by James Millar
Union of Sovereign States Ann E. Robertson
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Archie Brown
Union of Soviet Writers Brian Kassof
Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of Labor Reginald E. Zelnik
Union Treaty
Roman Solchanyk
United Nations
Harold J. Goldberg
United Opposition Kate Transchel
United States, Relations with Norman E. Saul
Unity (Medved) Party Peter Rutland
Universities
Alexander Vucinich
Unkiar Skelessi, Treaty of Nikolas Gvosdev
Ushakov, Simon Fyodorovich A. Dean McKenzie
Ustinov, Dmitry Fedorovich Jacob W. Kipp
Uvarov, Sergei Semenovich Cynthia Hyla Whittaker
Uzbekistan and Uzbeks Roger Kangas
Value Subtraction Susan J. Linz
Varennikov, Valentin Ivanovich Jacob W. Kipp
Varga, Eugene Samuilovich Robert W. Campbell
Vasilevsky, Alexander Mikhailovich Johanna Granville
Vavilov, Nikolai Ivanovich Yvonne Howell
Veche
Michael C. Paul
Vekhi
Gary Thurston
Verbitskaya, Anastasia Alexeyevna Charlotte Rosenthal
Vienna, Congress of
David M. Goldfrank
Vietnam, Relations with Stephen J. Morris
Vikings
Heidi M. Sherman
Vilnius
Alfred Erich Senn
Virgin Lands Program D. Gale Johnson
Virtual Economy Susan J. Linz
Vladimir Monomakh Martin Dimnik
Vladimir, St.
Francis Butler
Vlasov Movement
Catherine Andreyev
xlvii
LIST OF ARTICLES
Vodka
Kate Transchel
Volkogonov, Dmitry Antonovich Bruce W. Menning
Volsky, Arkady Ivanovich Eric Lohr
Vorontsov, Mikhail Semenovich Anthony Rhinelander
Vorontsov-Dashkov, Illarion Ivanovich Ronald Grigor Suny
Voroshilov, Kliment Efremovich Bruce W. Menning
Votchina
Mikhail M. Krom
Voyevoda
Brian Davies
Voznesensky, Nikolai Alexeyevich Mark Harrison
Vsevolod I
Martin Dimnik
Vsevolod III
Martin Dimnik
Vyborg Manifesto Oleg Budnitskii
Vyshinsky, Andrei Yanuarievich Peter H. Solomon Jr.
Vyshnegradsky, Ivan Alexeyevich Boris N. Mironov
Vysotsky, Vladimir Semyonovich Gerald Smith
Wages, Soviet
Lewis H. Siegelbaum
War Communism Mark Harrison
War Economy
Mark Harrison
War of the Third Coalition Norman E. Saul
Warsaw Treaty Organization Andrew A. Michta
Westernizers
Boris N. Mironov
What Is to Be Done?
David K. McQuilkin
White Army
Mary R. Habeck
White Sea Canal
Cynthia A. Ruder
Winius, Andries Dionyszoon Jarmo T. Kotilaine
Winter Palace
William Craft Brumfield
Witchcraft
Roman K. Kovalev
Witte, Sergei Yulievich Boris N. Mironov
Women of Russia Bloc Nikolai Petrov
Workers
Reginald E. Zelnik
Workers’ Control
John M. Thompson
Workers’ Opposition Barbara Allen
World Revolution William J. Chase
World War I
David R. Jones
World War II
Mark Harrison
Wrangel, Peter Nikolayevich Jonathan D. Smele
Yabloko
Peter Rutland
Yagoda, Genrikh Grigorevich Michael Parrish
Yakovlev, Alexander Nikolayevich Jonathan Harris
Yalta Conference
Joseph L. Nogee
Yanayev, Gennady Ivanovich Ann E. Robertson
Yarlyk
Donald Ostrowski
Yaropolk I
Martin Dimnik
Yaroslav Vladimirovich Martin Dimnik
xlviii
LIST OF ARTICLES
Yaroslav Vsevolodovich Martin Dimnik
Yaroslav Yaroslavich Martin Dimnik
Yavlinsky, Grigory Alexeyevich Peter Rutland
Yazov, Dmitry Timofeyevich Jacob W. Kipp
Yeltsin, Boris Nikolayevich Ann E. Robertson
Yermak Timofeyevich Maureen Perrie
Yesenin, Sergei Alexandrovich Brian Kassof
Yevtushenko, Yevgeny Alexandrovich Gerald Smith
Yezhov, Nikolai Ivanovich Marc Jansen
Yudenich, Nikolai Nikolayevich Jonathan D. Smele
Yugoslavia, Relations with Richard Frucht
Yuri Danilovich Martin Dimnik
Yuri Vladimirovich Martin Dimnik
Yuri Vsevolodovich Martin Dimnik
Zadonshchina
Norman W. Ingham
Zagotovka
Robert C. Stuart
Zaslavskaya, Tatiana Ivanovna Christopher Williams
Zasulich, Vera Ivanovna Michael Ellman
Zealots of Piety
Cathy J. Potter
Zemstvo
Oleg Budnitskii
Zero-Option
Matthew O’Gara
Zhdanov, Andrei Alexandrovich Werner G. Hahn
Zhelyabov, Andrei Ivanovich Oleg Budnitskii
Zhenotdel
Elizabeth A. Wood
Zhensovety
Mary Buckley
Zhirinovsky, Vladimir Volfovich Jacob W. Kipp
Zhordania, Noe Nikolayevich Ronald Grigor Suny
Zhukov, Georgy Konstantinovich David Glantz
Zhukovsky, Nikolai Yegorovich Albert L. Weeks
Zinoviev, Grigory Yevseyevich Nick Baron
Zinoviev Letter Nick Baron
Zubatov, Sergei Vasilievich Jonathan W. Daly
Zyuganov, Gennady Andreyevich Luke March
Winston Churchill’s well-known description of Russia as a “riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma” has been widely quoted because it has seemed so apt to Western observers. The Cyrillic alphabet appears mysterious to the uninitiated, as does the odd system of dual dates for key historical events. Russia is huge and geographically remote, with over one hundred ethnic groups and as many languages. Historically, Russia stood on the margin of Europe proper, and Russian society experienced the Renaissance and the Reformation, which shaped modern Europe, only partially and belatedly.
Physical distance and prolonged isolation from Europe would be sufficient to enhance and promote a distinctive Russian culture. Russians have themselves debated whether they are more European, or more Asian, or instead a unique Slavic civilization т-» r-» i-» i-? л ^-» i-» destined to provide the world with a “third” way. PREFACE Nikolai Gogol, one of Russia’s earliest and most original writers, expressed this messianic view in his novel Dead Souls, where he offered a speeding troika, a carriage drawn by three horses, as a metaphor for Russia:
Russia, are you not speeding along like a fiery matchless troika? Beneath you the road is smoke, the bridges thunder, and everything is left far behind. At your passage the onlooker stops amazed as by a divine miracle. . . . Russia, where are you flying? Answer me! There is no answer. The bells are tinkling and filling the air with their wonderful pealing; the air is torn and thundering as it turns to wind; everything on earth comes flying past and, looking askance at her, other peoples and states move aside and make way.
The Encyclopedia of Russian History is designed to help dispel the mystery of Russia. It is the first encyclopedia in the English language to comprehend the entirety of Russian history, from ancient Rus to the most recent events in post-Soviet Rus
sia. It is not aimed primarily at specialists in the area but at general readers, students, and scholars who are curious about Russia, have historical events, dates, and persons they wish to explore or papers to write on the widely varying topics and individuals contained herein. Contributors include top scholars in history, Russian studies, military history, economics, social science, literature, philosophy, music, and art history. The 1,500 entries have been composed by over 500 scholars from 16 countries. All were instructed to “historize” their entries, thereby placing them in the larger context of Russian history. Each entry is signed and feavii
tures carefully chosen cross references to related entries as well as a bibliography of print and Internet sources as suggested additional readings. The four volumes contain over 300 black and white maps and photographs illustrating the text, and each volume contains color inserts portraying the beauty and scope of Russian peoples, art, and architecture, as well as important military and political pictorials. Entries are arranged alphabetically, and the first volume includes a topical outline that organizes articles by broad categories, thereby offering teachers and students alike an informed map of Russian history. A comprehensive subject index offers yet another entry point for the set, encouraging readers to explore the four volumes in greater depth.
The encyclopedia is the product of recent scholarship. Russian studies began as a significant field of study in the United States and Europe only during the Soviet era. Although a small number of scholars were active before World War II, particularly in England, the field began to grow in the United States with the onset of the Cold War in the late 1940s. When the Soviet Union launched the first earth satellite, Sputnik, in 1957, a concern for national security became a driving force for development of Russian area studies. All fields grew especially rapidly in the 1960s and 1970s, for it was recognized that study of the contemporary Soviet social system would require in-depth knowledge of the language, history, and culture of Russia. In the United States, for example, both the federal government and private foundations such as the Ford Foundation and the Carnegie Endowment funded graduate Russian studies on an almost “crash” basis. Whereas the Russian Institute of Columbia University and the Russian Research Center at Harvard dominated the field initially, by the end of the 1960s all major research institutions had Russian studies programs and were producing new Ph.D.s in the field. In fact, most of the scholars who have ever received Ph.D.s in the various fields of Russian history, social science, arts, and so forth, are still active scholars. The field of Russian-Soviet studies now has better coverage and higher quality than ever. The 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union ended the ideological constraints that communism had placed on scholarly publication, allowing scholarship to blossom in post-Soviet Russia as well. Researchers now have unprecedented access to archival and other historical materials-and to the Russian people as well. The editors and I have been fortunate, therefore, to be able to select as our contributors-the most outstanding scholars not only in the United States, but also in Britain, Europe, and Russia. Twenty years ago it would not have been possible to produce such a balanced, high quality, and comprehensive encyclopedia. The last five decades or so of intensive scholarship have greatly increased our knowledge and understanding of Russian history.
As one views the length and breadth of the Russian historical experience certain continuities and recurring patterns stand out. Autocracy, for example, has ancient and strong roots in Russian history. For most of its history, Russia was led by all-powerful tsars, such as Peter the Great or Nicholas I, who served willingly as autocrats, seemingly conscious of the difficulties inherent in ruling so large and diverse a country. Even those tsars who sought to modify the autocracy, such as Alexander II, who emancipated the serfs, reversed course when confronted with revolutionary or nihilist opponents. Soviet communism lapsed into autocracy under Josef Stalin, who was perhaps the most complete autocrat since Peter the Great. More recently, Russian President, Vladimir Putin, appears to be tolerating a drift back toward autocracy in reaction to the democratic impulses of Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin. He seems to relish comparison of his rule to that of Peter the Great.
With the exception of the years under Soviet communism, Orthodoxy has been autocracy’s twin. Historically, the Russian Orthodox Church has successfully resisted attempts to separate church and state and has offered support and justification for autocracy in return. Consequently, the church and state have not welcomed religious diversity or promoted tolerance. Judaism, Catholicism, and other Christian denominations, Islam, and other religious faiths have suffered persecution and restrictions over the years. The Soviet era differed only in than all religions were persecuted in the name of official atheism. The long-term trend has apparently reasserted itself as the growing strength of the Russian Orthodox Church in the post-Soviet years has featured renewed attempts to exclude religious competition.
Territorial expansion has characterized the development of Russia from the earliest days, usually through warfare and hostile partitions. The Great Northern War brought Russia to the Baltic coast, while the wars of the nineteenth century expanded Russia’s power into Central Asia. Expanviii
sion under the tsars included annexing territories occupied by settled peoples, as in Ukraine, Poland, and Finland, and also by nomadic tribes, as in Central Asia, and the Caucuses. The outcome of World War II extended Moscow’s reach into Eastern Europe, and during the Cold War Russia supported regimes in Afghanistan, Cuba, and insurgent movements in Central America and Africa.
The process of empire-building brought more than 120 ethnic and national groups under Russian rule. It was a costly exercise requiring a large standing army. Russification versus promoting local languages and cultures in these territories was a recurring issue under tsars and commissars alike, and it remains an issue today in the Russian Federation. The collapse first of the Soviet empire in East-Central Europe in 1988-1989 and then of the USSR itself in 1991 caused an equivalent contraction in Moscow’s power and undermined the economy as well. Consequently, although Russia’s leaders have sought to maintain and even increase influence in what only Russians call the “near abroad,” that is the former republics of the USSR, the empire has shrunk to its smallest extent since the eighteenth century, and the Russia Federation’s influence in its former republics, not to mention Eastern and Central Europe, has been severely constrained by a lack of funds as well as by local nationalist feelings.
Successful modernization of Europe has been viewed by Russians as either a possible model for Russia’s development or as a threat to her distinctive, peculiar social, political and economic institutions. From Russia’s vantagepoint on the periphery of Europe, to modernize has meant to Westernize, with all the political and economic baggage that that implies. Periodically, Russia’s leaders have opened the “door” to Europe, as Peter the Great put it, only to have it closed or restricted by those who have sought to maintain and foster Russia’s unique civilization and its messianic mission in world history. In one form or another there has been a recurring struggle since the time of Peter the Great between the Slavophiles and the Westernizers, and this was even true during the Soviet era. Lenin and Trotsky and the Old Bolsheviks thought they were opening Russia to a global communist system. Stalin closed it tightly and created an autarkic economy. Nikita Khrushchev, Gorbachev, and Yeltsin opened Russia once again to the West, ultimately with catastrophic consequences for the empire. It has been difficult, however, to overcome the pull of the “Russian idea,” and post-Soviet development policies have been undercut by an ambiguous commitment to democratization and marketiza-tion.
These issues, autocracy, Orthodoxy, territorial expansionism, modernization, and cultural uniqueness, have appeared, disappeared, and reappeared throughout Russian history. Western and Russian historians have argued at length about the strength, significance, and permanence of these themes, and the articles contained in this encyclopedia explore these issues as impartially and objectively as p
ossible.
There is no question, however, about the unique, unparalleled contributions of Russian culture to art, music, literature, philosophy, and science. Where would we be without Glinka, Mussorgsky, Tchaikovsky, Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Chekhov, Rublev, Mendeleyev, Sakharov and the many, many other artists, thinkers, and scientists that Russia’s citizens of all nationalities have produced? The editors and I hope that the reader will use this encyclopedia to sample the richness of Russian history and be induced to explore Russian culture in depth.
STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE ENCYCLOPEDIA PROJECT
When Macmillan Reference USA approached me seeking an editor in chief for a projected Encyclopedia of Russian History, I realized that if I could persuade the best scholars in the field to serve as Associate Editors and on an Editorial Board, and if we could persuade other top scholars to write entries, the experience would be educational and highly worthwhile. I also realized that it would necessarily be a “labor of love” for all involved. Participating scholars would have to believe in the intrinsic value of the project. I first approached Dr. Ann Robertson, who was serving as Managing Editor of my journal, Problems of Post-Communism, to see whether she would be willing to contribute her outstanding editorial skills as well as her expertise in political science to work closely with me as Senior Associate Editor on the encyclopedia. Next I approached Professor Nicholas Riasanovsky of University of California at Berkeley. As the leading historian of Russia and director of innumerable Ph.D. dissertations in the field, Professor Riasanovsky represented the keystone in the construction of the editorial committee. I knew that his name would assure other scholars of the serious academic nature of the project. I was soon able to recruit an ix
awesome set of associate editors: Daniel Kaiser of Grinnell College, Louise McReynolds of the University of Hawaii at Manoa, Donald Raleigh of the University of North Carolina, and Ronald Suny of the University of Chicago. With their assistance we recruited an equally outstanding Advisory Board.
Below are very brief biographies of the distinguished members on the Editorial Board:
Editor in Chief James R. Millar (Ph.D. Cornell University) is professor of economics and international affairs at the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at the George Washington University. His primary areas of research are Soviet/Russian economic history and economics of the transition.