“Unichtozhenie tsygan Simferopolia i “reshenie” tsyganskogo voprosa v okkupirovannom Krymu / Уничтожение цыган Симферополя” [Destruction of the Roma of Simferopol and the “Solution” of the “Gypsy Question” in the Occupied Crimea].” Istorichieskoe nasledie Kryma 32 (2021): 36-56.

This book addresses various aspects of the integration of the Crimea into political, ideological, administrative, legal, ethnoconfessional, cultural, and symbolical spaces of Russia after the first annexation in 1783. Russia faced the necessity to absorb the region having politico-legal and socio-economic relations based on principally different fundamentals. The state used that situation to develop new administrative methods according to the values of the Enlightenment, such as humanism, religious and national tolerance, and scientific approach. Despite of the abundant scholarship discussing various aspects of the problem, one should establish that some important topics have not been uncovered yet. The reason is that different historiographic trends operate different methods, naturally coming to different results, though there are entire groups of sources still not introduced into scholarly circulation. Their study requires complex interdisciplinary approach based on modern methods of new history, archaeology, ethnology, philology, art history, legal studies, demography, and statistics. In result, complete operation cycle performed by Russian administration in order to solve integration issues in the specific region has been discovered for the first time, including such components as information collection machinery, creation of alternative screenplays for the development of the Crimea and aspects of their implementation, variants of feedback between the imperial bureaucracy and local communities, principles of correction of already made solutions.

Contemporary researchers consider it as a proven fact that Grand Prince of Moscow Ivan III instigated the attack of the Crimean khan Mengli Giray against Kiev in 1482. Italian documents of 1480s allow us to provide an alternative explanation for these events. After the Ottoman conquest of Caffa in 1475 the Genoeses planned to recover their colony. For this purpose they sent their emissaries to Mengli Giray who were to both examine the situation in Crimea and incite the khan for an uprising in Caffa against Turkish rule. To secure the success of their plan they also planned to persuade the Polish king Casimir Jagiellon to participate in the uprising. Polish ruler approved a plan in words, but did not provide any practical support. This, in turn, prompted Mengli Giray to attack on Kiev. Purpose of the study: to find out the reasons for the Tatar attack against Kiev in 1482. Objective: to establish the circumstances that led to the attack on Kiev in 1482 and the rupture of peaceful relations between Mengli Giray and Casimir IV. Novelty of the study: based on the little-known sources the author for the first time provides an alternative explanation for the rupture of peaceful relations between Mengli Giray and Casimir IV.

Миграции цыганских групп и формирование цыганского населения Российской империи в XVII – начале ХХ вв., 2018

Ключевые слова: Российская империя, формирование цыганского населения, сервисный номадизм, миграции, этнические группы цыган В статье на основе предыдущих исследований автора рассматриваются причины и сроки появления в Российской империи крупнейших этнических групп цыган, в XVII-начале ХХ в. составивших основу цыганского населе-ния России: сэрвов, русских цыган, влахов, кишиневцев, крымских цыган, кэлдэрарей, ловарей. Кратко анализируется история формирования цыган-ского населения России в контексте основных тенденций государственной политики в отношении цыган, выделяются крупнейшие этапы этого процесса. Использованы результаты историко-этнографических и лингвистических ис-следований, архивные и печатные источники, переписи, государственные акты Российской империи, полевые материалы.

Historia Provinciae – the Journal of Regional History, vol. 7, no. 1 (2023): 190–237

The unification of the Crimea with Russia in 1783 was an important event in the world politics and attracted the attention of the whole Europe. The apparent evidence of that interest was the inclusion of the Crimea in the itinerary of the great educational journey, or the Grand Tour, of the European elite. In their travelogues, published later on, the representatives of the European elite discussed the “legality” and effectiveness of the actions of the Russian authorities in the region. Given the specific image of the Crimea, a region with a predominantly Muslim population, located at the imaginary border between Europe and Asia, the travellers used traditional in the European mind ideas of the historical roles of East and West, the historical mission of the European powers, and the essence of the Russian state. As the source base for the study, several of the most popular travelogues of the period under research were chosen, in particular the works of François de Tott and Edward Clarke, William Eton and Matthew Guthrie, Mary Holderness and Paul Guibal, Xavier and Adèle Hommaire de Hell, and Olimpiada Shishkina. The article shows the genesis of popular, and the same time opposite interpretations of the historical role and fate of the Crimean Khanate, from the “golden age” in the history of the region to the disaster that threw it far back. Depending on the author’s aim, the unification with Russia was interpreted as a “barbarian invasion,” or, alternatively, as a new possibility for fast progress. Moreover, the article uncovers the main criteria used by the travellers when evaluating the activities of the Russian government, their attitude towards the local residents, the ability to establish effective administration, develop trade, protect Christianity, keep archaeological and architectural monuments and sites, and so on. The work analyses established stereotypes developed by the travellers, such as “huge economic potential” of the Crimea, the perception of its residents as “noble savages / lazy idlers,” “Russian barbarism” concerning cultural heritage, and “military impotence” of the Black Sea Navy. It is indicated that many such assessments depended on the travellers’ background and already existing opinion, which had been formed before the journey. The article demonstrates the continuity in the stereotypes and explanatory models, especially in the period of aggravation of relations between Russia and Europe on the eve and in the course of the Crimean War, when anti-Russian ideological patterns and discourses became in demand again.

The paper analyses the account of Tataria collected by famous English adventurer John Smith. In 1602, Smith, a mercenary in Transylvania, was captivated by pillagers and, later, sold into slavery. In spring of 1603 he found himself a slave somewhere in the Azov Sea Area, in the land of the Crimean Khanate. A few months later, Smith succeeded to escape, he reached the Moscow czar’s country, and whence returned to Transylvania. Twenty years after, Smith published his life story in short (1625) and then long version (1630). A considerable part of the story was the account of the author’s adventures among the Turks and the Tatars. Smith widely used other travellers’ accounts (William Biddulph, Antony Jenkinson, William of Rubruck, and Martin Broniovius), collected by famous Samuel Purchas, the first publisher of Smith’s own story. Now we can determine original materials by Smith, based on his personal experience, which describe the Crimean Khanate’s daily life and warfare.

Ïðîáëåìè ³ñòî𳿠êðà¿í Öåíòðàëüíî¿ òà Ñõ³äíî¿ ªâðîïè. -Âèïóñê 5 events, which determined a foreign-policy situation in Central-Eastern Europe., They gained character of alliance or hostility depending of circumstances. Валерий Степанков «СВЕТ» И «ТЕНИ» УКРАИНСКО-КРЫМСКИХ ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИХ ОТНОШЕНИЙ В ГОДЫ НАЦИОНАЛЬНОЙ РЕВОЛЮЦИИ XVII в. (1648-1676) Автор статьи разработал собственную периодизацию отношений между Гетманщиной и Крымским ханством в период Национально-освободительной революции середины XVII в. На основе ключевых военно-политических событий, которые определяли внешнеполитическую ситуацию в Центрально-Восточной Европе, выделено 9 этапов украинско-крымских отношений. В зависимости от обстоятельств, они приобретали характер союзнических или же враждебных. Ключевые слова: Украина, Крымское ханство, военный союз, внешняя политика, периодизация, протекция. Отримано: 24.02.2016. © Тарас Чухліб, 2016 113 Êðèì â ³ñòî𳿠Öåíòðàëüíî-Ñõ³äíî¿ ªâðîïè

Sbornik statei i dokumentov o krymchakakh (XVI – XXI vv.) [Collection of articles and documents about the Krymchaks (16th – 21st centuries)]. Edited by Mikhail Kizilov and Natalia Sumina. Simferopol, 2020. 320 pp. Includes Kizilov, Mikhail, and Yulia Leibenson. “Obzor sovremennogo sostoianiia krymchakskikh kladbishch Respubliki Krym” [A survey of the modern state of the Krymchak cemeteries of the Republic of the Crimea]. In Sbornik statei i dokumentov o krymchakakh (XVI – XXI vv.) [Collection of articles and documents about the Krymchaks (16th – 21st centuries)]. Edited by Mikhail Kizilov and Natalia Sumina. Simferopol, 2020, 216-241.

Rakhimzianov B.R., “Meshcherskii iurt kak zona dvoinogo vliianiia Moskovskogo gosudarstva i Krymskogo khanstva [Meshcherskii iurt as an area of double influence of Muscovy and the Crimean Khanate],” Krymskoe istoricheskoe obozrenie, no. 1, 2016, pp. 81-91 (in Russian). Meshcherskii iurt as an area of double influence of Muscovy and the Crimean khanate Bulat R. Rakhimzianov (Institute of History of the Academy of Science of the Republic of Tatarstan) Abstract. The article analyses problematic of so-called “buffer”, or “frontier” zones – the territories of frontier. These areas often had a very specific system of government and cooperation with international partners. In some cases they submitted to two or even three influential players of international political scene simultaneously. This aspect has been investigated on the case of Meshchera, or “Meshcherskii iurt” (in authentic diplomatic sources), or “Kasimov khanate”, or “Kasimov tsardom” (in historiography). The diplomatic correspondence between Muscovy and the Crimean khanate covering the period of late fifteenth – early sixteenth centuries shows us Meshchera as an area of double influence of both Muscovy and the Crimean khanate: Muscovy possessed lands were Meshchera was situated, and Crimean representatives ruled in Kasimov at the same time. Keywords: Golden Horde, Tatar khanates, Crimean Khanate, Muscovy, Juchids, Girays, vykhod, Tatar departures.

In this article, I will examine the Sufism in the Crimea during the Russian sway. I will show the emergence and development of Sufism in the Crimean peninsula in the Golden Horde and the Ottoman period, as well as the status and position of the Sufi tariqahs in the peninsula at the time of the annexation of the Crimea by the Russian Empire. Based on eyewitness illustrations (primarily Russian travelers), I will consider the case of the Sufi tariqahs in the Crimea in the period from the end of the 18th to the early the 20th century, that is during the rule of the Russian Empire in the peninsula.