gentry and royal family to maintain their control over private property.

Williams finishes the book by providing a summary of the results of the Stolypin reforms and the long term implications of them. He breezes through the short history leading up to World War I and the events that prevented the completion of the land reforms. Overall I found the language of this book to be friendly to the reader. This would be a good book for someone without a lot of Russian history experience as well as the seasoned historian.

>Winkler,Heinrich August|_The Long Road West| GO Winkler.GRM

<>Woolf,Stuart J., ed|_Nationalism in Europe, 1815 to the present: A reader| *1996:NYC,Routledge|>NiE| ((UO| prm.sbk ntn.sttism ntnism| ToC =

Nationality / J.S. Mill
What is a nation? / Ernest Renan
The nation / Otto Bauer
Nation, nationality, internationalism / Marcel Mauss
National states and national minorities / C.A. Macartney
The idea of nation / Federico Chabod
Reflections on nationalism / John Breuilly
Language and nationalism / Joshua Fishman
Urban space and monuments in the 'nationalization of the masses' : the Italian case / Bruno Tobia
When was Wales? / G.A. Williams.

<>Wolfe,Bertram D| a{}
*1948:B.MA|_Three Who Made a Revolution| ((rvs))
*1967:L.ENG|_Marxism:100 Years in the Life of a Doctrine| ((OWN))3{Mrx idl mvt REV CIV|965:orig.pbd??))
*:| FRN,GRM,idl,& flaw in Ntx1,Ntx2,Ntx3 [Curtiss,Essays]

<>Wood,Alan| a{}
*1987:L.ENG, Methuen |_The_Origins of the Russian Revolution,1861-1917| ((DK189.W66 gnr RREV|56p w/ggr noWbr))

<>Wood,Anthony| a{}
*1986:LND|_Russian Revolution| ed#2| ((DK265.W62))

<>Worobec,Christine| a{}
*1991:P.NJ,PUP|_Peasant Russia: Family and Community in the Post-Emancipation Period| ((HN530.R87w67|257p lxt!| krx fmy RUS2))

<>Wynn,Charters|_Workers, Strikes, and Pogroms: The Donbass-Dnepr Bend in Late Imperial Russia, 1870-1905, (Princeton, 1992)| ((prl zbs RREV1))

<>Yaney,George| a{}
*1982:IL.Urbana|_The_Urge to Mobilize: Agrarian Reform in Russia, 1861-1930| ((krx.rfm StpP.rfm))

| Road to Revolution...| ((>YRR| gnr ?NOndx?))
*1965:KS.UK| A Russian’s American Dream: A Memoir on William Frey| ((prm ppx RS2 rdx cmn gte USA1~~))

<>Yavuz,M.Hakan et al. eds|_War and Diplomacy: The Russo-Turkish war of 1877-1878 and the Treaty of Berlin|>Yavuz.WAR| ((UO 8x11:1-13(Intro) ndr.sbk| RTwrx&irx WW1a OTM.TRK MPR B.trt

[NB!=] Introduction:1-13 [8x11] laying the foundations for future instability / M. Hakan Yavuz, Peter Sluglett|
The transformation of "empire" through wars and reforms: integration vs. oppression / M. Hakim Yavuz
European equilibrium or Asiatic balance of power?: The Ottoman search for security in the aftermath of the Congress of Berlin / Feroze A.K. Yasamee
[NB!=] Benevolent contempt: Bismarck's Ottoman policy / Sean McMeekin
The Ottoman Eastern question and the problematic origins of modern ethnic cleansing, genocide, and humanitarian interventionism [...] / Mujeeb R. Khan
[NB!=] Muslim and orthodox resistance against the Berlin Peace Treaty in the Balkans / Mehmet Hacisalihoǧlu
The establishment of Serbian local government in the countries of Niš, Vranje, Toplica, and Pirot after the Congress of Berlin / Miroslav Svirčević
[NB!=] The Ottoman wrong horse?: The question of Bosnia and Hercegovina in the last phase of the eastern crisis / Edin Radušić
The Berlin Treaty, Bosnian Muslims, and nationalism / Aydin Babuna
Agents of post-Ottoman states: the precariousness of the Berlin Congress boundaries of Montenegro and how to define/confine people / Isa Blumi
A reassessment of the Macedonian Question, 1878-1908 / Gül Tokay
Patterns of conflict & violence in eastern Anatolia leading up to the Russo-Turkish War and the Treaty of Berlin / Brad Dennis
From Millet-i Sadika to Millet-i Asiya: Abdülhamid II and Armenians, 1878-1909 / Garabet K. Moumdjian
[NB!=] Template for destruction: the Congress of Berlin and the Evolution of Ottoman counterinsurgency practices / Edward J. Erickson
The Hamidiye light cavalry regiments: Abdülhamid II and the eastern Anatolian tribes / Bayram Kodaman
[NB!=] Ignoring the people: the effects of the Congress of Berlin / Justin McCarthy
The Treaty of Berlin and the tragedy of the settlers from the three cities / Mustafi Tanriverdi
Two different images: Bulgarian and English sources on the Batak massacre / Tetsuya Sahara
The Rhodope resistance and commission of 1878 / Ömer Turan
Conclusion: On the road back from Berlin / Frederick F. Anscombe|
Yavuz.WAR employs theoretical tools and approaches of political science, sociology, history, and international relations

<>Zelnik,Reginald| a{}n{prl}o{
*1971:|_Labor and Society in tsarist Russia: The Factory Workers of St. Petersburg, 1855-1870
*1976:RRe#35,4:417-47| "Russian Bebels...."| [TXT] ((part two of series on Kalatchikov & Matvei Fisher))
*1995:|_Law and Disorder on the Narova River: The Kreenholm Strike of 1872
*1999:|_Workers and Intelligentsia in Late Imperial Russia: Realities, Representations, Reflections

<>Zeman,Z.A.B., and W. Scharlau| a{}
|>_The_Merchant of Revolution: The Life of A. I. Helphand (Parvus),1867-1924| *1965:L.ENG,| ((WW1c RREV3 Gwrx rvs SDs(b) ))

<>Zenkovsky,Serge A., ed| a{}
*1960:C.MA|_Pan-Turkism and Islam in Russia| ((ntn CAS TRK rlgI EUA AfrAsia))

<>Zevelev,A. I., ed| a{}
*1994:MVA Vyswaya wkola|_Istoriia_politicheskikh partii Rossii| ((450p| JN6598.a1i88| plt pty~ plt.clt R&A RREV1| cites Shelokhaev| gnr intro on methodologies & hst.gph [5-38] Brief intro to origins of plt pty~ in zpd [39-40] Discussion of particulars of RUS sit [41-52]))
--|_Politicheskie partii Rossii : istoriia i sovremennost : uchebnik dlia istoricheskikh i gumanitarnykh fakultetov vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii / pod redaktsiei A.I. Zeveleva, IU.P. Sviridenko, V.V. Shelokhaeva

<>Ziablikov,A| a{}
*2002:KOS,KGTU| "Iasnovidtsy revoliutsii": Rossiĭskaia khudozhestvennaia intelligentsiia v politicheskikh bataliiakh nachala XX veka...| ((UO xdj.plt plt.clt))

<>Zimina,VD| a{}
*2006:MVA,RGGU|_Beloe delo vzbuntovavsheisia Rossii: Politicheskie rezhimy Grazhdanskoi voiny. 1917-1920 gg| (( 467pp| mdn
V monografii rassmatrivaetsya maloizuqennyi process formirovaniya i funkcionirovaniya politiqeskix rejimov v Rossii v 1918-1920 gg. V centre vnimaniya avtora naxodyatsya problemy legitimnosti vlasti, formy i metody bor'by protivoborstvuyuwwix politiqeskix sil za pravo realizovat' sobstvennuyu koncepciyu social'no-politiqeskoi modernizacii rossiiskoi gosudarstvennosti. Predprinyaty popytki tipologii politiqeskix rejimov s toqki zreniya analiza ix gosudarstvennogo i institucional'nogo stroitel'stva i social'no-ekonomiqeskogo reformatorstva krasnyx i belyx. V Prilojenii pomeqqwwy vospominaniya uqastnikov i oqevidcev dramatiqeskix sobytii

<>Zuckerman,Frederic| a{}
*:|_The_Tsarist Secret Police in Russian Society, 1880-1917| (( plt.plc

Fredric Zuckerman is currently a Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Adelaide. He acknowledged that this volume began as a PhD dissertation under the guidance of Professor William L. Blackwell at New York University.

Zuckerman acknowledged his debt to the Hoover Institution as the location of primary sources, makes a point of his use of a modified Library of Congress transliteration system, and includes a note on the Julian Calendar used by Tsarist Russia that ran 12 days behind the Gregorian in the 19th century and 13 days behind in the 20th century.

Additionally an introductory glossary and abbreviation guide is given that identifies the common terms used by historians and contemporaries. Zuckerman uses these subject specific terms and abbreviations through out the book and the inclusion of a glossary was very helpful.

This volume is a comprehensive study of the political police system in late Imperial Russia based on a vast bibliography of primary and secondary sources, and on Zuckerman's research in the Hoover Institution's Archives. The main focus of the work is on the operation activities of the tsarist police between 1900 and 1917.

[mdn=] Zuckerman is not biased or prejudiced in any way and deals with persons and events in an evenhanded manner. The Tsarist police are themselves unique in history but the need for a modern state to protect itself and its citizens is understood as a common feature of the modern nation state. Many European states and even the U.S. examined the Russian experience when establishing their own political police.

Introductory chapters give an overview of Russia's 19th century experience in dealing with political dissent and then examines the lives and working conditions of individuals who served within the tsarist system. A sociological view of the bureaucracy by the identification of distinct groups within the police; civil servants, gendarmes, and former revolutionaries (sotrudniki). These individuals are shown to have conflicts when forced to interact with each other and additionally the various departments are shown to conflict within the system as departments vie with each for power influence, and monies, as well as individual ministers have agendas of their own which often conflict for personal reasons or for tactical and strategic reasons.

What follows the look at the make up the political police is a detailed chronological account of the failures and accomplishments of the Russian political police from 1900 to 1917. The story is highlighted by events and people that bring the revolutionary period into focus. The story follows the police efforts and infighting of the many ministers and police chiefs who came to their appointments through chance or as the result of a patronage / clientele system.

Sometimes the best man available for a post comes into power, but as often as not a mediocre or unsuitable man is chosen to lead the most important section at the worst possible time. Another problem is the lack of a strategic vision that could coordinate a single department much less coordinate a number of departments that could work together to achieve a desired goal. While not specifically laying the blame at the feet of Nicholas II it is obvious that the fault is the Tsar's and the tsarist / imperial system.

The volume concludes with a chapter that discuses the similarities between the tsarist and Soviet secret police. I found this interesting but perhaps out of place. Obviously Zuckerman draws on a vast knowledge and understanding but this chapter is speculative and without the academic rigor that was evident in the previous chapters. While reading the last few chapters I had a feeling that Zuckerman had more to say as he made statements that were not as circumspect as earlier in the book. Perhaps a publisher's constraint or deadline came into effect. I must admit though that I myself have been guilty of speculation at the end of a research paper when insights gained during research find themselves added regardless of their relevance to my topic and thesis, and so I gave the author the benefit of the doubt and forgave, but some readers may be taken aback during the final chapter.

While I enjoyed the book enormously I would not recommend it as an introductory volume. Zuckerman presupposes a certain knowledge of his subject, and a historical familiarity with many personalities and politics of the period. On the other hand anyone who is interested in the period will benefit from the huge bibliography that can be used as a guide for further reading.

<>Zyrianov,P. N| a{}
*1984:MVA|_Pravoslavnaia tserkov’ v bor’be s revoliutsiei, 1905-1907 gg| EBy A. I. Klibanov| ((GRS:185| RREV1 chx rxn))