DOCSLIB.ORG

Boris Kolonitskii, “'Democracy' in the Political Consciousness of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Boris Kolonitskii, “'Democracy' in the Political Consciousness of The "Democracy" in the Political Consciousness of the February Revolution Author(s): Boris Ivanovich Kolonitskii Source: Slavic Review, Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring, 1998), pp. 95-106 Published by: Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2502054 . Accessed: 17/09/2013 09:58 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Slavic Review. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.197.27.9 on Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:58:33 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions "Democracy" in the Political Consciousness of the FebruaryRevolution Boris Ivanovich Kolonitskii Historians of quite diverging orientations have interpreted the Feb- ruary revolution of 1917 in Russia as a "democratic" revolution. Sev- eral generations of Marxists of various stripes (tolk) have called it a "bourgeois-democratic revolution." In the years of perestroika, the contrast between democratic February and Bolshevik October became an important part of the historical argument of the anticommunist movement. The February revolution was regarded as a dramatic, un- successful attempt at the modernization and westernization of Russia, as its democratization. Such a point of view was expressed even earlier in some historical works and in the memoirs of participants in the events-liberals and moderate socialists. For example, just such a de- scription of the revolution is given by Aleksandr Kerenskii, whose last reminiscences are especially significant. Kerenskii thought that "the overwhelming majority of the Russian population ... were wholeheart- edly democratic in their beliefs."' In many respects, this viewpoint is correct. For the most part, both the legislation of the February revolution and the practical activity of the Provisional Government were directed toward creating democratic, elected institutions, toward securing human rights and democratic freedoms. Democratization was seen as a universal means to solve any kind of problem. After February, people strove to democratize the theater, church, and schools (in the latter case one might inean labor education and the creation of self-management). During the revolution a unique experiment was conducted in the democratization of the army, which Kerenskii himself called "the freest in the world" (samaia svobodnaia v mire) (soldiers of the 12th army, for example, were proud of the fact that it was "the most democratic" of the Russian armed forces). Troop committees of elected representatives were created in the army and were able to exercise significant rights; soldiers of many units and subdivisions chose their commanders; even the decision to initiate an attack was occasionally subject to a vote.2 Democratic ideology and phraseology influenced the language of revolution. The term democracy(demokratiia), which gave way in popu- larity to the concepts of "the people" (narod), "freedom" (svoboda),and "socialism" (sotsializm), was absolutely "politically correct," ideologi- 1. A. F. Kerensky, Russia and History's Turning Point (New York, 1965), 326. 2. V. V. Shul'gin claims, with referen-ce to the testimony of Germnanofficers, that soldiers sometimes voted in the middle of an attack, before each charge. It is difficult to believe this, but the very existence of anecdotes on the theme of "democratized battles" is symptomatic. V. V. Shul'gin, "1917-1919," in A. V. Lavrov, ed., Litsa: Bio- graficheskiialmanakh (Moscow, 1994), 5:143. Slavic Reviezv 57, no. 1 (Spring 1998) This content downloaded from 128.197.27.9 on Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:58:33 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 96 Slavic Review cally fashionable, and emotionally attractive.The guberniia diocese congressin Kursk concluded thatthe republican democraticstructure "corresponded most closely" to evangelical law. The battleshipImpe- ratorNikolai I was to take the name Democracy.But ships were not the only thingschanging names. On 8 (21) April 1917, one soldier,Sergei Romanov, made a special request: like manywho shared his surname, he wanted to be rid of the Romanov name because it was considered "monarchist" and "unpleasant" (some Rasputins and Sukhomlinovs also aspired to change their surnames).Romanov wrote,"A wounded soldier,I consider it shamefulat the presenttime to bear the surname Romanov, and thereforerequest that you permit me to change my name fromRomanov to Demokratov" (his request was denied).3 If the renamingof militaryships testifiesto the inclusion of a political term in the new governmentideology, then the anthroponymicreaction to the revolution(changes in surnames and the decline in popularityof the name Nikolai were unusuallywidespread afterFebruary) indicates a distinctivepoliticization of private life. For neophytes of political life the termdemocracy had a positive meaning; one must suppose that the soldierRomanov (he was neverallowed to change his name) thought that he, his family,and his descendants would be proud of the new name. Including the termdemocracy in one's own political lexicon became a must for practicallyall political forces-from Bolsheviks to Kor- nilovites.Thus, Nikolai Berdiaev called Lavr Kornilov an "indubitable democrat" and Boris Savinkov considered the general "a true demo- crat and unwaveringrepublican."4 To combat German propaganda in Russia, British and French missions, in cooperation with Kornilov's entourage, created a special publishing house in Petrograd,turning out no fewerthan 12 million leaflets.Significantly, the publisher was called DemokraticheskaiaRossiia (DemocraticRussia). Evidently,it was assumed thatprinted matter from such a source would be in demand.5 On the other hand, even the leader of the Bolshevikswas seen by his supportersas "the leader of democracy." In May 1917 front-line soldiers wrote to the editorial officeof a Bolshevik newspaper: "We send a warm greeting to the leader of Russian democracy and the defender of our interests,comrade Lenin." A Bolshevik-poet pro- claimed on the pages of Pravda: 3. Russkaiavolia, 1 (14) June 1917; Russkoeslovo, 21 April (4 May) 1917; Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyiistoricheskii arkhiv, f. 1412, op. 16, d. 532. On changing surnames, see AndrewM. Verner,"What's in a Name? Of Dog-Killers,Jews and Rasputin,"Slavic Reviezv53, no. 4 (1994): 1046-70. 4. N. A. Berdiaev, "O svobode i dostoinstveslova," Narodopravstvo:Ezhiniedielnyi zhurnal,1917, no. 11:6; House of Lords Record Office,Historical Collection, no. 206: The Stow Hill Papers, DS 2/1(G). 5. B. I. Kolonitskii,"Izdatel'stvo 'DemokraticheskaiaRossiia,' inostrannyeinissii i okruzhenie L. G. Kornilova," in I. L. Afanas'ev,A. U. Davydov, V. I. Startsev,eds., Rossiia v 1917 godu:Novye podkhody i vzgliady:Sbornik nauchnykh trudov, 2d ed. (St. Pe- tersburg,1994), 28-31. This content downloaded from 128.197.27.9 on Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:58:33 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions "Democracy"in theFebruary Revolution 97 A nOFO CeMbIO HapOIHyfO, 'ITO 30BeTCA geMoKpaTHeH, 3a ee 60pb6ynpHpO)jHyfo C TeMHOTO1O Ha HaTHei. (I sing the familyof my people, Which is called democracy, For her instinctivebattle With darkness and apathy.)6 And so, representativesof nearly the entire political spectrum thoughtthey should call themselves"democrats." This facilitatedthe multiple meanings of the term democracyand lent the advantages of political mimicryto those who used it. The satiristD. N. Semenovskii had good reason to describe the situationin the followingway: BcMPycb HO-HOBOMY ogeTa, MIepTOBCKH rieCTpbI4 MacKapa)j! HlOrpOMIUIK HPHHAUI BH)j KageTa, A KTO TeIepb He =eMOKpaT? (All of Russia is newlydecked out, A devilishlymotley masquerade! A thug pretends to be a Kadet, And who's not a democrat now?)7 One distinctivepiece of evidence concerningthe popularityof the term democracyin revolutionaryRussia was the emotional statement made by Lord Charles Hardinge, the permanent undersecretaryof state for foreignaffairs of Great Britain. On 13 (26) April, Hardinge wrote to Sir George Buchanan, the Britishambassador in Petrograd: "How I hate the word democracyat the present time: if we do not win the war,as it should be won, it will be thanksto the Russian revolution and the absurd nonsense talked about the democracies of the world."8 An officialof conservativeconvictions, Hardinge questioned, not with- out foundation,the battlereadiness of the Russian revolutionaryarmy, at the same time that many of his compatriotliberals wrote enthusi- asticallyof a unified battle pittingthe "democratic countries" against Prussian militarismand absolutism. The Most Democratic Country Active participantsin the Russian revolution not only strove to- ward democratictransformations in theircountry, they thirsted to make Russia "the most democratic" governmentin the world: "We won't create some kind of English or German structure,rather a democratic republic in the full sense of the word," Kerenskii declared on 15 (28) 6. Pravda, 11 (24) May and 19 May (1 June) 1917. 7. Russkaiastikhotvornaia satira 1908-191 7-xgodov (Leninggrad, 1974), 568. 8. Cambridge University
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Revolution in Real Time: the Russian Provisional Government, 1917
    ODUMUNC 2020 Crisis Brief Revolution in Real Time: The Russian Provisional Government, 1917 ODU Model United Nations Society Introduction seventy-four years later. The legacy of the Russian Revolution continues to be keenly felt The Russian Revolution began on 8 March 1917 to this day. with a series of public protests in Petrograd, then the Winter Capital of Russia. These protests But could it have gone differently? Historians lasted for eight days and eventually resulted in emphasize the contingency of events. Although the collapse of the Russian monarchy, the rule of history often seems inventible afterwards, it Tsar Nicholas II. The number of killed and always was anything but certain. Changes in injured in clashes with the police and policy choices, in the outcome of events, government troops in the initial uprising in different players and different accidents, lead to Petrograd is estimated around 1,300 people. surprising outcomes. Something like the Russian Revolution was extremely likely in 1917—the The collapse of the Romanov dynasty ushered a Romanov Dynasty was unable to cope with the tumultuous and violent series of events, enormous stresses facing the country—but the culminating in the Bolshevik Party’s seizure of revolution itself could have ended very control in November 1917 and creation of the differently. Soviet Union. The revolution saw some of the most dramatic and dangerous political events the Major questions surround the Provisional world has ever known. It would affect much Government that struggled to manage the chaos more than Russia and the ethnic republics Russia after the Tsar’s abdication.
    [Show full text]
  • Socialism in Europe and the Russian Revolution India and the Contemporary World Society Ofthefuture
    Socialism in Europe and II the Russian Revolution Chapter 1 The Age of Social Change In the previous chapter you read about the powerful ideas of freedom and equality that circulated in Europe after the French Revolution. The French Revolution opened up the possibility of creating a dramatic change in the way in which society was structured. As you have read, before the eighteenth century society was broadly divided into estates and orders and it was the aristocracy and church which controlled economic and social power. Suddenly, after the revolution, it seemed possible to change this. In many parts of the world including Europe and Asia, new ideas about individual rights and who olution controlled social power began to be discussed. In India, Raja v Rammohan Roy and Derozio talked of the significance of the French Revolution, and many others debated the ideas of post-revolutionary Europe. The developments in the colonies, in turn, reshaped these ideas of societal change. ian Re ss Not everyone in Europe, however, wanted a complete transformation of society. Responses varied from those who accepted that some change was necessary but wished for a gradual shift, to those who wanted to restructure society radically. Some were ‘conservatives’, others were ‘liberals’ or ‘radicals’. What did these terms really mean in the context of the time? What separated these strands of politics and what linked them together? We must remember that these terms do not mean the same thing in all contexts or at all times. We will look briefly at some of the important political traditions of the nineteenth century, and see how they influenced change.
    [Show full text]
  • The Azef Affair and Late Imperial Russian Modernity
    Chto Takoe Azefshchina?: The Azef Affair and Late Imperial Russian Modernity By Jason Morton Summer 2011 Jason Morton is a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at the University of California, Berkeley. “Petersburg streets possess one indubitable quality: they transform passersby into shadows.” -Andrei Bely “Now when even was come, he sat down with the twelve. And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. And they were exceedingly sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I? And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.” -Matthew 26: 20-23 Introduction: Azefshchina- What’s in a name? On January 18, 1909 (O.S.) the former Russian chief of police, A.A. Lopukhin, was arrested and his house was searched. Eleven packages containing letters and documents were sealed up and taken away. 1 Lopukhin stood accused of confirming to representatives of the Socialist Revolutionary Party that one of their oldest and most respected leaders, Evno Azef, had been a government agent working for the secret police (Okhrana) since 1893. The Socialist Revolutionaries (or SRs) were a notorious radical party that advocated the overthrow of the Russian autocracy by any means necessary.2 The Combat Organization (Boevaia Organizatsiia or B.O.) of the SR Party was specifically tasked with conducting acts of revolutionary terror against the government and, since January of 1904, Evno Azef had been the head of this Combat Organization.3 This made him the government’s most highly placed secret agent in a revolutionary organization.
    [Show full text]
  • HUGH PHILLIPS (Bowling Green, KY, USA)
    HUGH PHILLIPS (Bowling Green, KY, USA) "A BAD BUSINESS"-THE FEBRUARY REVOLUTION IN TVER'* The February Revolution of 1917 ended hundreds of years of Russian monarchial absolutism and established Russia virtually overnight as the "frees country in the world." Yet the nature of this revolution, especially the course of events in the provinces, has only recently become accessible to archival study owing to the collapse of the Soviet regime that for so long wished to see only its version of events. To be sure, historians have made admirable and useful efforts to understand February under these unfavor- able circumstances. Most notably, Ronald G. Suny and Donald Raleigh have written indispensable accounts of the entire revolutionary process of 1917 in Baku and Saratov, respectively, but neither was able to consult local archives. Indeed, Raleigh conducted his research without being allowed even to visit the city.1 Until scholars possess a comprehensive body of archival- based literature that encompasses events beyond Petrograd and Moscow, a complete history of the February Revolution will remain impossible. This article is intended to contribute to this effort through a study of the ancient Russian city of Tver', located about 150 miles northwest of Moscow on the rail-line to St. Petersburg. Broadly speaking, I have two objectives. First, I 1. Ronald G. Suny, The Baku Commune, 1917-1918 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 1972) and Donald J. Raleigh, Revolution on the Volga:Saratov in 1917 (Ithaca, NY:Cornell Univ.Press, 1986). Rex Wade's, Red Guards and Workers' Militias in the Russian Revolution,(Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ.
    [Show full text]
  • Revolution in Russia and the Formation of the Soviet Union
    CLASSROOM COUNTRY PROFILES Revolution in Russia and the Formation of the Soviet Union The Russian Revolution often refers to two events that took place in 1917. The first, known as the February Revolution, forced Tsar Nicholas II to abdicate and led to the formation of a provisional government. During the second event, commonly known as the October Revolution or Bolshevik Revolution, Vla- dimir Lenin’s Bolshevik Party seized power and began seven decades of one-party rule. Some scholars and Soviet critics have argued that the second event was actually a coup by Lenin and his supporters and not a true revolution. The Russian Empire in 1914. Date confusion—The February Revolution actually In the early 1900s, cracks were beginning to appear in the tsar’s control took place in early March. Because the Russian Em- over the Russian Empire. An attempted revolution in 1905, which saw pire followed the Julian Calendar, which is 13 days mass worker strikes and peasant revolts, shook the monarchy and forced behind the Gregorian Calendar, the events are referred Tsar Nicholas II to implement political reform, including the establishment to as the February Revolution. Likewise, the October of a parliament and a new constitution. Revolution actually took place in early November. Reform temporarily quieted the unrest, but the new policies proved inef- Soviet—The word means “council” in Russian. Soviets fective and the parliament, known as the State Duma, was largely unable were workers’ councils made up of various socialist to override the Tsar’s decrees. parties at the end of the Russian Empire.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Were the “Greens”? Rumor and Collective Identity in the Russian Civil War
    Who Were the “Greens”? Rumor and Collective Identity in the Russian Civil War ERIK C. LANDIS In the volost center of Kostino-Otdelets, located near the southern border of Borisoglebsk uezd in Tambov province, there occurred what was identified as a “deserters’ revolt” in May 1919. While no one was killed, a group of known deserters from the local community raided the offices of the volost soviet, destroying many documents relating to the previous months’ attempts at military conscription, and stealing the small number of firearms and rubles held by the soviet administration and the volost Communist party cell. The provincial revolutionary tribunal investigated the affair soon after the events, for while there was an obvious threat of violence, no such escalation occurred, and the affair was left to civilian institutions to handle. The chairman of the volost soviet, A. M. Lysikov, began his account of the event on May 18, when he met with members of the community following a morning church service in order to explain the recent decrees and directives of the provincial and central governments.1 In the course of this discussion, he raised the fact that the Council of Workers’ and Peasants’ Defense in Moscow had declared a seven-day amnesty for all those young men who had failed to appear for mobilization to the Red Army, particularly those who had been born in 1892 and 1893, and had been subject to the most recent age-group mobilization.2 It was at this moment that one of the young men in the village approached him to ask if it was possible to ring the church bell and call for an open meeting of deserters in the volost, at which they could collectively agree whether to appear for mobilization.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hungarian Revolutions of 1848 and 1989: a Comparative Study
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 473 219 SO 034 475 AUTHOR Augsburger, Irene TITLE The Hungarian Revolutions of 1848 and 1989: A Comparative Study. Fulbright-Hayes Summer Seminars Abroad Program, 2002 (Hungary and Poland). SPONS AGENCY Center for International Education (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 2002-00-00 NOTE 6p. PUB TYPE Guides Classroom Teacher (052) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Comparative Analysis; *Curriculum Development; *European History; Foreign Countries; Grade 10; High Schools; Political Science; *Revolution; Social Studies; *World History IDENTIFIERS Fulbright Hays Seminars Abroad Program; *Hungary ABSTRACT This study unit for grade 10 world history classes helps students understand the economic, social, and political causes and effects of revolution, using the Hungarian Revolutions of 1848 and 1989 as examples. The unit cites an educational goal; lists objectives; provides a detailed procedure for classroom implementation; describes standards; notes materials needed; addresses assessment; and suggests a follow-up activity. Contains five references; a summary of the relevant historical background of Hungary; and a grid representing the causes, demands, and results of the 1848 and the 1989 revolutions. (BT) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. The Hungarian Revolutions of 1848 and 1989 A Comparative Study By Irene Augsburger Description: This study unit will help students understand the economic, social and political causes and effects of revolution. 2. Grade Level: 10th grade world history 3.Goal: Students will recognize patterns that lead to revolution in general. They will also analyze cause and effect relationships. 4.Objective: a.) Compare different revolutions b.) Explain similarities and differences c.) Hypothesize the outcome in a specific country d.) Generalize the information 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Sidney Reilly's Reports from South Russia, December 1918-March 1919
    Ainsworth, J. (1998) Sidney Reilly's reports from South Russia, December 1918-March 1919. Europe-Asia Studies. 50(8) 1447-1470 COPYRIGHT 1998 Carfax Publishing Company Sidney Reilly's reports from South Russia, December 1918-March 1919. John Ainsworth Sidney Reilly has become a legendary figure as the master spy of the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6). 'He was surely not only the master spy of this century', wrote one ardent admirer, 'but of all time'. While his activities as an intelligence agent in British service have only been glimpsed through the veil of secrecy that officialdom invariably imposes on such matters, nonetheless, they seem to have an aura of the extraordinary about them. Supposedly they even surpassed the amazing exploits of the fictional super-spy character James Bond, whose creator Ian Fleming, himself a former officer of the Naval Intelligence Directorate, declared: 'James Bond is just a piece of nonsense I dreamed up. He's not a Sidney Reilly, you know!'(1) Other estimates of his achievements have been rather less flattering though. Some senior officials of the Foreign Office in London, for instance, were said to have dismissed the Reilly legend as one derived largely from his inclination to 'exaggerate his own importance', while an acclaimed historical study of Britain's secret intelligence agencies described Reilly's secret service career overall as 'remarkable, though largely ineffective ...'.(2) Examination of his reports from South Russia, and their manner of compilation as well, affords us a unique opportunity to assess both his function and performance, at least on this particular occasion, as an agent in the field for MI6.
    [Show full text]
  • The Socialist Revolutionary Party
    onmicrofilm The SocialistRevolutionary Party Archive collection of the PartiiaSocialistov-Revoliutsionerov 5EIVIA5HBOAM fi1iROP1361.1 oliPtT 'EMI) Tbm Pth0CBO E 11APT151- CORIAA VICTOR% PEBOAKRIOHEPOITh International Institute of Social History (IISH) IDC The Socialist Revolutionary Party The archives of the Socialist Revolutionary Party (SR) are now for the first time available in convenient, fully-indexed microfilm format from IDC Publishers. This collection, held by the International Institute of Social History (IISH), Amsterdam, contains minutes of party congresses and documents of local party organizations in Russia and Western Europe, original correspondence, leaflets and proclamations, documents of and about Socialist International, Russian Ochranka and many other organizations. This microform collection is without any doubt anindispensable research tool in the field of social history and Slavic studies. History of the Socialist Revolutionary Moscow and brother-in-law of Tsar Karlsruhe. Upon returning to Russia in Party Nicolas H. Meanwhile,a left-wing 1899 he moved in circles connected Partiia Socialistov-Revoliutsionerov (in spin-off, the Maximalists, pursued a with the birth of the SR in 1901. When Russian, abbreviated to ceserys) terrorist campaign against the state even Gershuni, a principal advocate of occupies a special place in Russian more intense than that of the SR. In terrorism within the SR was arrested for history. Together with that of the 1905 the main party advocated the the murder of Minister Sipiagin in 1902, Mensheviks and the anarchists, this formation of a Constituent Assembly Azev became the head of the party's history belongs to the victims to the left and supported universal suffrage. Combat organization. He was a prime of the Bolsheviks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Okhrana and the Cheka: Continuity and Change
    The Okhrana and the Cheka: Continuity and Change A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Amanda M. Ward August 2014 © 2014 Amanda M. Ward. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled The Okhrana and the Cheka: Continuity and Change by AMANDA M. WARD has been approved for the Department of History and the College of Arts and Sciences by Steven M. Miner Professor of History Robert Frank Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT WARD, AMANDA M., M.A., August 2014, History The Okhrana and the Cheka: Continuity and Change Director of Thesis: Steven M. Miner The most notorious aspect of the Soviet Union was its culture of secret policing that, through a series of state security agencies, carried out mass arrests, deportations, and executions. Since the collapse of the socialist state and the opening of the Soviet archives, the historical community has only begun to understand the full extent of crimes committed at the hands of the Cheka, and its successors, the OGPU, NKVD, and KGB. Yet, after tracing this repression to its origins, historical evidence indicates that Imperial Russia first cultivated this culture of secret policing and introduced many of the policing techniques the Bolsheviks later implement and further perfected. By the turn of the 20th century, the Okhrana – the Tsarist secret police – developed into a highly effective political police force which was, by and large, quite successful in penetrating underground revolutionary organizations, including Lenin’s Bolshevik party.
    [Show full text]
  • Arkhangel'sk, 1918: Regionalism and Populism in the Russian Civil War Author(S): Yanni Kotsonis Source: Russian Review, Vol
    The Editors and Board of Trustees of the Russian Review Arkhangel'sk, 1918: Regionalism and Populism in the Russian Civil War Author(s): Yanni Kotsonis Source: Russian Review, Vol. 51, No. 4 (Oct., 1992), pp. 526-544 Published by: Wiley on behalf of The Editors and Board of Trustees of the Russian Review Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/131044 . Accessed: 15/11/2013 01:18 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Wiley and The Editors and Board of Trustees of the Russian Review are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Russian Review. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Fri, 15 Nov 2013 01:18:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Arkhangel'sk,1918: Regionalismand Populism in the Russian Civil War YANNI KOTSONIS In August 1918 a group of moderate socialists, liberals, and army officers over- threw the Bolshevik authorities of Arkhangel'sk province and replaced them with the Supreme Administration of the Northern Region (Verkhovnoe Upravlenie Severnoi Oblasti). The new authorities intended the North to serve as a foothold from which to remove the Bolsheviks from power in the remainder of Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Soviet History Author(S): Daniel T
    Southern Methodist University SMU Scholar History Faculty Publications History 12-1990 The ewN Soviet History Daniel T. Orlovsky Southern Methodist University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/hum_sci_history_research Part of the History Commons, and the Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies Commons Recommended Citation Orlovsky, Daniel T., "The eN w Soviet History" (1990). History Faculty Publications. 2. https://scholar.smu.edu/hum_sci_history_research/2 This document is brought to you for free and open access by the History at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. The New Soviet History Author(s): Daniel T. Orlovsky Source: The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 62, No. 4 (Dec., 1990), pp. 831-850 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1881065 . Accessed: 08/12/2014 16:18 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Modern History. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 16:18:34 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ReviewArticle The New SovietHistory Daniel T.
    [Show full text]