British travelers on the Russification of Crimea at the turn of 18-19th centuries

Year 2023, Volume: 3 Issue: 5 - PROF. DR. DOĞAN ÖZLEM'E İTHAFEN, 30 - 47, 20.06.2023

Elmaz Asan

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8058392

Abstract

The 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea revived the historical myth that the peninsula has always been a Russian territory and is “a primordially Russian land.” “Krym nash” (“Crimea is ours”) has become a catch phrase symbolizing the revival of Russian imperial ambitions. The creation of the myths around Crimea and the falsification of history has been an integral part of Russian imperial politics since 1783 when Russia annexed the peninsula. To justify the annexation of Tatar inhabited Crimea, Russian historiography often depicts the Tatars as “barbaric people,” “the descendants of the Mongols,” and as a nation that does not have its own intellectual heritage and cultural past. Such rhetoric is the marker of a colonial history which denies conquered people their cultural and political identity and justifies imperial hegemony, which it legitimizes as a ‘civilizing project.’ Following the Russian annexation of Crimea in 1783, foreign travelers made their way to the region and recorded their observations of the daily life, social and political institutions and cultural traditions of the Crimean Tatars as well as the Russian colonial policies and their consequences. On the basis of these primary sources (mostly travelogues), I propose to examine the cultural heritage of the Crimean Tatars at the time of their subjugation by the Russian state and the changes in their life brought about by the Russian colonial policies.

Keywords

Crimea, Crimean Tatars, Russian annexation

British Travelers on the Russification of Crimea at the Turn of 18-19th Centuries

Abstract

The 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea revived the historical myth that the peninsula has always been a Russian territory and is “a primordially Russian land.” “Krym nash” (“Crimea is ours”) has become a catch phrase symbolizing the revival of Russian imperial ambitions. The creation of the myths around Crimea and the falsification of history has been an integral part of Russian imperial politics since 1783 when Russia annexed the peninsula. To justify the annexation of Tatar inhabited Crimea, Russian historiography often depicts the Tatars as “barbaric people,” “the descendants of the Mongols,” and as a nation that does not have its own intellectual heritage and cultural past. Such rhetoric is the marker of a colonial history which denies conquered people their cultural and political identity and justifies imperial hegemony, which it legitimizes as a ‘civilizing project.’ Following the Russian annexation of Crimea in 1783, foreign travelers made their way to the region and recorded their observations of the daily life, social and political institutions and cultural traditions of the Crimean Tatars as well as the Russian colonial policies and their consequences. On the basis of these primary sources (mostly travelogues), I propose to examine the cultural heritage of the Crimean Tatars at the time of their subjugation by the Russian state and the changes in their life brought about by the Russian colonial policies.

Keywords

Crimea, Crimean Tatars, Russian annexation, British travelers

References

• Abdulvaapov, N. (2021), “Kalgi Sultan’s Palace in Simferopol”, Issues of Crimean Tatar Philology, History and Culture, (12).
• Czerwonnya, S. (2017), “Between Krakow and Istanbul: The Art and Architecture of the Crimean Khanate as the Connecting Link Between Ottoman and European Culture”, Art of the Orient, 6.
• Clarke, E. (1848), In Russia, Tartary, and Turkey; Ipswich: J. M. Burton.
• Dickinson, S. (2002), “Russia's First ‘Orient’: Characterizing the Crimea in 1787”, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, 3.
• Engelhardt, A., Shesrakova S. (2022), “Crimean Tatar Infrastructures of Decolonial Care”, European Review, 30 (4).
• Finnin, R. (2022), Blood of Others: Stalin's Crimean Atrocity and the Poetics of Solidarity, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
• Fisher, A. (1968), “Enlightened Despotism and Islam Under Catherine II”, Slavic Review, Dec., 27 (4).
• Fisher, A. (1978), The Crimean Tatars, Stanford, Calif: Hoover Institution Press.
• Fisher, A. (1970), The Russian annexation of the Crimea 1772-1783, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Gleason, H. (1950), The Genesis of Russophobia in Great Britain a Study of the Interaction of Policy and Opinion, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Herber, R. (1829), Some Account of the Life Reginald Heber, D. D. Bishop of Calcuta. With a Portrait, London: Simpkin & Marshal.
• Idrisova. M. (2019, 12 October), “Iskusstvo Krymskogo Hanstva v Logike Interval'nogo Analiza”, Avdet.
• Kırımlı, H. (2022), Geraylar ve Osmanlılar Kırım Hanlık Hanedanının Osmanlı Devletindeki Hikayesi, Ankara: Ötüken Yayınları.
• Kançal-Ferrarı, N. (2017), An Italian Renaissance Gate for the Khan: Visual Culture in Early Modern Crimea, Muqarnas, 34.
• Lyall, R. (1825), Travels in Russia, the Krimea, the Caucasus, and Georgia, London: T. Cadell and W. Blackwood.
• Milner, T. (1855), The Crimea its Ancient and Modern History: The Khans, Sultans, and The Czars with Notices of Its Scenery and Population by Rev. M.A.F.R.A.S, London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longman.
• Nepomnyashij, A. (2019), Stanovlenie i Razvitie Istoriografii Istorii Kryma: Osnovnye Vehi (Vtoraya Polovina XVIII-pervaya Polovina XX-veka) Uchennye Zapiski Krymskogo Federalnogo Universiteta im. Vernadskogo, (2).
• O'Neill, K. (2017), Claiming Crimea: A History of Catherine the Great's Southern Empire, Yale University Press.
• Ragsdale, H. (1988), “Evaluating the Traditions of Russian Aggression: Catherine II and the Greek Project”, The Slavonic and East European Review, Jan., 66 (1).
• Sasse, G. (2007), The Crimea Question: Identity, Transition, and Conflict, Cambridge: Harvard University Press for Harvard Ukrainian research Institute.
• Spencer, E. (1837), Travels is Circassia, Krim Tartary, London.
• Scott, C. (1854), The Baltic the Black Sea and the Crimea, London.
• Ükten Y. D. (2022), The Crimean Turks in the 19th Century According to Western Travelers, Aksaray.
• Vozgrin V., Istoricheskie Sudby Krymskih Tatar: IV Nacionalnaya Politika Carizma v Pervoj Polovine XIX v. http://www.krimoved-library.ru/books/istoricheskie-sudbi-krimskih-tatar.html
• Williams, G. (2016), The Crimea Tatars from Soviet Genocide to Putin's Conquest, Oxford University Press.
• Yakobson, A. (1973), Krym v Srednie Veka, Moscow: Nauka.
• Istoriya Kryma, (2015), http://www.krimoved-library.ru/books/kodzova-istoriya-krima1.html.
• Yakubovych, M. (2013), “Post-Classical Islamic Philosophy in the Medieval Crimea: Sharaf al-Din al-Qirimi and Ahmad al-Qirimi”, Studia Antyczne i Mediewistyczne, 11.
• Zorien A. (2014), By Fables Alone: Literature and State Ideology in Late Eighteenth- and Early Nineteenth-Century Russia, Academic Studies Press.
• Žídková, M., Melichar, M. (2015), “Crimean Tatars Before and After the Annexation of Crimea: Identity, Societal Security, and the Prospects of Violence”, ALPPI Annual of Language & Politics and Politics of Identity, 39 (9).