编号 4 (2025)

For a long time, the Western model of modernity was regarded as the single paradigm, leading to the assumption that the Western nation-state represented the only “authentic” or “correct” form of nationhood. Within this framework, atheism – or more precisely, atheisation, often erroneously conflated with secularisation – was deemed essential to nation-building. However, the non-reducibility of secularism to its Western version, and the consequent multiplicity of secularisms, forms a crucial aspect of the broader phenomenon of multiple modernities. Secularity, understood as a distinctive form of religiosity that entails tolerance towards the “other” and the separation of secular (including political) and religious spheres within society, constitutes an integral element of modernity as a global historical epoch. Contrary to prevailing assumptions, the persistence of religious sentiment within mass consciousness does not obstruct nation-building. Moreover, the decline of religiosity is not a universal feature but rather a specifically Western characteristic of the nation-building process.

This study offers a meticulous examination of liturgy as a quintessential institutional mechanism underpinning confessional identification, with particular emphasis on the liturgical reforms that accompanied the emergence of the Lutheran and Reformed traditions in the sixteenth century. It undertakes a critical examination of the intricate processes through which religious identity was forged via ritual practice, elucidating the manner in which worship served as a salient instrument of confessional differentiation. Employing an interdisciplinary methodological framework that synthesises comparative liturgical scholarship with institutional analysis, this inquiry illuminates the dynamics by which liturgical reforms facilitated the consolidation of discrete confessional identities. The discussion unfolds across three principal themes. Initially, the study establishes a robust theoretical framework by engaging critically with historical sociology – most notably the seminal insights of Émile Durkheim – and the principles of new institutionalism as articulated by Douglass North, thereby elucidating the pivotal role of ritual in the construction and perpetuation of collective identity. Subsequently, it explores the paradigm of organic liturgical development as a normative ideal within the pre-Reformation ecclesiastical milieu. The final section undertakes a discerning comparative analysis of the liturgical reforms pursued by Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli, alongside their respective successors, with particular focus upon divergences in liturgical structure, ritual innovation, and the theological rationales that undergirded these transformations. The study advances the concept of “liturgical confessionalisation” to encapsulate the dual function of ritual modifications: both as reflections of doctrinal distinctions and as instrumental processes in the institutionalisation of collective ecclesiastical identities during the early modern period. The findings attest that, in the crucible of the sixteenth century, liturgy constituted a principal vector of confessional differentiation. These liturgical reforms were pivotal in the articulation and solidification of emergent religious identities, thereby contributing fundamentally to the diversification and pluralisation of the Reformation movements.

This article examines one of the most renowned engagements in the military career of Napoleon Bonaparte: the Battle of the Pyramids, fought on 21 July 1798 on the outskirts of Cairo. It analyses the enduring image of the battle, widely perpetuated in historiography and artistic culture, and contrasts it with evidence drawn from primary historical sources. While the event has long been enveloped in a romanticised aura of legend and dramatic embellishment, this study offers a critical reassessment of such narratives. Drawing on official records of the Armée d’Orient and contemporary eyewitness accounts, the article undertakes a scholarly reconstruction of the battle’s course and outcome. Although there is broad consensus among contemporaries and later historians regarding the strategic significance of the French victory – namely, the capture of Cairo and the subsequent weakening of Mamluk power – notable discrepancies persist in accounts of the battle’s topography, scale, troop numbers, casualties, and the specific roles of commanders and military branches. The article argues that the engagement consisted of two brief and largely independent episodes, in neither of which Napoleon played a direct operational role. The Mamluk cavalry’s assault on the French right flank was repelled by divisions under Generals Louis Charles Antoine Desaix and Jean Louis Ebénézer Reynier, while the French offensive on the left, including the decisive assault on the fortified village of Embaba, was led by General Louis André Bon. Bonaparte, meanwhile, remained throughout in the centre near General Louis André Bon’s position, which did not directly engage in combat. By disentangling fact from fiction, this study offers a more nuanced understanding of the battle and challenges enduring heroic representations of Napoleon’s role in the Egyptian campaign.

This article investigates language policy in the Kingdom of Poland during the immediate aftermath of the suppression of the Polish Uprising of 1863–1864. Central to the broader contest between the Russian Empire and Polish nationalism was the effort to secure the political and cultural loyalty of diverse ethnic and social strata within the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the 1860s, a cohort of Russian nationalist bureaucrats sought to implement a series of culturally interventionist measures targeting the Polish peasantry, aiming to sever their traditional ties to the politically suspect szlachta. At the heart of this study is an analysis of the attempt to render Polish vernacular literature in Cyrillic script – an initiative conceived as part of a broader strategy of cultural reorientation. Drawing for the first time in historiography on reports entitled “On the Dissemination of Books for Popular Reading”, as well as private and official correspondence of Russian officials housed in archives in Moscow and St Petersburg, the article offers a detailed reconstruction of the project’s inception, rationale, and implementation. The study evaluates the role this orthographic reform played in the wider programme of the so-called “Milyutin party”, whose ambitions extended to the transformation of Polish national identity along Slavophile lines. The Cyrillicisation of Polish formed part of a wider imperial trend in the late 1850s and early 1860s, in which language and script were consciously deployed as instruments of political governance in the contested borderlands of both the Russian and Austrian Empires. In the Polish context, this experiment was emblematic – though not exhaustive – of the cultural policy pursued under the auspices of Nikolay Milyutin. It was accompanied by parallel efforts to produce Polish-language literature in both Latin and Russian scripts. The article concludes that the eventual abandonment of the Cyrillic project was due not merely to the retirement of its chief sponsor but also to internal tensions and contradictions within the Warsaw bureaucracy itself, which ultimately undermined the cohesion of the Milyutin group’s Slavophile vision.

This article investigates the deployment of the term “civilisation” in the deliberations of the British Cabinet during the First World War. While the concept has frequently been examined as a legitimising tool of colonial expansion, this study shifts the analytical focus to its mobilisation within intra-European conflict. Rather than serving solely to differentiate the imperial centre from its colonial periphery, “civilisation” became a rhetorical device through which British political elites distinguished themselves from their European adversaries. Employing a content-analysis approach, this article examines Cabinet conclusions, circulated memoranda, and internal notes to identify the principal semantic domains within which the concept was employed. Five dominant clusters are identified: the colonial and orientalist lexicon; perceptions of Germany and its allies; articulations of national selfhood (“Ourselves”); evaluations of the political futures of Russia, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe; and the contrast drawn between “civilisation” and the nature of war itself. The analysis reveals that each semantic bloc comprised both a stable conceptual core and a more fluid periphery, thereby allowing for considerable rhetorical flexibility. The discourse thus accommodated a range of meanings, at times even contradictory ones, reflecting the complex and evolving political landscape of wartime Britain. The study further examines the extent to which the invocation of “civilisation” correlated with the departmental affiliations and political identities of its proponents. By illuminating the Cabinet’s use of “civilisation” not merely as an imperial trope but as a wartime instrument of domestic and international mobilisation, this article contributes to broader debates on the cultural and ideological dimensions of the First World War. It also underscores the enduring political utility of the term, which has resurfaced in strategic discourse during the early twenty-first century.

This article examines the events of 6 April 1927 in Beijing, when Chinese security forces raided premises associated with the Soviet diplomatic mission, conducting arrests and seizures. In Soviet historiography, this episode was long portrayed as a flagrant breach of international law and a manifestation of an imperialist conspiracy against the USSR. This interpretation – framing the incident as an “attack on the embassy” – has persisted in much of Russian historical writing. However, the operation was carried out under the authority of the Beijing government, led by Wellington Koo and Zhang Zuolin, on premises that, contrary to Soviet assumptions, did not enjoy diplomatic extraterritoriality. The Soviet diplomats’ lack of awareness regarding the legal status of these properties resulted in serious consequences: key Soviet military and intelligence personnel, as well as Chinese Communists, were exposed to a coordinated strike by the Chinese authorities. The search uncovered extensive documentary evidence of Soviet subversive activities in China, including the operations of the Comintern and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), support for Kuomintang General Feng Yuxiang – then in opposition to the Beijing regime – funding of anti-government activities, and covert intelligence work by Soviet advisers. Among the most significant revelations was the direct involvement of CCP leader Li Dazhao in armed resistance, leading to his execution alongside several associates. The fallout from the raid significantly weakened Soviet and Communist influence in northern China. While the episode has often been labelled an attack on a diplomatic mission, it is more accurately described as the seizure of Soviet and Communist institutions operating without diplomatic immunity.

This article examines Soviet perspectives on the limitation of the arms race in the late 1960s and early 1970s, as reflected in expert memoranda produced by the Institute for US Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences and submitted to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). The study highlights the development of arguments in favour of détente within these documents. The memoranda reveal the efforts of Soviet Americanists to promote the normalisation of relations with the United States – an objective of growing significance given the ambivalence within the Party leadership regarding rapprochement. In this context, the Institute’s director, Georgy Arbatov – who maintained close ties with prominent figures such as Brezhnev, Andropov, and Gromyko – sought to position the Institute’s expertise as a resource for those advocating engagement. Soviet experts justified arms control on both economic and strategic grounds. They underscored the disproportionate economic burden of the arms race on the USSR, which impeded much-needed domestic reform, while also highlighting the technological and economic superiority of the United States, which risked shifting the strategic balance. Alongside analytical assessments, the memoranda contained concrete policy recommendations. These included exploiting internal political dynamics in the United States, expanding public diplomacy, and strengthening ties with American society. The experts advocated for a flexible strategy capable of sustaining bilateral relations beyond short-term electoral cycles or presidential administrations. Taken together, the memoranda constitute a significant source for understanding the role of foreign policy expertise in the Soviet Union and reflect broader attempts to conceptualise alternative approaches to US-Soviet relations during the Cold War.

Despite recent improvements in electricity provision, South Africa continues to grapple with an enduring energy crisis, with persistent power shortages becoming a byword for national infrastructural dysfunction. The shortcomings of the ruling leadership have been met with consistent critique from opposition parties, notably the Democratic Alliance (DA), the Freedom Front Plus (FF+), and the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP). While these parties display certain ideological affinities and broadly similar diagnoses of the crisis, their proposed solutions often diverge significantly ranging from pragmatically viable strategies to proposals that are, at times, politically or economically unfeasible. This article examines the principal approaches to the energy crisis advanced by South Africa’s main opposition forces in the lead-up to the 2024 general election. The relevance of the study lies both in the pressing nature of the energy question for the Republic of South Africa and in the notable absence of scholarly analyses – domestic or international – on opposition-party perspectives regarding this persistent crisis. The article draws upon a combination of historical-comparative, historical-genetic, and chronological methods. The source base includes official party websites and electoral manifestos (in English and Afrikaans), as well as publications from South African periodicals. While all three parties seek to reduce the country’s dependence on coal-fired power generation and promote the adoption of renewable technologies, the extent and framing of their proposals vary considerably. Some programmes, although well-intentioned in their environmental aspirations, risk advancing extreme positions that could endanger the economic stability, social welfare, and energy sovereignty of the South African state.

This article examines the principal milestones in the life and intellectual development of Yevgeny Viktorovich Tarle, arguably the most renowned and widely read Russian historian of the twentieth century. It traces the evolution of his scholarly interests – from the economic history of France and Western Europe to the history of warfare, diplomacy, and international relations – and explores the ideological transformations that shaped his worldview, shifting from the moderate liberal oppositionism of the pre-revolutionary period to the Soviet great-power patriotism of the 1940s. The analysis centres upon the impact of key Soviet-era events on Tarle’s personal and academic trajectory: the Bolshevik Revolution, the political repressions of the early 1930s (during which he became a target in the so-called Academic Case), and his scholarly and public contributions during the Great Patriotic War and its immediate aftermath. Tarle’s rejection of the anti-national historiographical doctrines associated with the school of Mikhail Pokrovsky – dominant in Soviet historical thought during the 1920s – nearly led to his professional ruin. However, the ideological turn prompted by the impending war with Nazi Germany enabled his rehabilitation and the production of some of his most influential works, including Napoleon, Talleyrand, Napoleon’s Invasion of Russia, 1812, and The Crimean War. The final section reflects on Tarle’s personality, intellectual breadth, and moral integrity. On the occasion of the 150th anniversary of his birth, this reassessment underscores the enduring significance of his legacy in Russian historiography.