V. Carl Erdmann – ein deutschbaltischer Provinzialrechtler mit Idealen

Author(s):  
Marju Luts-Sootak

Abstract Carl Erdmann − a German-Baltic provincial lawyer with ideals. Carl Eduard Erdmann (1841–1898), almost forgotten today, produced the most comprehensive work on the private law of the Baltic provinces of the Russian Empire in the late 19th century. With a good reason, he is considered the most outstanding philosophical mind among the Baltic provincial lawyers. His doctrines on the person and ownership in law are deeply rooted not in the modern philosophy of freedom, but in Christian ideals. The person had its ultimate justification in the divine personality. The idea of ownership was to be kept free from individualistic egoism and embedded in the generational continuity of the family. These ideals explain how Erdmann was able to combine his legal technique of German Pandektistik with the pre-modern normative guidelines of Baltic private law codification.

Author(s):  
Valeria Sobol

This book shows that Gothic elements in Russian literature frequently expressed deep-set anxieties about the Russian imperial and national identity. The book argues that the persistent Gothic tropes in the literature of the Russian Empire enact deep historical and cultural tensions arising from Russia's idiosyncratic imperial experience. It brings together theories of empire and colonialism with close readings of canonical and less-studied literary texts as the book explores how Gothic horror arises from the threatening ambiguity of Russia's own past and present, producing the effect Sobol terms “the imperial uncanny.” Focusing on two spaces of “the imperial uncanny” — the Baltic “North”/Finland and the Ukrainian “South” — the book reconstructs a powerful discursive tradition that reveals the mechanisms of the Russian imperial imagination that are still at work today.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (25) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ljubov Kisseljova

Artiklis käsitletakse probleemi, kuidas Vene Geograafiaseltsi vaated, mis põhinesid Karl Ernst von Baeri etnograafilisel programmil, realiseerusid populaarses ja teaduslikus diskursuses, ning millist osa etendab etnograafilistes kirjeldustes poliitiline faktor. Mitmeköitelise teose „Maaliline Venemaa“ Baltikumi käsitleva teise köite teise osa näitel analüüsitakse impeeriumi ideoloogia peamiste postulaatide mõju piirkonna ajaloo ning põlisrahvaste kuvandi konstrueerimisele. Näidatakse, et autorid püüavad tõestada, nagu oleks piirkonna põhiprobleem Balti erikord, et kohalik elanikkond vihkab sakslasi ja vaatab lootusega Vene võimu poole. Selline tendents sobis täiesti vene 1860.−1870. aastate hoiakutega Balti küsimuses. Põhijäreldus on, et populaarne diskursus tingib etnograafilise käsitluse lihtsustamise ning ideologiseerimise.   The article views, in as great detail as possible, the history of creating the popular scientific ethnographic publication North-Eastern Borderlands of Russia. The Baltic Region (Северо-Западные Окраины России. Прибалтийский край, 1883) from the ethnographic series Picturesque Russia (Живописная Россия). Differently from Karsten Brüggemann (2018) who placed it in the broad context of 19th-century ethnographic publications, this article is less interested in the context and the general paradigm it blends with than in immanent text analysis, its pragmatics and sources. The author has set herself the task to examine how the book’s anonymous authors cope with the dilemma of academic and popular discourses; to which extent they manage to overcome the ideological and political setting of the era straddling the boundary between the epochs of Alexander II and Alexander III; how they implement the conditions of official imperial ideology – the loyalty of the subjects, the need for the acculturation of borderlands, the consolidation of a unified imperial nation. Therefore, a brief digression is made into the general features of imperial ideology. The beginning of the article describes how the publication reflected the general views of the Russian Geographical Society that should have become the patron of the publication. It is shown that Karl Ernst v. Baer’s article “On ethnographical studies in general and in Russia in particular” (“Об этнографических исследованиях вообще и в России в особенности”, 1846), which makes a clear distinction between the scientific and political tasks of ethnography, played a role in the formation of the concept of Picturesque Russia. The authors met the scholarly criteria in their selection of reliable information about the history of the Baltic provinces and their peoples and the new stage in the formation of the national mentality of Estonians and Latvians in the period of modernisation. The authors underscored how education influenced the gradual breakaway from the traditional lifestyle, creation of national cultural societies and periodicals, development of new literature in the local languages. They tried to present to the readers interesting digressions into the history of the region and its peoples, thus meeting the criterion of popularity. Simultaneously, the authors adhered to clear ideological principles: the territory of the Baltic provinces is a primordial “Russian” territory and must forever remain a part of the Russian Empire (the authors, naturally, could not imagine that the empire was not eternal). The indigenous peoples suffered greatly because of the German invasion in the 13th century and the long-time German rule that would follow; they hated Germans, strove for liberation from German domination and wanted to integrate into the Russian context. This attitude fully met the ideology and policy of the Russian authorities concerning the Russian acculturation of the region and gradual cancellation of the Baltic special order. One of the principles of the authors of the publication was to show the indigenous peoples’ support to such policy. The book about the Baltic provinces was published anonymously, and, until now, archive searches have not revealed the authors’ names. Analysis shows that the book is a compilation; the authors relied on many sources, which are listed in the current article. However, the lack of a single editor, heterogeneity of different parts of the book, and ideological engagement had a negative effect on the quality of the book. Picturesque Russia, which was planned as an extensive and very expensive project covering the history, geography and ethnography of the all regions of the Russian Empire did not prove as successful as its initiator, the renowned Russian published Maurycy Wolff, had expected. The bulky and heavy tomes did not sell well and did not get a serious response from Russian readers. Still, the books of this series, and The Baltic Region in particular, became sources for many popular publications of the time, including guidebooks on Russia not only in Russian, but also in German.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 145-172
Author(s):  
Georgy Smirnov ◽  
Tatyana Vyatchanina

The article deals with two Courland palaces built by the Duke ErnstJohann Biron in Mitau and Ruhental (today, respectively, Jelgava andRundale, Latvia) in connection with architectural drawings of theso-called Bergholtz collection, which is part of the Tessin-HårlemanCollection (THC) in Nationalmuseum in Stockholm. Twelve drawingsof the two Courland palaces make this collection of special interestto those interested in the art of the Baltic region.The first part of the paper is dedicated to the person of FriedrichWilhelm von Bergholtz and to his collection. Who was the creatorof the collection, what were the reasons to gather it and what otherdrawings are stored there? Born in the German duchy of Holstein,Bergholtz spent in all about 15 years in Russia. An extremely richand diverse collection of architectural drawings was gathered mainly(presumably totally) during his third visit in 1742–1746 as tutor ofKarl-Peter-Ulrich, heir to the Russian throne and future emperor ofRussia under the moniker Peter III. The circumstances of compilingthe collection and reasons for it are quite obscure. All the assumptionsmade by different authors remain mere guesswork. The greaterpart of the Bergholtz collection deals with St Petersburg and itssurroundings. All other drawings, numbering 174 in total, referto Moscow, to several provinces of the Russian empire and to theDuchy of Courland.The second part of the article reveals and describes 12 sheetsfrom the Bergholtz collection dedicated to the Baroque palaces inCourland constructed in the 1730s for duke Ernst Johann Bironaccording to the projects of the great architect Francesco Rastrelli.The research resulted in the discovery of seven sheets depicting plansand façades of the palaces in Ruhental, showing how they are almostexact copies of the original projects stored in the collection of theAlbertina museum in Vienna. Of the five drawings that representthe palace in Mitau, two are also copies of the Vienna sheets, andthree are copies of completed projects. Thus, the most valuable amongthe architectural drawings from the Bergholtz collection are threedrawings depicting the façade, and plans for two floors, of the palacein Mitau – the only known copies of Rastrelli’s project, the originalsof which have not yet been discovered.


2021 ◽  
pp. 186
Author(s):  
Nadezhda S. Nizhnik

The review of the XVIII International Scientific Conference "State and Law: evolution, current state, development prospects (to the 300th anniversary of the Russian Empire)" was held on April 29-30, 2021 at the St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The Russian Empire existed on the political map of the world from October 22 (November 2), 1721 until the February Revolution and the overthrow of the Monarchy on March 3, 1917. The Russian Empire was the third largest state that ever existed (after the British and Mongolian Empires): It extended to the Arctic Ocean in the north and the Black Sea in the south, to the Baltic Sea in the west and the Pacific Ocean in the east. The Russian Empire was one of the great powers along with Great Britain, France, Prussia (Germany) and Austria-Hungary, and since the second half of the XIX century – also Italy and the United States. The capital of the Russian Empire was St. Petersburg (1721 - 1728), Moscow (1728 - 1732), then again St. Petersburg (1732 - 1917), renamed Petrograd in 1914. Therefore, it is natural that a conference dedicated to the 300th anniversary of the formation of the Russian Empire was held in St. Petersburg, the former imperial capital. The conference was devoted to problems concerning various aspects of the organization and functioning of the state and law, a retrospective analysis of the activities of state bodies in the Russian Empire. The discussion focused on various issues: the character of the Russian Empire as a socio-legal phenomenon and the subject of the legitimate use of state coercion, the development of political and legal thought, the regulatory and legal foundations of the organization and functioning of the Russian state in the XVIII century – at the beginning of the XX century, the characteristics of state bodies as an element of the mechanism of the imperial state in Russia, the organizational and legal bases of the activities of bodies that manage the internal affairs of the Russian Empire, as well as the image of state authorities and officials-representatives of state power.


Slavic Review ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toivo U. Raun

Historical studies of the Russian empire in upheaval in the first two decades of the twentieth century have tended to be animated by a narrow centralist bias or an equally narrow regional one. Although it is clear that the primary impulse for revolutionary situations in 1905 and 1917 resulted from events in St. Petersburg/Petrograd, a Russocentric approach to a society that was less than 50 percent Russian is surely inadequate. At the same time, studies of individual minority nationalities, however thorough, tend to view these groups in isolation. A comparative perspective, which could identify broader uniformities as well as local peculiarities, is usually lacking. In this article I shall present a synthesizing and comparative overview of the Revolution of 1905 in the Baltic Provinces and Finland. Although these areas constituted only 2 percent of the land area of the Russian empire and had less than 4 percent of its population in 1905,2 they were among the most modernized in the country, and their ethnic diversity and differing histories provide abundant material for a comparative case study.


Slavic Review ◽  
1968 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 542-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan W. Fisher

Discussions of Catherine II as an “enlightened despot” usually emphasize her attempts to reform the social and political bases of the Russian Empire and to gain the active support of the nobility and gentry in governmental activity. Catherine denned enlightened government as wellordered government, achieving its policy and programs through bureaucratic and political means rather than with the sheer force that many of her predecessors had used.The term “Russification” is seldom used with reference to the period of Catherine II, even though it was in her reign that the Cossack Sech was abolished, the special privileges granted by Peter I to the Baltic provinces abrogated, and the first successful assimilation of Russia’s Muslim subjects into the Russian state accomplished.


Author(s):  
S.A. Sobolev

The article attempts to investigate general and particular issues of the social development of the domestic legal system in the modern knowledge of its history from a general theoretical standpoint on the example of a specific legal discipline - labor law. The problem of methodological order is considered when there is a confusion of law as an object of cognition with a real reflection of the formation and social development of its subsystems or structural components, which receive study at the sectoral level. Labor law is analyzed as a subsystem or the most important structural component of the legal system, while scientific research on various aspects of the history of labor legislation goes beyond the modern industry and academic discipline. The problem of the methodological order is the continuity and discontinuity of the very course of development of the domestic system of law and branches of law of the Russian Empire, the Soviet and modern periods. Attention is drawn to the fact that many modern labor law categories in the period before 1917 were absent in the legislation, but formed the content of legal acts and scientific research. In turn, labor relations were formalized by a contract of employment (personal employment), but the specifics of its regulation were determined by mining and factory legislation. Some problems of understanding the modern history of labor law are characterized, when in the general theoretical and branch educational and scientific literature on labor and civil law, concepts such as an employment contract and labor legislation are mixed, and labor law as a branch of law refers to private law. Based on the theoretical works of scientists of the Russian Empire, the Soviet and modern period, a combination of private law and public law foundations of labor law is shown.


Author(s):  
Jūratė Landsbergytė-Becher

The image of the front line is deeply rooted in the contemporary Lithuanian discourse about cultureand politics. The strands of its cultural landscape connect art, media, politics and history. The concept of the line here performs like a literary metaphor deeply ingrained in everyday consciousness as a defensive front line due to the painful history of the nation’s experience. The confrontation with the constant threat of the Russian Empire and the catastrophes of occupation, especially in the 20th century, drew the Lithuanian prototype of the nation’s resistance and filled the 21st-century daily discourses with reflections on the emerged meaning of the Mannerheim Line. This actualised vision travelled to the spaces of artistic creation, music, cinematography, literature, creating feelings of infinity, spaces of transcendent landscapes, bridges of time and the dramaturgy of the Baltic archetypes of contiguity. These insights aim to unfold the Lithuanian discourse of contemporary culture with the special mark of the front line.


2020 ◽  
pp. 627-639
Author(s):  
Albina Ya. Ilyasova ◽  

The article presents the results of the source studies analyses of the alphabetical lists of confirmed and ascribed nobles of the Ufa and Orenburg gubernias from the Russian State Historical Archive (RGIA). Imperially approved opinion of the State Council of the Russian Empire (January 2, 1861) ordered national noble assemblies to send annually to the Department of Heraldry of the Governing Senate “alphabetical lists of noble families during the year confirmed in their nobility by the Governing Senate” and “similar lists of those families, to which, in the course of the year, were attached some individuals.” Most of these lists are preserved in the materials of the “Third Department of the Senate” fond of the Russian State Historical Archive. The archives holds original copies of 39 reports and 65 lists, including 28 lists of confirmed nobles, and 37 — of ascribed, which were sent to the to the Department of Heraldry of the Governing Senate by the Orenburg Noble Assembly in 1862-1917; and 48 reports and 89 lists, including 41 of confirmed nobles and 48 — of ascribed, which were sent to the Department of Heraldry by the Ufa Noble Assembly in 1866-1917. These documents are written on plain paper on both sides of the sheet sized 22.2 (width) * 35.4 (height) cm. Most are handwritten. Reports of the Ufa Noble Assembly became typewritten from 1899 on, those of the Noble Orenburg Assembly — since 1911; lists of Ufa Noble Assembly became typewritten from 1897 on, of the Orenburg Noble Assembly — from 1908 on. The lists have a title page. Information about the nobles is given in tabular form. A list of confirmed nobles contains the following information: surname, name, patronymic of the person confirmed in hereditary nobility; date of the resolution of the Noble Assembly on declaring them a noble; part of the genealogical book, in which that person was entered; the date of receipt of documents for consideration in the Department of Heraldry; date and number of the confirming decree of Department of the Heraldry. The list of ascribed nobles includes such data as: surname, name, patronymic of the person added to the nobility; the date of the resolution of the Noble Assembly to ascribe the person to a noble family, confirmed by the Department of Heraldry; name, date, and document number(s) on the basis of which they were ascribed; part of the genealogical book, in which the family was entered; date and number of the decree of the Department of Heraldry of the Governing Senate confirming the family to rank among the nobility. The list was to be certified by signatures of the gubernia marshal of nobility, or those acting in that position, and by the secretary of the Noble Assembly. The list was not sealed. These documents are unique and quite valuable written sources on the history of the Russian nobility.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document