Hafidiya uprising in Morocco in 1907—1909 in the Russian diplomatic correspondence (based on materials of Archives of foreign policy of the Russian Empire)

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (12_2) ◽  
pp. 60-68
Author(s):  
Natalia Zherlitsina
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (10-2) ◽  
pp. 176-184
Author(s):  
Dmitry Nechevin ◽  
Leonard Kolodkin

The article is devoted to the prerequisites of the reforms of the Russian Empire of the sixties of the nineteenth century, their features, contradictions: the imperial status of foreign policy and the lagging behind the countries of Western Europe in special political, economic relations. The authors studied the activities of reformers and the nobility on the peasant question, as well as legitimate conservatism.


Author(s):  
Maksim Anisimov

Heinrich Gross was a diplomat of the Empress of Russia Elizabeth Petrovna, a foreigner on the Russian service who held some of the most important diplomatic posts of her reign. As the head of Russian diplomatic missions in European countries, he was an immediate participant in the rupture of both Franco-Russian and Russo-Prussian diplomatic relations and witnessed the beginning of the Seven Years' War, while in the capital of Saxony, besieged by Prussian troops. After that H. Gross was one of the members of the collective leadership of the Russian Collegium of Foreign Affairs. So far there is only one biographic essay about him written in the 19th century. The aims of this article are threefold. Using both published foreign affairs-related documentation and diplomatic documents stored in the Archive of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire, it attempts to systematize the materials of the biography of this important participant in international events. It also seeks to assess his professional qualities and get valuable insight into his role both in the major events of European politics and in the implementation of the foreign policy of the Russian Empire in the mid-18th century. Moreover, the account of the diplomatic career of H. Gross presented in this essay aims to generate genuine interest among researchers in the personality and professional activities of one of the most brilliant Russian diplomats of the Enlightenment Era.


Istoriya ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (6 (104)) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Khorosheva

Based on published sources, as well as documents from the Archive of the Foreign policy of the Russian Empire, introduced into scientific use for the first time, the article relates the place of Grand Duchy of Luxembourg during the Unification of Germany. The author analyses the attitude of European states — Prussia, France, Belgium and especially the attention of Russia — toward Luxembourg during the crises of 1867 and after the neutralization of Grand Duchy. Studying German policy over the XIX century in regard to Luxembourg, the author comes to the conclusion that economic dependence from Germany determined future foreign orientation of Grand Duchy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-147
Author(s):  
Salome Dundua

Abstract In this article, we discuss two different directions about the Georgian nationalism of the 19th century: first we consider, thetrinity of language, homeland, faith – maybe one of the best classical formulations of nationalist project. And second, in the process of creation of the nation, in the course of research of the Georgian nation-building of that period, we can not avoid the role of printed media. Georgian intellectuals published their opinions on general internal problems or foreign policy processes and all the most important ideas expressed by them were widespread by the printed media. Under strict censorship, discussing foreign policy processes was an indirect way to disclose the attitudes of Georgian intellectuals to the building Georgian nation, restoration of state, territorial integrity and independence, as well as to the colonial politics in generall. “Let’s be self-sufficient” is a phrase best describing the main purpose of Georgian intellectuals. However, it is noteworthy that the creators of that time Georgian nationalismprimarily sought to gain autonomy within the Russian Empire, while full political independence was due to the reality a far and difficult goal. Generally, Georgian nationalism developed during that period was clearly mild and was far from ethno-cultural discrimination that is o”en characteristic for nationalism.


2020 ◽  
pp. 602-614
Author(s):  
Rafael A. Arslanov ◽  
◽  
Elena V. Linkova ◽  

The article studies perception of the uprising of December 14, 1825 in the Western European public opinion as reflected in the press. The source base of the study consists of archival (including previously unpublished) documents found by the authors while working in the State Archive of Turin, and also of the considerable fond 11 “Foreign newspapers,” stored in the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire. The authors investigate and summarize assessments of the Decembrists’ uprising that appeared in the European press in late 1825 – early 1826 and identify the origin of the newspaper information. Working with archival documents, the authors have used a number of methods that are typical for both historical research (retrospective, analytical, comparative methods) and source studies (heuristic, textual, and hermeneutic methods). These methods allow the authors not only to analyze the documents and determine their epistemological value, but also to comprehend their content in historical context. The article concludes that the European public opinion not just showed interest in the events in St. Petersburg, but also tried to analyze them, to identify their sources and their consequences for Russia and Europe. There were two trends in the coverage of the Decembrist uprising. Firstly, publicists repeated the information received through official channels. Secondly, journalists were inclined to believe that the revolutionary tendencies that emerged in the Russian army after the Napoleonic wars were characteristic of all European countries. The accumulated scientific material allows the authors to come to certain conclusions that are valuable for studying not just the uprising on the Senate square on December 14, 1825, but also mechanisms of formation of the image of Russia on the international arena.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-51

The reintegration of three Southern Bessarabian districts into the Russian Empire in 1878 represented not only a high point of the Russian-Romanian symbolic competition for Bessarabia, but also the creation of an ‘administrativ aberration’ within the Russian Empire. The former Romanian territories, merged into the new Ismail uezd, preserved their institutional and legal peculiarities for almost 40 years. Thus, the modern structures of an emerging nation-state were transferred into the Russian imperial context. This article will discuss, first, the attitude of a number of Russian observers and officials towards the 1856 – 1878 Romanian administration, with a special emphasis on mutual perceptions and the foreign policy dimension. Second, the article will examine the polemics concerning the alternative strategies for integrating this region within the empire.


Author(s):  
Andrey Mitrofanov

The article deals with the history of secret diplomacy of the time of the French Revolution. It aims to show unknown aspects of the French émigré сount d'Antraigue's activities as a councillor to the Russian embassy in Venice and as a personal representative of Louis XVIII in 1795–1797. Unpublished documents from the Archives of Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire and the memoirs of contemporaries form the source base of the research. The practice of appointing French royalists “under Russian protection” as employees of Russian diplomatic missions was proposed by the Russian court in 1794. The case of d’Antraigues, therefore, was not unique. D'Antraigues' duties in this post were related to the search for information on revolutionary France, the French army in Italy, the politics of the Italian states. His contacts with Swedish agents, French royalists, and French army officers were the most fruitful. At the same time, he was associated with British diplomats. Bonaparte used the errors of the diplomat to his advantage: сount d'Antraigues’s notes served as a pretext for the coup d'état of 18 Fructidor, Year V. Although he сount lost credibility in the eyes of the royalists yet, thanks to the support of A.K. Razumovsky, he continued his service as correspondent and honorary “pensionnaire” of the Russian court. It was after 1797 that a “black legend” developed around the name of the count, thanks, in particular, to former secret agents of the Directory and Napoleon Bonaparte, depicting him as an opportunist.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document