DOCSLIB.ORG

The Budjak Region in the Aftermath of the Treaty of Bucharest (1812)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Annals of the Academy of Romanian Scientists Series on History and Archaeology ONLINE ISSN 2067-5682 Volume 6, Number 2/2014 73 THE BUDJAK REGION IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE TREATY OF BUCHAREST (1812) Murat TU ĞLUCA * Abstract. The paper focuses on Budjak’s status after the Treaty of Bucharest, dated 1812. Ottomans abandoned Bessarabia to Russia with this treaty. Then, Russia seperated Budjak Region from Bessarabia. Before the treaty, both of them had been a whole with the name of Bessarabia. According to Ottoman archive documents, Ottoman Empire dealt with the demografic movements and security problems of Budjak after the treaty. The subject of this study is Ottoman and Russian officials’ diplomatic negotiations on these problems. Keywords: Ottoman Empire, Russia, Black Sea, Cahul, Izmail, Bolgar, Treaty of Bucharest Introduction Today being part of Odessa Province of the Republic of Ukraine, Budjak 1 is the historical southern region of Bessarabia encompassing Cetatea Alb ă, Cahul, Chilia, Tighina and Izmail provinces. 2 Situated between the Danube and Dniester rivers and the Black Sea, the region extends till Prut River, a tributary of Danube. 3 Known for serving as the homesteads for Scythian, Hun, Avarian, Bolgar, Patzinak (or Pecheneg), Cuman, Mongolian, Tatar and Romanian 4 civilizations among many others on the historical time line, Budjak's emergence as an * Assist. Prof. Dr. Instructorat Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Ahi Evran University/Turkey. 1 The region has been termed variously in the English language, including Budzhak, Budjak, Bujak and Buchak. In this study, “Budjak” phrase is preferred. Because, this phrase was used at The Encyclopedia of Islam, New Edition. See, Halil Đnalcık, “Budjak”, EI 2, Volume I, Leiden, 1986, pp. 1286. It is used as “Bucak” in Turkish. The Turkish meaning of the word Budjak is “triangle” or “corner”. In Romanian this phrase is used as “Bugeac”. In the Ukrainian, Bulgarian, and Russian languages, the area is referred to as Budzhak (Cyrillic: Буджак ) 2 See, Map I. 3 Aurel Decei, “Bucak”, ĐA, Vol. II, Istanbul, 1979, pp. 742.; Halil Đnalcık, “Budjak”, EI 2, Volume I, Leiden, 1986, pp. 1286.; Kemal Karpat, “Bucak”, DĐA, Vol. VI, Istanbul, 1992, pp. 341. For an assessment of the geographical area covered by Budjak region, based on a historical background, please refer Alper Ba şer, Bucak Tatarları (1550-1700) , Afyon University Institute of Social Sciences, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis Study, Afyonkarahisar, 2010, p. 1-4. See, Map II: Budjak’s Borders. 4 Ba şer, p. 11-16. 74 Murat Tu ğluca autonomous political and administrative region under a distinct name and identity dates back to the Ottoman Period. Bayezid II conquered Chilia and Cetatea Alb ă, in 1484. To defend and secure the roads reaching at these two castles, he felt the need to bring the entire region under control. Thus Budjak emerged as an administrative, military and commercial region, due to the immense trade and strategic needs. 5 The final phase of annexation of Budjak Region into Ottoman soil took place in 1538, when Suleiman the Magnificent embarked on a military campaign over Boghdan (a.k.a.Moldavia). 6 In the aftermath, Budjakregion fell under the exclusive control of Ottoman Empire. 7 Thereby, Budjak ruled by Moldavians before Ottoman presence in the territory, was ceded from Moldavians and annexed to territories under Ottoman rule, directly with this conquest and a series of later arrangements that took place in the 15th and 16th centuries. 8 During the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, the territory falling between Prut and Dniester rivers were organized as an administrative district, under the name Budjak. Budjak was initially brought under the control of the Greater Lordship of Rumelia, as Cetatea Alb ă Flag post, and then under control of Ozi State, in late 16th cc. 9 Settlement of Nogai Tatars first emerging with the initial Ottoman conquests of the territory, got even denser after 1538. The region had a large resident Tatar population (Budziak Tatary) during the 17th century. 10 The struggle against Russians in Balkans started by the beginning of 18th century, resulted in frequent Russian invasions of Budjak Region. Petro I had to evacuate the region, following his invading Budjak, for a short period of time. During the Russo-Turkish war (1768-1774), all castles of Budjak, consisting of Cetatea Alb ă, Chilia, Tighina and Izmail were occupied by Russian forces, however, they were returned back to the Ottoman administration with the Treaty of Kuchuk Kainarji dated 1774. 11 The Russians released and returned Budjak 5 Karpat, p. 341. 6 In this study, “Boghdan” phrase is used. Because, the Ottomans called today’s the north of Romania and Moldovia as “Bo ğdan”. Boghdan was ruled by Voivodes who appointed by The Ottoman central government. See, Aurel Decei, “Bo ğdan”, ĐA, Vol. II, Istanbul, 1979, p. 697. “Boghdan, originally Boghdan-ili or Boghdan-vilayeti (the land of Boghdan), Turkish name of Moldavia, so called after Boghdan who in 1359 founded a principality between the Eastern flanks of Carpathians and the Dniester. The name Boghdan-ili appears in the hükm of Mehemmed II dated 1455” (Halil Đnalcık, “Boghdan”, EI 2, Volume I, Leiden, 1986, p. 1252). 7 Ba şer, p. 18. 8 Decei, p. 742. 9 Karpat, p. 341. 10 For observations on Tatar settlements and activities in Budjak region, in this century, please refer Alper Ba şer, “Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi’nde Nogaylar”, Journal of Turkish World Studies , XI/2, (Winter 2011), Access: http://tdid.ege.edu.tr/files/AlperBaser.pdf, Date Accessed: 20.05.2012, p. 117-128. 11 Karpat, p. 342. > The Budjak Region in the Aftermath of the Treaty of Bucharest (1812) 75 together with all the castles they acquired during war, back to the Ottoman Empire through the Treaty of Jassy signed in 1792. 12 The Russians finally reoccupied the territory once and for all, as a non-returnable asset to Ottoman Empire, during the Russian-Turkish wars (1806-1812). During the final years of this war, the French threat directed towards Russia, put the country at unease. For this reason, Czar of Russia even thought of repealing all his soil claims due to the mandate of settling peace with Ottomans. However, improper functioning of Ottoman diplomacy led to the failure of Ottoman administration to fully exploit the situation and the Treaty of Bucharest, concluded against its favor. 13 In truth, the Ottomans were as much eager as Russians about immediate execution of the treaty, as they lacked any trust for the French. Consequently, when Russians waived from their claims on Anatolian soil in a number of negotiations, Ottomans consented to signature of the treaty. 14 It is learned from a decoding of an encrypted text originally sent to Istanbul, that Turkish negotiatorsdid not condemn with Anatolia, only. The letter dated January 16, 1812, reports that negotiations were restarted after being paused for a while. On this day, the dandruff hosting the talks was witnessing hot discussions about which parts of land were to be left to Russia. The Ottoman negotiators were insistent upon Budjak Region's remaining under hegemony of the Ottoman Empire, including the lands and neighboring areas of Chilia and Izmail Castles, remanding that Prut River is declared to form the new boundary. Also during the talks reported was a formal statement that nothing less than full coverage of Anatolian Boundaries before the war could be acceptable. The Serbian trouble was another sensitive issue. The Ottoman delegate revealed to their counterpart during negotiations that Serbians had been subjects of the Ottoman Empire since the past, wherefore; they needed no manipulations by others. According to them, no other claims on the matter would have possibly been accepted. 15 However, with reference to the Treaty of Bucharest signed on May 28th, 1812, it becomes clearly obvious that all efforts endeavored by Turkish negotiators yielded nothing beneficial to the Turkish crown, except those concerning Anatolia. As a result of the negotiations, Bessarabia and Budjak were left under the rule of Russia with Boghdan staying under control of Ottomans, but with concessions recognized for Serbians. 16 12 Muahedat Mecmuası, Volume IV, Türk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara, 2008, pp. 7.Ayla Efe, “Silistre Eyaletinde Osmanlı-Rus Sava şları Küçük Kaynarca’dan Berlin’e”, OTAM , Edition 19, Access: http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/19/26/191.pdf, Date Accessed: 20.05.2012, p. 145. 13 Karpat, p. 342. 14 Ahmed Cevdet Pasha, Tarih-i Cevdet , Volume 10, Istanbul, 1309, p. 24-26. 15 BOA. HAT, 989/41825-A. 16 Reference can be made to the following studies for the Russo-Turkish War of 1806-1812 and the Treaty of Bucharest: Ahmed Cevdet Pasha, Tarih-i Cevdet , Volume 10, Istanbul, 1309; Johann Wilhelm Zinkeisen, Osmanlı Đmparatorlu ğu Tarihi, Trans. by: Nilüfer Epçeli, Volume VII, > 76 Murat Tu ğluca Budjakafter the Treaty of Bucharest Pursuant to the fourth article of the Treaty of Bucharest, Bessarabia and Budjak were left to Russia. 17 This shift of power over these two regions resulted in a number of events, which forced Ottoman Empire to lay interest upon Bessarabia and Budjak during the period after signing of the Treaty. As Budjak region forms the subject of this study, focus will mainly be laid upon the interests of Ottoman Empire on Budjak after the Treaty. Of course mentions will be made concerning the interest of the Empire on Bessarabia, where the context requires. The interest of the Ottoman Empire over the region caused conveyance of a variety of documents until the present day, in Ottoman archives. The present study has been conducted with much reliance upon these documents about Budjak, available in the Ottoman archives. Attempts will be made towards drawing ideas on such matters like due to which reasons had Sublime Porte (Bâb-ı Âli) laid interest over this land and how it managed to carry out the process of intelligence gathering about related issues, within the context of information provided in these documents.
Recommended publications
  • The Republic of Budjak: Next in Line?

    The Republic of Budjak: Next in Line?

    (https://neweasterneurope.eu/) The Republic of Budjak: Next in line? The idea of the Republic of Budjak appeared at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s within the process of a national awakening triggered by perestroika. The republic was supposed to include the localities where Gagauzians and Bulgarians lived in southern Moldova and, in another variant, were also in the neighboring southern part of the Ukrainian Odesa region. No such scenario was realised, however Gagauzians from Moldova managed to create their (separatist) republic that existed till 1994 when their region was granted autonomous status within a unitary state. From time to time, the idea of the Republic of Budjak had returned. January 2, 2015 - Marcin Kosienkowski (https://neweasterneurope.eu/post-author/marcin-kosienkowski/) - Articles and Commentary (https://neweasterneurope.eu/category/articles-and-commentary-50/) Crucially, it was highlighted in a November 2014 report (http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21637415-little-known-place- interests-both-ukraine-and-russia-towards-unknown-region?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/towards_the_unknown_region) by Kyiv-based “Da Vinci AG” Analytic Group because of the Russian-Ukrainian conict, attracting the attention of some mainstream newspapers such as Nezavisimaya gazeta (http://www.ng.ru/cis/2014-11-27/1_kiev.html) and The Economist (http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21637415-little-known-place-interests-both-ukraine-and-russia-towards-unknown-region? fsrc=scn/tw_ec/towards_the_unknown_region). Bessarabia spring of 2015 The “Da Vinci AG” Analytic Group warns in its report that the Republic of Budjak could be established in the spring of 2015. It would be rather called the Bessarabian People’s Republic, alluding to the already existing peoples’ republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, and it would not be limited just to Gagauzians and Bulgarians, encompassing the whole southern part of the Odesa region.
  • 1768-1830S a Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate

    1768-1830S a Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate

    A PLAGUE ON BOTH HOUSES?: POPULATION MOVEMENTS AND THE SPREAD OF DISEASE ACROSS THE OTTOMAN-RUSSIAN BLACK SEA FRONTIER, 1768-1830S A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History By Andrew Robarts, M.S.F.S. Washington, DC December 17, 2010 Copyright 2010 by Andrew Robarts All Rights Reserved ii A PLAGUE ON BOTH HOUSES?: POPULATION MOVEMENTS AND THE SPREAD OF DISEASE ACROSS THE OTTOMAN-RUSSIAN BLACK SEA FRONTIER, 1768-1830S Andrew Robarts, M.S.F.S. Dissertation Advisor: Catherine Evtuhov, Ph. D. ABSTRACT Based upon a reading of Ottoman, Russian, and Bulgarian archival documents, this dissertation examines the response by the Ottoman and Russian states to the accelerated pace of migration and spread of disease in the Black Sea region from the outbreak of the Russo-Ottoman War of 1768-1774 to the signing of the Treaty of Hünkar Iskelesi in 1833. Building upon introductory chapters on the Russian-Ottoman Black Sea frontier and a case study of Bulgarian population movements between the Russian and Ottoman Empires, this dissertation analyzes Russian and Ottoman migration and settlement policies, the spread of epidemic diseases (plague and cholera) in the Black Sea region, the construction of quarantines and the implementation of travel document regimes. The role and position of the Danubian Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia as the “middle ground” between the Ottoman and Russian Empires
  • Nikolaj Von Wassilko. Bukovinian Statesman and Diplomat

    Nikolaj Von Wassilko. Bukovinian Statesman and Diplomat

    https://doi.org/10.4316/CC.2019.01.010 POLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES NIKOLAJ VON WASSILKO. BUKOVINIAN STATESMAN AND DIPLOMAT Oleksandr DOBRZHANSKYI Yurii Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University (Ukraine) E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The article is dedicated to the study of the political biography of Nikolaj von Wassilko, a well-known Bukovinian leader, one of the most controversial personages among Ukrainian politicians of Austria-Hungary at the end of the 19th – the beginning of the 20th century. It is worth mentioning that many scientists from various countries wrote about N. Wassilko, but separate studies about his life and political activities have not been written yet. Author paid considerable attention to the formation of N. Wassilko's political views, the evolution of his preferences from conservative Rusynism and Moscophilia philosophy to the populistic doctrine. Since the beginning of the 20th century, N. Wassilko became almost the sole leader of Ukrainians in Bukovina. The article presents the analysis of his activities in the Austrian Parliament, the Diet of Bukovina, public organizations, and his initiatives to resolve various regional issues. His activities in the years of World War I were equally rich. In particular, the article shows his diplomatic activities as the ambassador of the ZUNR (West Ukrainian People's Republic) in Vienna, the ambassador of the UPR (Ukrainian People's Republic) in Switzerland and other countries. At the end of the research, the author points out the remarkable path of N. Wassilko in the history of the Ukrainian movement in Bukovina in the early twentieth century, as one of the central figures of the Ukrainian diplomacy during 1918-1924.
  • Moldova, Moldavia, Bessarabia Yefim Kogan, 25 September 2015

    Moldova, Moldavia, Bessarabia Yefim Kogan, 25 September 2015

    Moldova, Moldavia, Bessarabia Yefim Kogan, 25 September 2015 Dear Researchers, I have received recently an email from Marilyn Newman: Hello Yefim, I've been following this project and appreciate your more complete break down in today's Jewishgen Digest. I did contribute to Bob Wascou before he passed. The reason for this message is that I'm confused. My family were from Moinesti and Tirgu Ocna, both near each other in Moldova. However, this area was not Bessarabia..... Can you explain what areas of Moldova are covered other than Bessarabia and Chisanou (sp.). Many Thanks, Marilyn Newman Marilyn thank you. I think this is a very important question. I was getting many similar message for many years. Let’s clear this confusion. Let's start with terminology. The term Moldavia and Moldova mean the same region! Moldova is in Romanian language and Moldavia was adopted by Russian and other languages, including English. Charles King in 'The Moldovans. Romania, Russia, and the Politics of Culture', Stanford U., 1999 writes that 'It is a myth that Moldova changed its name from Moldavia. What happened in the 1990s was simply that we in the West became better informed about what locals themselves had always called it.' So let's dive into the history of the region: Moldavia is known as a country or Principality from 14 century until 1812. There were also two other Danube or Romanian Principalities - Walachia and Transilvania. At some point in the history Moldavia joined other Principalities. In 1538 Moldavia surrendered to Ottoman Empire, and remained under Turks for about 300 years.
  • Molvania Free

    Molvania Free

    FREE MOLVANIA PDF Santo Cilauro,Tom Gleisner,Rob Sitch | 176 pages | 01 Oct 2004 | Overlook Press | 9781585676194 | English | United States Molvanîa - Wikipedia The region of Pokuttya was also part of it for a period of time. The western half of Moldavia is now part of Romania, the eastern Molvania belongs to the Republic of Moldovaand the northern and southeastern parts are territories of Ukraine. The original Molvania short-lived reference to the region was Bogdaniaafter Bogdan Ithe founding figure of the principality. The names Molvania and Moldova are derived from the name of the Moldova River ; however, the etymology is not known and there are several variants: Molvania [8]. In several early references, [11] "Moldavia" is rendered under the composite form Moldo-Wallachia in the same way Wallachia may appear as Hungro-Wallachia. See also names Molvania other languages. The inhabitants of Moldavia were Christians. The place of worship, and the tombs had Molvania characteristics. The Molvania of worship had a rectangular form with sides of eight Molvania seven meters. The Bolohoveniis mentioned by the Hypatian Chronicle in the 13th century. The chronicle shows that this [ which? Archaeological research also Molvania the Molvania of 13th- century fortified settlements in this region. Molvania ethnic identity is uncertain; although Romanian scholars, basing on their ethnonym identify them as Romanians who were called Vlachs in the Middle Agesarcheological evidence and the Hypatian Chronicle which is the only primary source that Molvania their history suggest Molvania they were a Slavic people. In the early 13th century, the Brodniksa possible Slavic — Vlach vassal state of Halychwere present, alongside the Vlachs, in Molvania of the region's Molvania towardsthe Brodniks are mentioned as in service of Suzdal.
  • Contours and Consequences of the Lexical Divide in Ukrainian

    Contours and Consequences of the Lexical Divide in Ukrainian

    Geoffrey Hull and Halyna Koscharsky1 Contours and Consequences of the Lexical Divide in Ukrainian When compared with its two large neighbours, Russian and Polish, the Ukrainian language presents a picture of striking internal variation. Not only are Ukrainian dialects more mutually divergent than those of Polish or of territorially more widespread Russian,2 but on the literary level the language has long been characterized by the existence of two variants of the standard which have never been perfectly harmonized, in spite of the efforts of nationalist writers for a century and a half. While Ukraine’s modern standard language is based on the eastern dialect of the Kyiv-Poltava-Kharkiv triangle, the literary Ukrainian cultivated by most of the diaspora communities continues to follow to a greater or lesser degree the norms of the Lviv koiné in 1 The authors would like to thank Dr Lance Eccles of Macquarie University for technical assistance in producing this paper. 2 De Bray (1969: 30-35) identifies three main groups of Russian dialects, but the differences are the result of internal evolutionary divergence rather than of external influences. The popular perception is that Russian has minimal dialectal variation compared with other major European languages. Maximilian Fourman (1943: viii), for instance, told students of Russian that the language ‘is amazingly uniform; the same language is spoken over the vast extent of the globe where the flag of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics flies; and you will be understood whether you are speaking to a peasant or a university professor. There are no dialects to bother you, although, of course, there are parts of the Soviet Union where Russian may be spoken rather differently, as, for instance, English is spoken differently by a Londoner, a Scot, a Welshman, an Irishman, or natives of Yorkshire or Cornwall.
  • Names in Multi-Lingual, -Cultural and -Ethic Contact

    Names in Multi-Lingual, -Cultural and -Ethic Contact

    Oliviu Felecan, Romania 399 Romanian-Ukrainian Connections in the Anthroponymy of the Northwestern Part of Romania Oliviu Felecan Romania Abstract The first contacts between Romance speakers and the Slavic people took place between the 7th and the 11th centuries both to the North and to the South of the Danube. These contacts continued through the centuries till now. This paper approaches the Romanian – Ukrainian connection from the perspective of the contemporary names given in the Northwestern part of Romania. The linguistic contact is very significant in regions like Maramureş and Bukovina. We have chosen to study the Maramureş area, as its ethnic composition is a very appropriate starting point for our research. The unity or the coherence in the field of anthroponymy in any of the pilot localities may be the result of the multiculturalism that is typical for the Central European area, a phenomenon that is fairly reflected at the linguistic and onomastic level. Several languages are used simultaneously, and people sometimes mix words so that speakers of different ethnic origins can send a message and make themselves understood in a better way. At the same time, there are common first names (Adrian, Ana, Daniel, Florin, Gheorghe, Maria, Mihai, Ştefan) and others borrowed from English (Brian Ronald, Johny, Nicolas, Richard, Ray), Romance languages (Alessandro, Daniele, Anne, Marie, Carlos, Miguel, Joao), German (Adolf, Michaela), and other languages. *** The first contacts between the Romance natives and the Slavic people took place between the 7th and the 11th centuries both to the North and to the South of the Danube. As a result, some words from all the fields of onomasiology were borrowed, and the phonological system was changed, once the consonants h, j and z entered the language.
  • International Journal of Research in Arts and Social Sciences Vol 10, No

    International Journal of Research in Arts and Social Sciences Vol 10, No

    Vol 10, No. 1 International Journal of Research in Arts and Social Sciences THE RUSSIA NEEDS THE WEST FOR SOME TIME, AFTER WHICH IT SHALL TURN ITS BACK TO IT: VLADIMIR PUTIN FULFILLING PETER THE GREAT’S PROPHESY Akin Ademuyiwa University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria Abstract There is no doubt that the all-time powerful Russian Tsar, Peter the Great was the architect of the Russian Empire by his exploits in opening up the once landlocked empire to be closer to Europe through his conquests , such as Asov campaign and many others, his westernization policy also ensured that Russians imbibed some western culture. In spite of the fact that virtually all his teachers, shipbuilders and others were westerners, he was not unmindful of Russia’s distinct culture and ways of life, hence his famous exhortation that ―Russia needs the west for some time, after which it shall turn its back to it‖ This paper attempts to link the prediction of Peter the Great with the present Russia involvement in the Crimea and its subsequent annexation, the ongoing Ukrainian skirmishes, and its attendant economic sanctions imposed on Russia by the western powers. Data will be gathered from archival materials, dedicated internet sources and periodicals. The paper concludes that Russia increasingly would work more closely with Asian nations, starve off the excruciating effects of the economic sanctions thus fulfilling the aged long prediction of Peter the Great. Key words: Peter the Great, the Crimea, Culture, Ukraine, annexation Introduction From the Ashes of Kievan-Rus Emerged the Russian Empire Several scholars have argued that the Russian Empire emerged from the ashes of Kievan- Rus, A medieval European state; Kievan-Rus was founded in 882AD by Prince Oleg.
  • The Rise of Bulgarian Nationalism and Russia's Influence Upon It

    The Rise of Bulgarian Nationalism and Russia's Influence Upon It

    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-2014 The rise of Bulgarian nationalism and Russia's influence upon it. Lin Wenshuang University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Wenshuang, Lin, "The rise of Bulgarian nationalism and Russia's influence upon it." (2014). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1548. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/1548 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE RISE OF BULGARIAN NATIONALISM AND RUSSIA‘S INFLUENCE UPON IT by Lin Wenshuang B. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 1997 M. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 2002 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Louisville in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Humanities University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky May 2014 Copyright © 2014 by Lin Wenshuang All Rights Reserved THE RISE OF BULGARIAN NATIONALISM AND RUSSIA‘S INFLUENCE UPON IT by Lin Wenshuang B. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 1997 M. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 2002 A Dissertation Approved on April 1, 2014 By the following Dissertation Committee __________________________________ Prof.
  • NARRATING the NATIONAL FUTURE: the COSSACKS in UKRAINIAN and RUSSIAN ROMANTIC LITERATURE by ANNA KOVALCHUK a DISSERTATION Prese

    NARRATING the NATIONAL FUTURE: the COSSACKS in UKRAINIAN and RUSSIAN ROMANTIC LITERATURE by ANNA KOVALCHUK a DISSERTATION Prese

    NARRATING THE NATIONAL FUTURE: THE COSSACKS IN UKRAINIAN AND RUSSIAN ROMANTIC LITERATURE by ANNA KOVALCHUK A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Comparative Literature and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 2017 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Anna Kovalchuk Title: Narrating the National Future: The Cossacks in Ukrainian and Russian Romantic Literature This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Department of Comparative Literature by: Katya Hokanson Chairperson Michael Allan Core Member Serhii Plokhii Core Member Jenifer Presto Core Member Julie Hessler Institutional Representative and Scott L. Pratt Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded June 2017 ii © 2017 Anna Kovalchuk iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Anna Kovalchuk Doctor of Philosophy Department of Comparative Literature June 2017 Title: Narrating the National Future: The Cossacks in Ukrainian and Russian Romantic Literature This dissertation investigates nineteenth-century narrative representations of the Cossacks—multi-ethnic warrior communities from the historical borderlands of empire, known for military strength, pillage, and revelry—as contested historical figures in modern identity politics. Rather than projecting today’s political borders into the past and proceeding from the claim that the Cossacks are either Russian or Ukrainian, this comparative project analyzes the nineteenth-century narratives that transform pre- national Cossack history into national patrimony. Following the Romantic era debates about national identity in the Russian empire, during which the Cossacks become part of both Ukrainian and Russian national self-definition, this dissertation focuses on the role of historical narrative in these burgeoning political projects.
  • Anna-Romania Corrected2by Rivka

    Anna-Romania Corrected2by Rivka

    Courtesy of the Ackman & Ziff Family Genealogy Institute Updated June 2011 Romania: Jewish Family History Research Guide Historical Background Like most European countries, Romania’s borders have changed considerably over time. Starting in the late 15th century, the Ottoman Empire ruled the Romanian provinces of Moldavia, Walachia, and Dobruja, while Austria and Hungary controlled Banat, Bihor, Maramures, Satu Mare, and Transylvania. Austria took over Bukovina (northwestern Moldavia) in 1774, and Russia obtained Bessarabia (eastern Moldavia) in 1812. An unsuccessful Balkan revolt against the Turks ultimately led to Russian occupation of Walachia and Moldavia from 1829-34. The two principalities merged in 1859 to form Romania (also spelled Rumania or Roumania at various times), which remained subservient to the Ottomans until full independence was achieved in 1878. The province of Dobruja was also added at that time. After World War I Romania regained control over the territories of Banat, Bessarabia, Bihor, Bukovina, Maramures, Satu Mare, and Transylvania at the expense of Austro-Hungary and Russia. During the Holocaust period, Romania temporarily gave up northern Transylvania (including northern Bihor, Maramures, and Satu Mare) to Hungary, and permanently lost northern Bukovina and Bessarabia (now the Republic of Moldova) to the Soviet Union. Jews were present in the region under the Roman Empire, but subsequent invasions and wars severely disrupted their existence. The Jewish population increased significantly after 1800, primarily due
  • An Ottoman Global Moment

    An Ottoman Global Moment

    AN OTTOMAN GLOBAL MOMENT: WAR OF SECOND COALITION IN THE LEVANT A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy In History By Kahraman Sakul, M.A Washington, DC November, 18, 2009 Copyright 2009 by Kahraman Sakul All Rights Reserved ii AN OTTOMAN GLOBAL MOMENT: WAR OF SECOND COALITION IN THE LEVANT Kahraman Sakul, M.A. Dissertation Advisor: Gabor Agoston, Ph.D. ABSTRACT This dissertation aims to place the Ottoman Empire within its proper context in the Napoleonic Age and calls for a recognition of the crucial role of the Sublime Porte in the War of Second Coalition (1798-1802). The Ottoman-Russian joint naval expedition (1798-1800) to the Ionian Islands under the French occupation provides the framework for an examination of the Ottoman willingness to join the European system of alliance in the Napoleonic age which brought the victory against France in the Levant in the War of Second Coalition (1798-1802). Collections of the Ottoman Archives and Topkapı Palace Archives in Istanbul as well as various chronicles and treatises in Turkish supply most of the primary sources for this dissertation. Appendices, charts and maps are provided to make the findings on the expedition, finance and logistics more readable. The body of the dissertation is divided into nine chapters discussing in order the global setting and domestic situation prior to the forming of the second coalition, the Adriatic expedition, its financial and logistical aspects with the ensuing socio-economic problems in the Morea, the Sublime Porte’s relations with its protectorate – The Republic of Seven United Islands, and finally the post-war diplomacy.