The article is devoted to contacts and interaction between Professor Pérenyi József (1915–1981), the eminent Hungarian specialist in Russian History, and his Soviet colleagues. The evolution of his perception of official Soviet historiography: from fascination after World War II to attempts to overcome the boundaries of the official Soviet narrative in the 1960s and 1970s. are analyzed. In this article the contacts of J.Pérenyi with B.D.Grekov, A.L.Sidorov, M.N.Tikhomirov, T.M.Islamov are studied. The contacts with the A.V.Florovsky, a Russian émigré historian from Prague, were woven into this context.

This article is devoted to the study of the journey of Academician B.D.Grekov to Hungary in November 1948, where he lectured on Ancient Russia history in the University of Budapest. The circumstances of the invitation of the Soviet scientist, the preparation and organization of his visit are studied; the content of his lectures is analyzed. A great place is given to Grekov’s direct contacts with Hungarian scientific and political figures, the image of the Soviet scientist in the Hungarian press. Grekov’s report on his trip was published in the appendix.

In this article the authors consider the domestic and foreign experience of using cinema as an instrument of soft power of the state, reveal the peculiarities of the American approach, analyse the Soviet experience, describe the current state of Russian cinema and study a number of causes due to which this soft power resource is not implemented in the most effective way, evaluate the prospects of using cinematography as a way of forming a positive image of the country and its dissemination abroad. The authors conclude that the focus of Russian film producers on commercial gain is the main reason why the artistic value of films is significantly reduced. The authors note the insufficient realisation of the "educational" function of contemporary Russian cinema. The method of analysis is comparative analytical approach and content analysis.

This article is devoted to the analysis of the visit of Academician Mikhail Nikolaevitch Tikhomirov in Paris in the spring of 1957 in the context of the history of the formation of Soviet-French scientific relations during the Thaw. On the basis of archival sources, the circumstances of the invitation of the Soviet scientist are reconstructed. The great role in this process of Fernand Braudel and leading by him the VIth section of the Practical School of Higher Research is concluded. In this article the chronology of Tikhomirov’s visit was described, analyze his meetings with French scientists, as well as with Russian émigrés was made. The conclusion on the great symbolic significance of Tikhomirov’s visit is made. His lectures in French in the Sorbonne symbolized the overcoming of the gap in the sphere of personal and business contacts of historians, which actually disappeared in the late 1920s.

The declined interest of the Soviet leadership in the church’s activities in the late 1940s led to the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) was compelled to demonstrate its own significance. The struggle for peace, in which the church took the international peace movement’s position, became one of the most important directions of the ROC activities. The article reviews the key aspects of the church’s participation in the struggle for peace on the basis of papers of the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. The general distinctive features of the church’s rhetoric are being identified. It is made a conclusion about the transformation of the church’s approach toward the coverage of the international developments and the convergence of the church and state lines.

The article deals with the main themes, subjects and images, that formed over the decades the problematics of the Balkan question in the interpretation of Russian pre-revolutionary journal satire. The traditions and novations in Russian satirical drawings that created the images of Turkey, it’s repressive politics in the Balkans and the images of Balkan peoples in their struggle for national liberation are analyzed on the historic material of two acute Balkan crises (1875–1878 and 1912–1913).

The article analyzes textbooks on World and Russian history written by Lev Mikhailovich Sukhotin (1879–1947) for children of Russian emigrants in Yugoslavia. Author developed traditions of educational literature, laid down by V.O.Klyuchevsky and P.G.Vinogradov. His textbooks were aimed at preserving cultural identity in the younger generation and at adapting them to conditions of emigration.

This article is devoted to the reconstruction of the scientific discussion of 1955–1956, connected with the accusations of S. L. Utchenko, a Soviet antiquity researcher, by a group of young Czechoslovak historians in plagiarism. The authors of this article do not set the task of bringing in verdict a of Utchenko’s guilty. The purpose of this study is to get closer to understanding the mechanisms of (not)resolving such conflicts, and in addition to try to understand the specifics of personal and business communications between Soviet and Czechoslovak scientists, to give a look how contacts were established between them within the framework of the formation of the intellectual field of “socialist science”. This episode is not just a curious incident from the history of scientific ties. It is indicative in that it demonstrates examples of the existence of disputes, discussions and conflicts in the scientific environment, and also outlines the facets of scientific ethics.

By analyzing a diverse layer of domestic sources, the article attempts to trace the reaction of Russian society and the ruling circles of Russia to the growth of anti-Russian sentiments in Europe in the 1930s – 1940s of XIX century, as well as to identify the measures by which various government departments tried to influence public opinion in Germany, forming a positive image of their country.

The early 40s of the 19th century were marked by the growth of anti-Russian sentiments in Europe. It provoked a number of retaliatory measures from the Russian government. The article discusses one of the “projects” for the formation of a positive image of Russia in Germany, proposed by the poet, publicist and diplomat F. I. Tyutchev. We are talking about a note on the organization of pro-Russian propaganda in the German press, presented by Tyutchev to the head of the III Department A. H. Benckendorf in the autumn of 1843.

The article examines the causes, course and results of the Greek-Russian conflict that arose in the first half of the 1870s in the Athos St. Panteleimon Monastery. It is shown that the conflict was caused by the aggravation of a number of contradictions between different ethnic communities in the monastery itself, the general rise in the Greek environment of anti-Slavic and anti-Russian sentiments caused by Russia's position in the Greek-Bulgarian church issue, as well as the actions of British diplomacy which sought to weaken Russian influence in the Balkans and the Middle East. The article considers the emergence of the New Athos Simon-Cananite Monastery in the Caucasus, which became one of the results of the «Greek-Russian Panteleimon process».

The article deals with the analysis of the satirical images of Turkey in Russian satirical journals at the beginning of the XXth century, in the epoch when the Romanovs and Ottoman empires suffered of the acute social and political crises connected with the process of rapid state modernization. On the base of narrative and visual sources of the leading satirical magazines of that time the author discovers an interesting phenomenon: Russian satirical journalist’s criticism on the “Ottoman renewal” became a kind of mirror for the perception and estimation of the entire situation in Russian empire on the eve of the century of wars and revolutions. The “gender” images in the satirical interpretation of Turkey in this context demonstrate an “orientalist” specificity of the critical rhetorics in the address of the “Southern neighbor”.

Saxony-Poland was most strange Russia`s ally in the Great Northern War. Russo-Polish tensions deeply rooted in history made it hard to imagine the possibility of their cooperation against Sweden. Nevertheless by 1700 they found themselves united in anti-Swedish coalition. The authors of the article assert that the factors which contributed to the emergence of the alliance between Peter the Great and Augustus II were initially charged with destructive potential strong enough to undermine the Northern Alliance long before the Nystadt Congress of 1721.

In the third and final part of the article the authors came to the conclusion that the Russian-Swedish tensions had not played a major role in the origins of the Great Northern War. It was initiated by other states with long-standing claims against Sweden that resulted in permanent conflicts. Although Russia was not going to constantly put up with its lack of access to the Baltic shores and wanted at least to regain its native Northern lands lost to the Swedes in the early 17th century it had to wait patiently until the right time. The propitious moment might have come much later than 1700 if not for the signing of a long-cherished peace treaty with Turkey. This saved tsar Peter from the threat of war which would have made him postpone the revenge over Sweden indefinitely.

The article is devoted to the international activities of the economist and sociologist, academician A.M.Rumyantsev (1905–1993). Based on new materials from the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the various stages of his biography are highlighted: the period of a sharp career take-off in the 1950s, the time of a boom in Soviet sociology in the 1960s and his participation in this process, the academician’s fell down during the Brezhnev stagnation of the 1970s. Archival materials allowed to analyze the Rumyantsev’s point of view on the prospects for the development of Soviet-British relations and the role of science and culture in this process, his participation in the work of the European Center for the Coordination of Research and Documentation in the Social Sciences, his perspective on economic reforms in Yugoslavia in the 1970s. Thus, a large-scale picture of the participation of the Soviet academician, the «intelligent Marxist», as his contemporaries called him, in transnational intellectual exchanges of the Cold War period is created.

The article is devoted to the international activities of the economist and sociologist, academician A.M.Rumyantsev (1905–1993). Based on new materials from the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the various stages of his biography are highlighted: the period of a sharp career take-off in the 1950s, the time of a boom in Soviet sociology in the 1960s and his participation in this process, the academician’s fell down during the Brezhnev stagnation of the 1970s. Archival materials allowed to analyze the Rumyantsev’s point of view on the prospects for the development of Soviet-British relations and the role of science and culture in this process, his participation in the work of the European Center for the Coordination of Research and Documentation in the Social Sciences, his perspective on economic reforms in Yugoslavia in the 1970s. Thus, a large-scale picture of the participation of the Soviet academician, the «intelligent Marxist», as his contemporaries called him, in transnational intellectual exchanges of the Cold War period is created.

Boris Alekseevich Evreinov is a historian, writer and publicist, known for his active social and political activities among the Russian emigration in Poland and Czechoslovakia. The historical works of B.A.Evreinov reflects evolution of social thought and scientific approaches of Russian historians-emigrants. The works of the scientist are devoted to the study of the history of the Russian peasantry, including the history of the rural community, the liberal undertakings of Alexander I, the life and work of M.A.Bakunin, and the history of Czech-Russian relations.

The article is devoted to the relationship of Francisco Afonso Chaves (1857–1926), a Portuguese scientist, with his Russian colleagues. He was a prominent meteorologist and seismologist, a propagandist of science, whose repute extended far beyond his native Azores and Portugal. In the article the examples of contacts of F.A.Chaves with Russian scientists (M.A.Rykachev, B.B Golitsyn, N.A.Demchinsky, and S.N.Nakhimov) are provide. In addition, much attention is given to the reflection of the «Russian theme» in the relationship of F.A.Chaves with his European colleagues. The article concludes that although Chaves’ relations with Russia were episodic, noticeably inferior to contacts with scientists from other European countries, these ties are remarkable in the context of the history of the Russian-Portuguese scientific dialogue. It is also indicative the «cross-country», since these relations involved scientists from different countries, united by common scientific subjects.

The article is devoted to the political and legal thought of Russian émigré in 1920–1930. In the focus of the article there are the concepts of state, democracy, empire that were reflected by the followers of the different political ideologies. They interpreted the experience of Russian empire, Russian revolution trying to predict the future of political systems in Europe. It helped them to make radical conclusions that were too far from the former intellectual tradition.

The article is devoted to the political projects of Russian émigré in 1920–1930. Its representatives tried to analyze their experience in Russia. Either they did their best to offer their vision of the future of Russia and Europe. Their way of thinking was non-standard and quite wide that helped them to define the challenges of the times and show the tendency of law and state evolution.

This story opens a series of articles devoted to the prehistory of the Great Northern War seen through separate contexts of diplomatic relationships between Russia, on the one hand, and each member of anti-Swedish coalition, on the other. The author starts with a detailed analysis of the intense activity of two consecutive Danish missions in Moscow – one led by Gildebrand von Horn, another by Paul Heins. They did their utmost to seduce tsar Peter by fabulous prospects promised by the future allied victory over the Swedes. He, however, was guided by his own thoughts as to the circumstances that would justify the risk of war against most powerful state in Northern Europe.

The article is devoted to the state and society of the 1860s understanding of the fiftieth anniversaries of the Patriotic War of 1812, the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the centenary of the birth of Napoleon I. The first (twenty five year) anniversary of 1812 was very solemnly celebrated by order of Nicholas I on the day of the victory over Napoleon at the end of August 1839. In 1862–1864, a celebration of the half-century anniversary was about to come and, it would seem, it should also be just as wide. However, in 1862 no official celebrations were held. Unlike the official state engaged in the celebration of another anniversary – the millennium of Russia, public thought didn’t forget the anniversary of the Patriotic War of 1812 and was trying to comprehend the events of recent past in its own way. In 1864, against the backdrop of the changed foreign policy situation, the anniversary of the entry of Russian troops into Paris was celebrated solemnly by a parade on Palace Square and lunch in the Winter Palace. At the same time the official press reflected in details news about the celebration of the centenary of Napoleon I in 1869 in France. This article examines in details the publications of official newspapers, literary magazines and the epistolary and memoirs of the contemporaries of the 1860s, which somehow reflected the anniversary dates.

It is easy to understand why historians got used to put Peter the Great`s visit to England in 1698 into a wider context of the topic «Russia and Europe». Following in their steps the author of the article adds some subtler details to the discourse. The point is that for all Peter`s affection for Holland it was England that he singled out among other Western countries. The tsar was far from indiscriminate perception of local ways and mores but he found there a lot of things extremely useful for his motherland. As to the English political elite of the time, it looked at him with a mixture of arrogance, curiosity, and admiration. Some of the country`s higher officials did not hesitate to predict that their «strange guest» would leave an incredible trace in world history.

In February 2018 Russia and Serbia celebrate 180th anniversary of establishment of official diplomatic relations. Glorious common past helps our countries to look with confidence into the future. The historical facts being separately mentioned in the current review are just symbolic examples of our tough friendship whose ground are not only common Slavic roots but a profound understanding of the interests. The publication of this work seems to be up to date in conditions of a new round of allegations against Moscow and the frequent criticism towards Belgrade.

The author of the article continues to investigate the reaction of English political celebrities and public to Peter the Great`s visit to their country. The numerous references to either well-known or little-known facts are accompanied by the implied idea that from a three-century distance these facts might be seen in a different light than that common for many contemporaries and historians. There is, however, a basis for compromise between struggling views of both admirers and detractors of Russian emperor. All of them agree that no matter how cruel or merciful Peter was he deservedly gained his place among the greatest heroes of the world history.

This article presents a factual analysis of Russian life abroad. It aids to investigate it as a form of a civil society – state with no borders.

The letters published in this article reflect daily and intellectual life of the Russian emigrants in France after the WW2. The author of the letters reacts to analysis of the 20th century events made by Volski. The correspondents focus their attention on peculiarities of pre-revolutionary Russia and its culture and the tie between the Soviet history and history of pre-revolutionary Russia. Intelligentsia, its role in events of the epoch and evolution of this social group is one of the correspondence cross-cutting themes.

The German foreign policy discourse of the first half of the XIX century indicates an exaggerated attention of the German audience to Russia, and inadequate compared to actual impact of the latter on the domestic and foreign policy in the German lands during the revolutionary unrest in 1848 and on the eve of the Crimean War. The main reason for such an inconvenience is the fact that the image of Russia in the German political literature of that period had initially been constructed as a tool to manipulate of public opinion in the political rivalry in Germany. It was demanded not only by conservatives in power, but also by the liberal opposition for self-consolidation and reinforcement of own ideology and self-perception.

The article discusses the debate the liberal, socialist and partly conservative circles of the Russian emigration 1920–30-ies about the Eurasian philosophical and political ideas. Based on the statements of Eurasianism such well-known figures of emigration as N.A.Berdyaev, L.P.Karsavin, F.A.Stepun, P.M.Bitsilli, P.N.Milyukov, V.V.Rudnev, and others. Analyze the key problems of the polemic: the ideological origins of Eurasianism, the ratio of Russian and European cultures, the historical construction and a political program of the Eurasians, etc. It is shown that wide circles of the emigration had not taken a position Eurasians: the underestimation of European culture, the allegations about her imminent death, the idea of building ideocratic state attempts to justify Bolshevism. To the merits of the Eurasians took trying to find a new ideological synthesis to awaken in the revolution of the Russian national consciousness. The conclusion provides the outcome of the controversy, summed up by A.S.Izgoev in 1932. He showed that the Eurasians tried to find a new base for the Russian national statehood, created the ideological Foundation for future Russian right-wing political groups.

The ideological views of the National union of the new generation, the Russian emigrant organization in the 1930’s, are analysed in this article. The concept “solidarism”, which had been the basis of the program, is articulated in this article. Its historical ideological sources are shown in this work. The Union was formed in 1930 in Yugoslavia, advocated the overthrow of the Bolshevik government and had offices in many countries.

The Russian diplomacy refused to collaborate with the Bolshevik power in Petrograd, established an autonomous organization and found ways of its financing. Over the period of all Civil War the agency carefully guarded its image of the all-Russian embassy and cooperated with all anti-Bolshevik forces of Russia.

The geopolitical aspects of a number of energy projects in South Caucasus are presented. The major pipeline projects in the region such as Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum, Iran-Armenia and others are estimated. The basic problems of confrontation and cooperation among Russia, USА, EU, Turkey and Iran for the dominance in the energy market of the South Caucasus are studied. Russia’s pipeline strategy in the region is analyzed; its strengths and weaknesses are identified. The significance of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the development of regional pipeline maps is revealed. The degree of influence of regional instability and a number of territorial conflicts on the pipeline system of South Caucasus is defined.

In article an estimation of U.S. press of Soviet announcement of Stalingrad battle is analyzed. Studied opinions of the press the U.S. about beginning the battle. Specificity of these opinions is revealed. Sources of formation of opinions and estimations are considered, for the first time in historiography. A comparison of press concerning the progress and character of Soviet defense and Nazi offensive.

The issue is about Russian foreign policy during post-Napoleonic period in Europe. Russia keenly protested against Austrian policy of interference with German home affairs. Russia did not champion the reactionary Carlsbad Decrees and restrained from recommending it to German sires. Alexander patronized sovereignty and constitutions of the German princes against the Habsburg court. From 1815 to 1821 Russia recommended and supported public representation bodies established in Bavaria, Baden, Würtemberg, Hessen-Darmstadt with three Saxon duchies of Sachsen-Weimar, Sachsen-Koburg and Sachsen-Meiningen. Russia was going to help France return to the Great Power system and replace the Quadruple Alliance with a «grand alliance» of all European countries which signed the Vienna treatises. Russia acknowledged the revolutionary government of Spain despite adoption of the constitution through revolution and the predominantly radical character of the constitution. After the Italian Revolution (1820) and on the eve of the Congress of Troppau, Russia did its best to prevent Austrian interference with Italian affairs and use the Congress to settle the Naples Revolution problem peacefully. The St. Petersburg Cabinet planned to reiterate the European Union and European Constitution issues.

The author considers principal stages and complicated problems of restoration of Russia’s relations with its East European former allies and negative phenomena Russia encounters along this way, as well as new circumstances emerging in connection with NATO the European Union expansion in the course of the East European countries' joining the Western integration blocks. Analysis of all these cardinal international changes occurred during the past decade and a half provides an opportunity not just to take into account lessons of the recent past but also (and that is particular important) to project ways of exit from the acute aggravation of international situation caused by the Ukrainian crisis. This crisis brought about «sanctions» of unpredictable consequences against Russia undertaken by the US and the EU countries including the East European «young Europeans» that follow the US.

The newspaper «Nedelja», published in Czechoslovakia in 1929−1930, is an important source of information on the economic adaptation of Russian emigrants in this country. Analysis of the publications of the newspaper allows us to consider the basic directions and ways of organizing economic activity of Russian emigrants in Czechoslovakia, to evaluate the nature and forms of mutual aid, characteristics and extent of their participation in the economy of Czechoslovak Republic and other countries.

In article of an estimation of U.S. press of Soviet announcement of war against Japan are analyzed. Specificity this opinions is revealed. Sources of formation of opinions and estimations are considered, for the first time in historiography. A comparison of press concerning the progress and character of Soviet offensive. Analyzed in the article the evolution of the role of the press estimates of the USSR in the Pacific war from positive 8 August, up sharply negative August 15, 1945 with the informational processes that influenced the change in public opinion about the Soviet Union.

The article covers the phenomenon of scientific congresses organized by Russian émigré scientists during the 1921−1930 years. These congresses combined Russian academic community abroad, coordinated scholars’s activities, regulated system of education and scientific manpower training. In total, five congresses were organized. Prague, Belgrade and Sofia were places where these congresses took place. A.A.Kizewetter, A.S.Lomshakov, N.O.Lossky, M.M.Novikov, P.B.Struve and others were members of congresses. Congresses have played a huge role in the development of scientific communication between emigrants.

The article covers the phenomenon of scientific congresses organized by Russian émigré scientists during the 1921−1930 years. These congresses combined Russian academic community abroad, coordinated scholars’s activities, regulated system of education and scientific manpower training. The article is devoted to the congresses organized in Prague (1922), Belgrade (1929) and Sofia (1930). A.A.Kizewetter, A.V.Florovsky, A.S.Lomshakov, N.O.Lossky, M.M.Novikov, P.B.Struve and others were members of congresses. Congresses have played a huge role in the development of scientific communication between Russian émigré scientists.

The House of the Romanovs is considered to be a social, culture, political phenomenon of Russian society. Dynasty marriage, on the one hand, is a political tool of Russia-Europe coexistence. On the other hand, it appears to be a special platform for a cross cultural dialog. The article reveals main indicators of positive sociocultural adaptation of German Princesses (Russian Impresses): Russian language competence — Orthodox mentality — self-understanding of high status — social and political activity — people surrounding — Russian self-identification. Two first steps are taken into consideration in details for their basic function in performing Russian self-identification. Also the article focuses on features of motivation and mentality orientation: the reach motif seems to be the most important. It overtakes the stimulus of recognition, stability, in prestige, in belonging to a family/society, cognitive, in self-competence.

In this article it is shown the interaction between the Famine High Commissioner F. Nansen with the soviet official circles and the world powers regarding the aid for the starving Russia in 1921−1922. There are also revealed strategies of combating scourge, various positions that existed among the world community, including those being in exile and the decision making officials of the Bolshevik society regard the famine, conditions, forms and methods of aid for the Soviet state.

The author elicits the diversity of the Russian émigré positions in respect of the Jewish question, considers factors that defined these positions and finds out what place this question occupied in the social and political life of the Russian community abroad. The dynamics of emigrants' opinions and attitudes is tracked in connection with the international climate and changes that were occurring in the USSR. Interactions of the German Nazis and the Russian extreme conservatives are characterized. The analysis is based on results of the recent studies and correspondence and political writings of F.I.Dan, B.I.Nikolaevski, M.V.Vishnyak, N.V.Volski (Valentinov) and other emigrants who touched this range of questions and, in particular, the attitude towards anti-Semitism, to the Bund’s fate and to the Zionist idea.

The author deals with peculiarities of the Russian emigrants; forms and means of the cultural memory preservation and creation of the ideal past models. The Russian communities abroad were transformed by a new social experience that had impact also on the culture of memory. The very expulsion brought about creation of a new, often idealized image of Russia, its people and culture and re-thinking of their own historical experience. Every educated person in emigration sought to create a new image of Russia that would satisfy him or her. The Russian exiles looked for ‘points of memory' around that the emigrant identity could jell. At the same time the recollections of the past served as the stage for ideological and political clashes.

The article is focused on the evolution of the traditional concepts of Russian public consciousness («Moscow the third Rome», Slavic brotherhood, liberating mission of Russia etc.) in the years of the First World War. Public reaction to the key events of the war is investigated, such as the Russian occupation of Galicia and the decision of the Entente powers to hand over Constantinople to Russia after the war. The elements of eschatology and messianism which were characteristic of the Russian consciousness, clashed with the ecclesiastical and political realities of Europe and Near East.

The article invites to revisit an extremely elaborate and fascinating history of the mid-18th century Ossetian diplomatic mission to St. Petersburg. Up to nowadays it has remained customary for some scholars to make this subject one of those to illustrate that Russian policy in the Caucasus was an onward march with no ebbs or twists. The author claims to give a broader picture to include both impartial «laws of history» and imperfect human beings doomed to create this very history in their own way.

The last part of the article deals with the crucial point of the history of the Ossetian embassy in St. Petersburg (1751−1752). The negotiations centered around the perspectives of establishing closer relationships between Russia and Ossetia to eventually usher in the era of incorporation of the pivotal North Caucasus region into Russian imperial mould.

The author deals with perception of N. V. Gogol’s creative works by inhabitants of Galicia (Rusyns of Galicia). The author succeeded in searching out and introducing into the scientific turnover historical material which nowadays is virtually unknown. N. M. Pashaeva exposes one of the least studied aspect of the national and public movement in Galicia (nowadays West Ukraine) from the mid-19th century to the present day through history of the Galician readers' familiarity with creative works of the great Russian writer and his personality.

The author focuses on a new situation which is emerging around so called «unrecognized states» on the post-Soviet expanse by the beginning of the second decade of the 21st century. After 2008 when Russia recognized republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia two states remained to be unrecognized: Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and Transnistrian Moldavian Republic. The fact that these two states are still unrecognized makes prospects of their recognition even more uncertain. Meanwhile the public opinion in Karabakh and Transnistria perceived acts of Russia as a coarse selection which was deprived of any legal ground. That could not but have impact on the people’s self-perception. The author emphasizes that due to peculiar historical circumstances that relates predominantly to Transnistrian Moldavian Republic (Transnistria) and concentrates attention on situation in this state. The author notes the contrast between changes in conscience of the Transnistrian people and the RF leadership slow response to the «Transnistrian settlement» which over the past year has moved to the center of Western states' foreign policy attention. In conclusion the author emphasizes that such inertia on the part of Russia taken together with indifference of the preponderant part of the Russian public to developments on the Dniester in future may turn back to Russia by loss of considerable part of Russia’s influence in the South-Western direction.

It is indisputable that the 21st century as well as the preceding century is the period of rapid transformations in the world of technologies. It turns out that position of every country in the world stage is increasingly depending on an extent to which a country succeeds in adjustment to generational change of machines and forms of labor organization. Historical traditions and mentality of population and of national elite find expressions in this breathtaking competition. Types of social and productive relationships of the past epochs that seem to be moribund reemerge first as menacing shadows and then acquire flesh and in its renewed forms they feel quite comfortable among very sophisticated devices the very ideas of which only fantasts or scientists who normally direct their regard to the future could grasp just a decade ago. The concluding article casts the total to the historian’s reflections on chances of Russia in the technological race and on the burden of the historical heritage that impedes progress of Russia in this race.

In the first part of the article the author deals with attitudes of population of Poland, Yugoslavia (Serbia), Czechia, Slovakia and Bulgaria towards the Red Army as it entered territories of these countries in 1944−1945. The author characterizes the USSR policy to these countries and analyzes the Nazi propaganda in the East European countries, demonstrates positions various political forces involved in the Resistance movement and struggle for national liberation at the terminal phase of the WW2 took in respect of the USSR. The article is based on Russian archive materials, published documents and the most recent literature.

The second part of the article deals with attitude of populations of Roumania, Hungary and Trans-Carpathian region to the Red Army which entered these territories in 1944−1945. The author uses materials from the Russian archives, published documents and literature and describes difficulties of the subject investigation and necessity of specific historic investigation of Russophilia and Russophobia phenomena as well as the present day countries' and regions' attitude to the fact of their liberation by the Red Army. The author adduces materials concerning condition of the Soviet servicemen’s graves in Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Hungary and Roumania and on ways the West celebrates May 8−9, the day of victory over the Nazi Germany.

The round-table is dedicated to analysis of «The social thought of the Russians emigration» encyclopedia published 2009. This work is the first attempt to track development of the social thought in chronological limits of all waves of emigration from the mid-19th to the end of the 20th century.

The article is devoted to analysis of the Russian Orthodox Church present day position and attitude to the Soviet period of Russia’s history. In connection with that the author refers to the prehistory of the question and considers evidence provided by representatives of those cultural and proper church Russian traditions from which the higher clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church Moscow Patriarchate has recently taken an increasing distance. A particular attention is paid to the Moscow Patriarchate hierarchs’ opinions of causes and character of the Great Patriotic war that were aired in the course of the outgoing year. In the concluding part of the article the author examines possible general meanings of these new trends as well as of reunification of the Russian Orthodox Church of Moscow Patriarchate and of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad.

The basis of these notes is a diary written in different years during travels across Latin American countries, even though the word «diary» can be applied to these notes in a very tentative sense. In this particular case notes are supplemented by various reminiscences that have emerged after travels as well as by judgments derived from miscellaneous sources that attracted the author’s attention. The focus of these notes occupies discourse on what Latin America and Russia have in common.

In the final part of her article the author focuses оn shifts that occur in the social psychology. These shifts are results of triumph of a specific version of the consumer society which has established in Russia. Triumph of this modification is combined with the most rough and ruthless ideology of inequality. It should be emphasized that, from the author’s viewpoint, precisely these deformations of the public conscience constitute the main principle of the paradox described in previous parts of the article. The Russian public is unwilling to break a movement which, according to the opinion which is gaining increasing currency, leads to deadlock. In conclusion the author comes back to the current situation in France. She demonstrates that despite a very strong historical commitment of the French to the ideal of equality the French public conscience is absolutely unwilling to appreciate significance of social and political processes that go on in Russia nowadays and to put these processes in the proper global context.

The author focuses his attention on «Diaries, 1973−1983» by Aleksandr Shmeman, a prominent religious (Orthodox) thinker of the mid-20th century. More exactly, the author focuses on Shmeman’s opinion about of the United States. Shmeman who was born out of Russia and spent most of his life in the US from cradle to grave felt himself to be a «particle of the Russian people» (his ancestors along maternal line were Russians). Father Aleksandr steadfastly watched the daily life of US, the country of his residence. He watched stratagems of US domestic and foreign policies of the 1970s and 1980s and provided refined comparative characterizations of the Russians and Americans. He offered his own interpretation of some aspects of US presidents' activities and argued about the American democracy which he compared with the European democracy. He expressed his opinions of the American literature, arts and paid attention to great variety of individual manifestations of the American life. One cannot but admit that Shmeman’s thoughts continue to take part in the present day controversies for these thoughts suggest specific variants of answers to questions the contemporary life puts before use.

This article, which takes its title from the famous song «Nightingales, O Nightingales» of the Great Patriotic War, seeks to discover the source of the Russian historical ballad «Il'ya of Murom and the Nightingale-Robber» in a spell to gain the power of the mythical Indian eagle Garuda. Two different forms of such a tale exist: a semi-Buddhist shamanistic spell-song from Mongolia, and a medieval Armenian magical spell-tale whose earliest variant is close to the Mongolian form. The tale would have reached Russia most likely via Central Asia, via Iran. The Armenian version is Christianised; the Russian, assimilated to the heroic genre. It is suggested that the eagle becomes a nightingale (slavii, solovei) because of the connection of the latter with the potent word (slovo) and the glory (slava) acquired by a hero through bardic acclaim: so the bard Boyan in the Song (Slovo) of the Campaign of Igor' is called the «nightingale of olden times».

Outbreak of the youth and students' protest which occurred in France in spring of 2006 has aroused very little attention and a weak reaction in Russia. That presents a sharp contrast with evaluations provided by the European observers and politicians who have seen these protests as one of the most vivid and obvious symptoms of the «end of epoch» mood which has begun to emerge in the West. The dominant note of this mood is the Angst to lose the social achievements conquered from 1950s to 1970s. The young people are afraid to find out that they are poorer than their parents and to lose the social guaranties that have become customary constants. Different opinions are brought out in respect of what should be considered as the determinant feature of the departing epoch. The author focuses on convergence of ideologies for this issue is the most accurate description of the problem’s scale. The name of the carrier of the ideology which underwent the convergence is the USSR. This approach highlights the generally valid social consequences of the Soviet Union’s collapse.

In this part of her article the author continues her investigation of the end of the social guaranties epoch. However she focuses on Russia where this end manifests in the unprecedented harsh and cruel form. Alongside with that slackness, shapelessness of the society’s responses to the process are also unprecedented, particularly in comparison with the similar events in France (these events were investigated in the previous issue of the magazine). Avoiding construction of linear relations the author suggests her answer to the question about certain reasons for this paradox.

The author highlights the complicated and painful topic of evolution which the national memory about the Russian history greatest event (victory over Hitlerite Germany) undergoes. As 60th anniversary of the victory has demonstrated, an enormous part of our society is not just losing the tie with meanings of the victory but is ceasing to get interest in these meanings. At the same time events and personalities of that epoch, by virtue of their immensity that nobody can annul, still keep to be a matter of political and psychological maneuvers that are very dangerous for Russia as well as for the world at large. We are drawing up nearer and yet nearer to the line beyond which the final and ultimate revision of WWII results and re-coding of its meanings become possible. Some facts indicate to possible revaluation of roles performed in that war by Germany and the USSR-Russia. Aftermath of such revision may prove to be really tragic for Russia. Meanwhile the destructive work the principal tool of which is manipulation with the public conscience aimed at elimination of the very ability to perceive the heroic and the sacred in history goes on unabated. Thereby a path to revenge of the innermost occult Nazi idea is opened and paved. This idea asserts that access to the heroic is the privilege conferred to supermen. Therefore opposition to this work means inheritance of anti-Nazism traditions to the same extent as this work continuation means acceptance of the Third Reich traditions.

The author undertakes to answer questions that are concerns of researchers, political writers and ordinary Russian citizens: How does the image of Russia change in the mirror of national and international statistics? What place does Russia occupy in the global economic space now, at the beginning of the 21st century and what place did Russia occupy at the beginning of 20th century? What was the real development of Russia which we have lost? How did balance of economic development levels of Russian empire, the USSR and the USA change in the past 90−100 years? The author adduces calculations and estimates that allow him to conclude that both in 1913 and in 2003−2004 per capita GDP in Russia was and is about one fourth of per capita GDP in the US. At the same time the author offers one more conclusion which may be a surprise for many people: in early 20th century as well as at the beginning of the 21st century per capita income in China was and is about 1−12% of per capita income in the US. However during the same period per capita GDP in Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand and India compared to per capita GDP of the US deteriorated considerably. To put it differently, in the course of the past 90−100 years these countries were lagging more and more behind the US. All these and some other, sometimes unexpected conclusions and estimates are based upon thoroughly analyzed statistical records and interstate comparisons.

In the second part of his article the author analyzes not just relationship of development levels of Russia, the US and other countries of West and East but also compares the absolute economic potentials of these countries (i.e., economic dimensions, economic power etc.) and other basic characteristics: area of their territories and populations. In result it becomes apparent that by beginning of the 21st century geo-economic position of Russia deteriorated considerably in comparison of what it used to be in the beginning of the 20th century. In 1913 GDP of Russian empire amounted to no less than 40−45% of the US economic potential and was, largely, in line with the similar indices of Great Britain and Germany; Russia’s economic power was nearly threefold greater than that of Japan. By 2003−2004 relationship of economic forces among these countries changed drastically: now the total GDP of Russia does not exceed 12−14% of the US GDP and is roughly equal to GDP of France and Italy in the best case. At the same time Russia’s GDP is one and a half time lesser than that of Germany and two and a half times lesser that that of Japan. It is expedient to take into account realities of the contemporary world and position Russia occupies within this world in setting of Russia’s domestic and foreign policies designed for the medium-term future. The hour has struck when it is necessary to abandon former messianic aspirations and to ensure favorable external conditions for accelerated economic development of the country.

The history of Nicolas II government’s famous initiative to establish control over armaments which led to the first Hague peace conference (May-July, 1899) is elucidated with drawing in new archive materials. The author’s attention is focused at the unprecedented alliance between the Russian diplomacy and the international peace movement that acquired a great scale. A thesis of the fundamental barring of an imminent world war due to its inevitably disastrous character for all participants was elaborated and set forth in the course of campaign in support of the proposals moved by Russia, even though this thesis contradicted positions held by general staffs of various states. Having received the political and propaganda gains but, at the same time having confronted with resistance of the partners in negotiations the Russian government at the conference repudiated its own disarmament project and took orientation to understandings that covered exclusively the humanitarian issues of the «right of war». After the war of Russia against Japan the Russian government and the Czar personally opposed in principle any attempts to limit armaments. The position of the Russian diplomats at the second Hague conference (1907) is the evidence of this change. The author concludes that the lessons of the Hague is important for the present day. The contemporary experience demonstrates that in conditions of globalization policies of excessive armament combined with methods of resolution of conflicts from position of power leads to the impasse of new wars fraught with threats to the humankind as a whole.

The «great shakes» of the XXI cent. became not only the Russian’s property, but the property of the whole world. The current events, as well as the forecasts indicate the possible development of economical (and political) turbulences. One of the forecasts from the modern Pandora’s trunk has already been realized. The matter concerns the digital-economics crisis that is linked to the considerable overestimation of its assets. Another wildly discussed subject is the possible troubles in the field of the world finance. The third rider of the economical Apocalypses is the shadow of the global energetic crisis. In the modern situation politics have to deny the habitual models. Probably the brightest mistake is the idea of the explosive development of innovational processes on the edge of the third millennium. Russia is a peculiar geo-economical space; its economy unites in a paradoxical way the structural features of the row-material South as well as the highly technological North. The national project «Innovational Russia» is aimed at saving and developing the progressive element of Russian society — its creative ability as a solid resource of its economy. In case of a proper historical chance it will be able to alter the situation in the country in a healthy way. The elaboration of the «Innovational Russia’s» initiative as the base of the national strategy presupposes the number of additional actions about the development of the culture of «the new Russian class» whose life is closely linked to the post-industrial reality.

The article contains a specific vision of Russian foreign policy history based on the analysis of the major underlying factor which determined its course — i.e. the problem of nation’s security. The author contends that for Kievan Rus, Moscovy, and, to a lesser extent, imperial Russia geopolitical expansion proved to be an inevitable reaction to the many threats the outside world posed to the nation’s mere existence. This «offensive» mode of survival was complemented by versatile diplomatic strategies aimed at pursuing Russia’s vital interests through a full-fledged participation in international relations both in Europe and Asia. It was nothing else than imperial state structure that provided the Tsars with most effective material and moral instruments to handle the country’s defense issues.

The author enunciates specific proposals Russia could advance in response to the Europeanc Union’s expansion eastwards. The author assumes that the Russian foreign policy in Europe is to be more vigorous: Moscow will initiate signing of several documents that would regulate relations of Russia and the EU after the latter’s expansion. The key document among these treaties should be a new, more equitable and more profound treaty on partnershiop and cooperation with statements of clear perspectives and goals of Russian-European interaction. In doing that Russia is to proceed from the assumption that despite of all its willingness and its cultural and civilizational closeness to Europe it nevertheless will not be fated to become a part of the EU. Therefore, for Russia the most advantageous model of relations with the EU is the EU-USA model within which Russia will be able to become the third participant with rights equal to those of other two players (always provided that Russia will overcome its current social and economic crisis). Russia’s relations with the EU are to be like relations between two merchants belonging to the same nation: values are common but interests are competitive. For the EU it is more advantegeous to have strong and prosperous Russia on its eastern border that to have a «gray zione» of instability there. For if the Russian state disappears suddenly it is absolutely incomperehensible how and with whom will Europeans will interact in the territory of the collapsed state.

The article is based on the authentic archive documents and is supplied with a commentary which demonstrates the exceptionally cautious and friendly attitude towards the letters' authors: Tseterteli, Bourghina and Nikolaevski. Anna Mikhailovna Bourghina left the Bolshevist Russia in 1922 and then served as the assistant of Boris Ivanovich Nikolaevski, a prominent member of the Russian Social Democratic movement, the researcher of the Russian and European political history. Nikolaevski was the founder of the Russian Social Democratic Party’s archive, an expert in and gatherer and publisher of archive documents. In the end of 1923 Nikolaevski sent Bourghina to Paris because he was afraid that the members of the Central Committee Bureau members' illegal letters delivered to her address in Berlin might somehow affect her relatives' fate. At Nikolaevski’s request Irali Georghievich Tsereteli, a prominent Russian politician and public figure, hired Bourghina as his secretary. Since the end of 1930s Bourghina was permanent assistant of Nikolaevski. It happened so that their archive heritage is dispersed all over many Russian and foreign archives in Moscow, Saint-Petersburg, Tbilisi, Paris, Amsterdam, Wien, New York, Stanford, Jerusalem. And only now, when the opportunity to gather them in a single place has appeared, we may discover previously unknown pages of their lives.

Poets are not done, they are born but in all times there are multitudes of those who are eager to pass for poets. The author undertakes an attempt to demonstrate what the spirit of true poetry is and in what way one may discover paths that allow become closer to the poetry. The author is sure that many our contemporaries who offer their intellectual experiments as innovations understand the poetry as a sort of intellectual industry for making a human being a more noble creature. On the contrary, the author thinks that the progress in the sphere of poetry is the cultivation of artistic intuition which connects us to out ancestors. At the same time the author does not call us back to caves but protests against dehumanization, degeneration of a human being and lack of spirituality.

In recent months the public opinion in Russia as well as abroad has been once again drawn to the problem of relations between Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church or, speaking in broader terms, between Catholics and Russian Orthodox believers. The decision of Vatican to establish four Catholic bishoprics on the territory of Russia in which the Russian Orthodox Church leaders saw an encroachment upon their «canonic territories» served as the pretext for deterioration of these relations. The issue has transgressed the limits of purely legal dispute and touched the broad masses of believers as well as the high echelons of politicians. Relying on strong arguments of those people who consider the very notion of «canonic territories» as an invalid stationery innovation and considering the accusations of proselytizing aggression on the territory of the Russian Federation that are usually addressed to the Catholic Church as unfounded the author transfers the issue in a broader and deeper historical context. The author focuses her attention on the staring contradiction between the consent the Russian Orthodox Church has granted to the principal ideologic assumption of post-Soviet Russia (i.e., «entering the European alias civilized community») and its desire to retain, as a norm of behavior for its flock, the traditional apprehension in regard of Catholicism. However, Catholicism constitutes the historical foundation of the European civilization. Sure, preceding from so contradictory assumptions the Russian Orthodox Church confronts a difficulty in elaboration of a clear and consistent line of behavior. The failure of the Russian Orthodox Church’s attempts to prevent the Pontific’s visits to the East Christian space or at least to the CIS countries is the convincing evidence of this impossibility. Analysis of the process' dynamics leads the author to conclusion that the stubborn attempts of the Russian Orthodox Church to solve the problem of its influence by appealing only to the power intervention of the state and by artificial instigation of its flock’s fear of the Catholic proselytism threat just divert the Russian Orthodox Church from grasping the problem’s essence.

The author focuses the attention on the Russians' inability to define their attitude to the «Soviet heritage». The author points out that this inability is quite typical for the political self-conscience of contemporary Russia. Having begun its own development with the avalanche-like, ideologically motivated rout of the Soviet heritage (the greatest rage was brought down on results of the World War II) nowadays the contemporary political conscience faces grave problems of both the social and political (the destruction of the national-historical identity) and the state and legal nature. This array of problems includes, in particular the problem of definition of the territory Russia imposes its sovereignty. This problem, in its most acute form, arises in respect of the territories the Russian Federation owns only as the successor to the USSR, the power which won the victory in the World War II. Obviously, the Russian Federation's titles to such territories are justified only to the extent to which the Russian Federation embraces the idea of the succession as an element of the basis of its new statehood being.

Taking relations between Russia and the Crimean khanate in the early 17th century as an example, the author demonstrates the importance which the Tsars of Russia imparted to contacts with the world outside of Russia. The period under consideration was characterized by the exceptionally difficult situation inside Russia. In ten years five supreme rulers succeeded each other in Russia, yet each of these autocrats (including the so-called "impostors", or false Tsars) devoted a great attention to the foreign policy. The author considers all messengers and embassies sent to the Crimean khanate as well as the reciprocal diplomatic missions and demonstrates the importance these relations had for Russia.

The article deals with the factors underlying the origin of the so-called Crimean system – the great powers casting which came into being in the wake of Russia`s defeat in mid 1850`s. In contrast to conventional views, the author holds that despite the policy of «receuillment» caused by the Crimean debacle Russia continued to exert a considerable, even if not overwhelming, influence on the international affairs. Since Russia was a major guarantor of the Vienna settlement her self-removal from the European scene after 1856 brought about a series of drastic changes in the continental balance of power. To regain a semblance of order and to save their own interests first France and then Germany were left with no other alternative than to resort to Russian help. In the end it occurred that those who, in 1856, posed as winners failed to create a mechanism to protect theirs gains in Europe and elsewhere. Instead they triggered a radical diplomatic revolution just to regret its unintentional consequences.

The author deals with the process of a parliamentary republic making in Moldova and the impact of the process on Moldova's foreign policy including relations with Russia and Transnistria (Dniester Republic) problem. Although the political life of all «post-Soviet space» except the Baltic republics is dominated by the presidential power strengthening, recent changes in Moldova's political system indicate that a parliamentary republic is in making. These changes have caused certain shifts in Moldova's foreign policy: development of relations with the European Union and the initiative of some Moldavian political parties to establish an intergovernmental union with Romania. This policy can undermine the balance of power in the region, system of the Russian regional interests in particular. Russia's policy towards Moldova is focused on the search of balance between president P.Luchinskii, Moldavian Communist party which has the biggest fraction in the Moldavian Parliament, and the government of Dniester Republic. Under new political circumstances the support Russia provides for the single political power in Moldova, the Communist party and its leader P.Voronin is neither effective nor realistic option. The relations between Russia and Transnistria can also become complicated by new political struggle in this Republic. Without the multidimensional approach which takes into due account all players and analysis of new political situation in this region Russia's ability to protect its own interests here will be seriously curtailed.

The author investigates interrelationships between the types of society development and the political elites formation models. The author proceeds from availability of two paradigms of development: the mobilization paradigm and innovative paradigm. Both paradigms predetermine formation of distinctively different models of elite formation: «bureaucratic» (or «service») one and the «oligarchic» one. Under the mobilization model of development the higher echelon of administrative-political bureaucracy performs the functions normally performed by the political elite while economically dominant groups act as the subject of the innovative development. The author provides, on the basis of the comparative analysis of political development in Russia and the US, a detailed analysis of factors that help to diversify models of development and political forms which correspond to these models. The author points out that the prolonged, in historical terms, period when the mobilization methods of development dominated caused the fact that the model of elite formation which evolved under mobilization development conditions functioned for a long span of the Russian history. In the course of the 1990s social reforms the old «service» principle has been succeeded by the «oligarchic» principle. The contemporary stage of the Russian society development is characterized by a complicated interaction between pluralistically organized political-financial groups and political-administrative bureaucracy.