scholarly journals The “Kerch Matter” of Bryansk Factory Joint Stock Company (1899–1903)

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 214-229 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Great Influence ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
Kerch Peninsula ◽  
Russian State ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Work Done ◽  
Financial Groups ◽  
Imperial State

The tsarist government and foreign businessmen had a great influence on the economic development of the Russian Empire. In the early 20th century, the position of Western capital in Russia became stronger, but how significant was this increase? Could foreign business have been able to take over the functions of managing and regulating the national economy from the Russian government? The author attempts to answer this question by examining it on a specific example: the “Kerch matter” of 1899–1903. This is the name contemporaries gave to the conflict between the Russian government and French capitalists close to the Company of Bryansk Factory, which arose because of metallurgical facilities on the Kerch Peninsula. The analysis of the case and its results is conducted on the basis of published sources and documentary materials from Russian archives. The results of work done have shown that the imperial state machine represented by the then Minister of Finance Sergei Witte managed to emerge victorious from the “Kerch matter”. Having succeeded in stopping production at the Kerch factory and preventing the bankruptcy of the Bryansk Company, the Russian authorities were able to contain the infiltration of financial groups such as the Société Générale into the metallurgical market of the South of Russia, which, in the conditions of the industrial recession of 1900–1903, threatened to cause a massive collapse in prices. The “Kerch matter” was the last attempt of Western European capital to intervene in the issues of control over the economy, which were subordinated to the Russian state.

scholarly journals Social-political activity of O. Bobrinsky in the last quarter of the nineteenth century.

10.33287/1196 ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 58-70
Author(s):  
І. С. Карпань ◽  
Н. С. Чернікова
Keyword(s):  
Russian Empire ◽  
Government Support ◽  
Political Activity ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Russian State ◽  
The Russian Empire

The article deals with problems of the noble class in post-reform period in Russia (70–90-ies XIXth cent.) through A. Bobrinsky’s activity as the Leader of the St. Petersburg nobility. The study analyzed his activities towards the Nobility consolidation and involvement their representatives into development of Russian state policy. A. Bobrinsky belonged to the family of large landowners and successful sugar-growers of the Russian Empire. It greatly influenced to the formation of his political worldview and contributed to the growth of the young Count’s authority among the Nobility and Gentry. In the last quarter of the XIXth cent. A. Bobrinsky defended the dominant position of the Nobility as the provincial Governor (the Leader) of the St. Petersburg nobility. A. Bobrinsky’s main efforts were aimed to the consolidation of the Gentry to defend their own rights and privileges and their involvement to the Russian state authorities. He promoted the idea of founding a representative institution – the Duma or Zemsky Sobor – in Russian Empire. However, the purpose of its creation he was seen in the count in the redistribution of executive, judicial and punitive powers between government representatives and elected people from the Nobility. He was convinced that only the Gentry was worthy to represent the interests of Russian society in the state authorities. During this period, the young Bobrinsky attempted to unite the St. Petersburg nobility into the organization of «Svyataya Druzhyna». It was a semi-secret organization which established to protect of the Russian Tsar from possible terrorist acts. The purpose of the organization was rather limited and local, so it disintegrated soon. However, it contributed to the growth of A. Bobrysky’s authority as a loyal to the Tsar and autocracy personality. It had a great importance in the conditions of the economic and political crisis of the noble class. In the 90’s of the XIX cent. A. Bobrinsky took an active part in nobility meetings devoted to problems of the privileged class. Here he defended an idea of preserving the privileges and dominant position of the estate Nobility. He opposed the provision of political rights and state support to the estateless nobles-homeowners and representatives of the bourgeoisie. A. Bobrinsky didn’t reject an idea to create conditions for the nobility replenishment by the new social classes, but he saw it possibility only in the distant future. However, even government support didn’t contribute to consolidation processes and politicization among the nobility class. A. Bobrinsky with sadness stated that the meetings of the noble leaders continued to be only like private talks about preserving the nobility former positions in the social structure. So he had to change strategy and initiated the founding in 1906 a new organization – the United Nobility. During the next decade its existence largely predetermined the main directions of Russian government policy and as a whole.

scholarly journals Administrative and management systems in territories of tatars living at the end of XVIII - the beginning of the XX centuries

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-102
Author(s):  
Sergey Valentinovich Lyubichankovskiy
Keyword(s):  
Volga Region ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Local Management ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
Central Russia ◽  
Administrative Practice ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Administrative Unit ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Set Up

This article deals with the administrative and management systems which were used in the territory where Tatars lived (Ural-Volga region) in the Russian Empire. It is established that the living of the Tatar people wasn't considered as the main feature of the region. Thus, until 1917 there was no plan to set up a separate administrative unit covering the area of the prevailing Tatar population (unlike, for example, the Bashkir and Kazakhs). The then administrative system reflected the imperial character of the Russian state. It manifested itself in the formation of a vertical power structure supported by the local elite and taking into account local management traditions, but controlling all key institutes and positions. The hypothesis is proved that evolution of the Russian government in the territory of the Ural-Volga region was based on the process of gradually pulling up suburban territories to the standards of local management in central Russia. These standards didn't consider national traditions of management, were based on the unified principles of rationalization and bureaucratization of management with the priority of state interests in administrative practice.

scholarly journals «Merger and acquisition»: monopolization of electro technical market in Russia at the beginning of the XX century

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-226
Author(s):  
Alexandr А. Bessolitsyn
Keyword(s):  
Merger And Acquisition ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Central State ◽  
Country House ◽  
Historical Archive ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Petersburg Region ◽  
The Common ◽  
Economic Modernization

Introduction. The problem of monopolization of the electric and technical market in Russia becomes the most important one during the economic modernization at the edge of XIX–XX centuries when the branches of foreign electric and technical companies are converted into Russian joint stock companies. “Electric illumination company of 1886” becomes the largest company on this market at the beginning of the XX century. Materials and Methods. The article is devoted to the research of the policy of “Electric illumination company of 1886” aimed at the acquisition of the “Shuvalov electric illumination company in Petersburg region” of the largest electro technical company – Joint stock company “Shuvalov electro technical illumination in Petersburg region” established for the purpose of illumination of country-house plots and houses in the suburb of St. Petersburg (Shuvalovo, Ozerki and Pargolovo) at the beginning of the XX century, which is based on the analysis of the archive materials contained in the Russian State Historical Archive (RSHA) and Central State Historical Archive of St. Petersburg (CSHA SPb.). Results of the Research. Using the example of the activity of such electro technical companies the author reveals the mechanism of “merger and acquisition” of minor joint stock companies by large monopolists who used different methods of pressure on the shareholders and management of the companies. Discussion and Conclusion. In this competitor environment, minor joint stock companies did not have a chance to remain independent even in the case of a fair court decision. The situation of “merger and acquisition” was actually profitable mostly for the companies’ management and for the leading shareholders who, in this case, received regular dividends, but the common customers had to pay according to the prices set forth by monopolies.

scholarly journals РИСИ СУСПІЛЬНО-ПОЛІТИЧНИХ ТРАНСФОРМАЦІЙ У МОСКОВСЬКІЙ ДЕРЖАВІ В XVII СТ.

2021 ◽  
pp. 63-81
Author(s):  
Олег Марченко
Keyword(s):  
Old Regime ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
Xviii Century ◽  
Xvii Century ◽  
New Beginning ◽  
Russian State ◽  
History Of ◽  
Time Of Troubles ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Boris Godunov

Ключові слова: Московська держава в XVII ст., династія Романових, самодержавство, абсолютизм, станово-представницька монархія. Анотація На основі новітніх історичних досліджень поданий неупереджений погляд на розвиток Московської держави в XVII ст. через призму соціокультурного, проблемного підходу до суперечливих в історіографії питань, що турбують сьогоднішніх істориків, політиків, звичайних людей України, Росії, інших країн світу і стають предметом численних спекуляцій та маніпуляцій. У результаті проведеного дослідження висвітлено основні риси суспільно-політичних трансформацій у Московській державі в XVII ст., акцентовано увагу на спростування радянських та сучасних російських міфів щодо розвитку централізованої самодержавної моделі Московії, визначаються можливості цивілізаційного вибору Московської держави XVII ст. між станово-представницькою та абсолютистською моделями розвитку. Посилання Andreev, 2003 – Andreev I.L. Aleksey Mihaylovich [Alexey Mikhailovich]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2003. 638 s. [in Russian] Ahiezer, 2013 – Ahiezer A., Klyamkin I., Yakovenko I. Istoriya Rossii: konets ili novoe nachalo? [History of Russia: end or new beginning?] / 3-e izd., ispr. i dop. Moskva: Novoe izdatelstvo, 2013. 496 s. [in Russian] Bogdanov, 2009 – Bogdanov A.P. Nesostoyavshiysya imperator Fedor Alekseevich [Failed Emperor Fyodor Alekseevich]. Moskva: Veche, 2009. 320 s. [in Russian] Volodihin, 2013 – Volodihin D.M. Tsar Fedor Alekseevich, ili Bednyiy otrok [Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich, or Poor youth]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2013. 267 s. [in Russian] Danilov, 2007 – Danilov A.G. Alternativyi v istorii Rossii: mif ili realnost (XIV–ХІХ vv.) [Alternatives in the history of Russia: myth or reality (XIV – XIX centuries)]. Rostov-na-Donu: Feniks, 2007. 303 s. [in Russian] Zarezin, 2018 – Zarezin M.I. V puchine Russkoy Smutyi. Nevyiuchennyiy uroki istorii [In the abyss of the Russian Troubles. Unlearned history lessons]. Moskva: Veche, 2018. 400 s. [in Russian] Istoriia Rosii, 2013 – Istoriia Rosii (z naidavnishykh chasiv do kintsia XVIII st.) [History of Russia (from ancient times to the end of the XVIII century)]: navch. posib. /avtor-uklad. V.M. Mordvintsev. Kyiv: Znannia, 2013. 346 s. [in Ukrainian] Kozlyakov, 2004 – Kozlyakov V.N. Mihail Fedorovich [Mikhail Fedorovich]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2004. 352 s. [in Russian] Kozlyakov, 2017 – Kozlyakov V.N. Boris Godunov. Tragediya o dobrom tsare [Boris Godunov. The tragedy of the good king]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2017. 330 s. [in Russian] Lobachev, 2003 – Lobachev S.V. Patriarh Nikon [Patriarch Nikon]. Sankt-Peterburg: Iskusstvo-SPb, 2003. 416 s. [in Russian] Lukin, 2000 – Lukin P.V. Narodnyie predstavleniya o gosudarstvennoy vlasti v Rossii XVII v. [Popular ideas about state power in Russia in the XVII century].Moskva: Nauka, 2000. 296 s. [in Russian] Marchenko, 2015 – Marchenko O.M. Istoriia slovianskykh narodiv. Chastyna persha. Istoriia Rusi, Moskovskoi derzhavy, Rosiiskoi imperii do kintsia XVIII st. Kurs lektsii dlia studentiv vyshchykh navchalnykh zakladiv: Navchalnyi posibnyk [History of Slavic peoples. Part one. History of Russia, the Moscow State, the Russian Empire until the end of the XVIII century. Course of lectures for students of higher educational institutions: Textbook]. Druhe vydannia, pereroblene y dopovnene. Kirovohrad, POLIMED-Servis, 2015. 385 s. [in Ukrainian] Narysy istorii, 2007 – Narysy istorii Rosii [Essays on the history of Russia]: per. z ros. /B.V. Ananich, I.L. Andreiev, Ye.V. Anisimov ta in.; Za zah. red. O.O. Chubariana. Kyiv: Nika-Tsentr, 2007. 800 s. [in Ukrainian] Nefedov, 2004 – Nefedov S.A. Pervyie shagi po puti modernizatsii Rossii: reformyi seredinyi XVII v. [First steps towards modernization of Russia: reforms of the middle of the XVII century] // Voprosyi istorii. 2004. №4. – S. 33–52. [in Russian] Payps, 2012 – Payps R.E. Rossiya pri starom rezhime [Russia under the old regime]. M.: Zakharov. 2012. 480 s. [in Russian] Pisarkova, 2007 – Pisarkova L.F. Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie Rossii s kontsa XVII do kontsa XVIII veka. Evolyutsiya byurokraticheskoy sistemyi [Russian government from the end of the XVII to the end of the XVIII century: the evolution of the bureaucratic system]. Moskva: ROSSPEN, 2007. 743 s. [in Russian] Svetova, 2013 – Svetova E.A. Dvor Alekseya Mihaylovicha v kontekste absolyutizatsii tsarskoy vlasti [The courtyard of Alexei Mikhailovich in the context of the absolutization of the tsarist power]. Moskva: MGU, 2013. 212 s. [in Russian] Sedov, 2006 – Sedov P.V. Zakat Moskovskogo tsarstva: Tsarskiy dvor kontsa XVII veka [The decline of the Moscow kingdom: the royal court at the end of the XVII century]. Sankt-Peterburg: Dmitriy Bulanin, 2006. 604 s. [in Russian] Skryinnikov, 1988 – Skryinnikov R.G. Rossiya v nachale XVII v. Smuta [Russia at the beginning of the XVII century. Troubles]. Moskva: Myisl, 1988. 283 s. [in Russian] Stanislavskiy, 1990 – Stanislavskiy A.L. Grazhdanskaya voyna v Rossii XVII v. [The Civil War in Russia in the XVII century]. Moskva: Myisl, 1990. 270 s. [in Russian] Talina, 1996 – Talina G.V. Tsar Aleksey Mihaylovich: lichnost, myislitel, gosudarstvennyiy deyatel [Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich: personality, thinker, statesman]. Moskva: Magistr, 1996. 144 s. [in Russian] Ulyanovskiy, 2006 – Ulyanovskiy V.I. Smutnoe vremya [Time of Troubles]. Moskva: Evropa, 2006. 448 s. [in Russian] Cherepnin, 1978 – Cherepnin L.V. Zemskie soboryi Russkogo gosudarstva v XVI – XVII vv. [Zemsky Cathedrals of the Russian State in the XVI – XVII centuries]. / Moskva: Nauka, 1978. 420 s. [in Russian] Shokarev, 2013 – Shokarev S.Yu. Smutnoe vremya v Moskve [Time of Troubles in Moscow]. Moskva: Veche, 2013. 320 s. [in Russian]

scholarly journals “Pure Nonsense!” War Minister A. N. Kuropatkin about the Proceedings of Japanese Nationalists

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 875-891
Author(s):  
R. S. Avilov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Far East ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
High Level ◽  
Imperial Governance

This article based on a large body of unpublished documents from the Russian State Military Historical Archive (RSMHA). The author analyzes the history of the acquaintance Russian Minister of War A. N. Kuropatkin with publications by the Japanese ultra-nationalist society Kokuryūkai in 1901. Despite weaknesses of Russian intelligence in the Far East before the Russo-Japanese War, the service was been able to obtain a highly valued materials, such as the second volume of Bulletin of Amur River Society. An analysis of this publication reveals that the authors and the journals founder, Uchida Ryōhei, had a high level of knowledge about Russian society. The Japanese discovered all the weak spots of Imperial governance, finance, economy, educational system, and domestic and foreign policies of the Russian Empire. The article shows how the Minister of War read a translation of Japanese edition and noted the authors’ conclusions. We conclude that the Japanese state was able to organize these investigations of Russia using materials from nationalist organizations that sometimes took different positions from those of the Russian government, in Russian. In contrast, Russian officials were not able to do a normal analysis of observations from official channels, And Kuropatkin often did not understand the value of such materials that were passed on to him.

scholarly journals The rights of performers in the legal practice of the Russian Empire: an agreement between the Joint-Stock Company “Gramophone” and the Society of periodicals and literature personalities

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 11-15
Author(s):  
Vladimir Nikolaev
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Revolutionary Period ◽  
History Of Formation

The article is devoted to the history of formation of the mechanism for protecting the rights of performers in Russia in the pre-revolutionary period. Analyzing one of the first agreements between participants of copyright and related rights’ market, the author examines the specifics of their relationship in the absence of legal protection means, enshrined in the law.

scholarly journals А. Khanzhonkov and Co Joint-Stock Company and its competitors in Russia

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 780-842
Author(s):  
Aleksandr A. Bessolitsyn
Keyword(s):  
Film Industry ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Central State ◽  
Foreign Companies ◽  
Historical Archive ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Russian Film ◽  
Film Market

The article is based on the archival files of joint-stock companies in the film industry, stored in the fonds of the Russian State Historical Archive (RGIA), the Russian State Archive of Literature and Art (RGALI), and the Central State Historical Archive of St Petersburg (TsGIA SPb) as well as statistics digests Joint-Stock Companies of Russia (1912–1917) and scientific literature and focuses on the analysis of the activities of A. Khanzhonkov and Co Joint-Stock Company and its competitors in the film industry at the beginning of the twentieth century. A. Khanzhonkov’s joint-stock company, which gradually developed from a small trade and commission business that supplied the Russian market with films and equipment produced mainly by European, became a leader in the Russian pre-revolutionary film market. The company steadily made a profit, increased its fixed and reserve capital, and also paid dividends to shareholders annually. The author came to the conclusion that it is A. Khanzhonkov and Co Joint-Stock Company that was most successful and effective in the field of production and distribution of films among Russian film companies firms and was a real competitor to the branches of leading foreign companies in Russian film business, such as Gaumont and Pathé Brothers. However, the company was unable to fully exploit the opportunities which emerged after the outbreak of the First World War due to the withdrawal of a number of branches of leading foreign companies from the film market. By keeping his firm in the form of a joint-stock company, A. Khanzhonkov actually hindered its development himself by not issuing shares for free sale on the stock exchange. Therefore, the company constantly suffered a lack of investment. This was especially evident after the February Revolution of 1917, when new companies entered the film business, which significantly increased competition in the film market. The attempt to transfer the company’s activities to the Crimea in connection with the construction of a new Yalta film studio was not successful, primarily due to the deterioration of the overall political and economic situation in the country.

scholarly journals Book publishing in Vyatka region in the early XX century

Bibliosphere ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. 63-67
Author(s):  
Yu. V. Pershina
Keyword(s):  
Book Publishing ◽  
Provincial Government ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
Policy Objective ◽  
Protective Function ◽  
The People ◽  
Government Power ◽  
Russian State ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Russian Empire

The Russian government in the field of extracurricular education in the early XX century persuded certain goals: preserving the state foundations inviolability, spreading the Orthodoxy tenets, raising the people cultural level. These objectives were being realized through book publishing. The public policy conductors were the governor administration, Vyatka diocese. The local territorial self-government played a certain role. The article purpose is to consider the Russian state policy specifics on development of book publishing in the early XX century implemented in Vyatka region. The study objectives are: to identify ways and methods of implementing the government policy on adult education in the specified field of activity; to show the role of local and territorial self-government and Vyatka diocese in developing the regional book publishing. The author uses historical-typological and historical-systematic methods; a historical-genetic technique is applied to identify the dynamics and historical perspective of Vyatka territorial self-government power and bodies activities in the printing field. An aggregative method makes it possible to collect the scattered facts and make a complete judgment on the studied subject. From the author’s viewpoint, cultural-historical and anthropological approaches allow highlighting the main policy objective of the Russian empire government on book publishing development in the early XX century, realized by Vyatka provincial authorities and local self-government bodies, which was to increase the population spiritual culture level. According to the census of 1897, only 21% of the population was literate, while the literacy rate for men in 1913 grew to 40%. By the beginning of 1913 the number of literate peasants in Vyatka province reached nearly 667 000 people. The Vyatka governor administration, the police sought to control colporteurs-ofens’ work. The aboriginal translation сommission has functioned in the province. A major role in organizating the book trade in Vyatka region played a warehouse created by the provincial zemstvo in 1894. In 1913 the provincial government agreed to its abolition. In the 1970s Vyatka provincial zemstvo undertook publishing activity. The local territorial self-government and Vyatka diocese showed themselves the most active in the sphere of people extracurricular education and book business in Vyatka province in the early XX century. The protective function dominated in Vyatka government activities.

scholarly journals The role of “Soyuzzoloto”joint-stock company in the geological development of the North-East of Russia in 1928–1931 .

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4/2020) ◽  
pp. 23-38
Author(s):  
G.A. Pustovoit ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
Mining Industry ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
State Archive ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
North East ◽  
The North ◽  
Russian State ◽  
East Russia

The paper reconstructs the process of accumulation of scientific knowledge on the geology of the North-East of Russia and evaluates the results. On the basis of extensive collections of documents in the State Archive of the Russian Federation, Russian State Archive of Economy, Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History, State Ar-chive of the Magadan Region, and local publications of 1930–1940, and memoirs of contemporaries we ac-cessed the contribution of geologists of joint-stock company «Soyuzzoloto» to the sharing of scientific knowledge on the mineral potential of North-East Russia. This provides better understanding of the practice of mining development in the North-East of Russia, introduces the valuable types of mineral raw materials into economic circulation, personal aspects of this phenomenon. The huge amount of factual material collected by «Soyuzzoloto» required the scientific and technical support of the mining industry. All necessary resources of the North-East of Russia were organized of in a single center ––the «Dalstroy» trust.

“Mansurov project” of the Russian Palestine (based on materials from a trip in 1857 to Holy Places)

2019 ◽  
pp. 292-298
Author(s):  
Andrey Allenov
Keyword(s):  
The Black Sea ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Holy Land ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
Black Sea Coast ◽  
Holy Places ◽  
History Of

We consider the activity of B.P. Mansurov in organizing Russian pilgrimage to the Holy Land. We describe the preparation, course and results of B.P. Mansurov’s trip to the Orthodox East (1857) that largely predetermined the nature of the Russian presence in Palestine. In the framework of this trip, we consider the reasons for creating the joint-stock company “Russian Company of Shipping and Trading”. We reveal that created as an attempt to preserve the presence of Russia on the Black Sea coast, the company set the task to facilitate the movement of Russian pilgrims to Palestine and Athos. By this step, the Russian government intended to increase Russia’s humanitarian influence in the region. We pay attention to B.P. Mansurov’s service instructions in trip to the East, the significance of his work for the publication of the “Guide to the Orthodox Worshiper to Holy Places”, and also Mansurov’s own views on the problem of Russian Orthodox pilgrimage in Palestine. We show that B.P. Mansurov’s program envisaged an increase in the intensity of the steamship communication with Palestine, the acquisition of land and construction of pilgrimage shelters, the erection of temples for the Russian worship. The development issues of Orthodox pilgrimage should be managed through the Russian consulates operating in the Middle East, including in Jerusalem itself. Consideration of results of the journey in 1857 allowed to draw conclusions about the significant role of B.P. Mansurov in the history of the Russian presence in the Holy Land.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document