164“Persistent Factors in Russian Foreign Policy”; Rieber, “Struggle over the
Borderlands”; Rieber, The Politics of Autocracy; Sarkisyanz, “Russian
Imperialism Reconsidered”; Starr, “Tsarist Government”; Jersild,
‹Russia,’ from the Vistula to the Terek to the Amur.” On popular
literature and new conceptions of the empire, see Brooks, When Russia
Learned to Read, 214–45.
Recent work on the Volga-Urals includes Dowler, Classroom and Empire;
Werth, “The Limits of Religious Ascription”; Geraci, “Ethnic Minorities,
Anthropology, and Russian National Identity on Trial”; Kefeli-Clay,
“L’Islam populaire chez les Tatars chrétiens orthodoxes au xixe siècle”;
and Steinwedel, “The 1905 Revolution in Ufa.”
On the conquest and incorporation of the Caucasus, see Atkin, “Russian
Expansion in the Caucasus to 1813”; Atkin, Russia and Iran, 1780–1820;
Gammer, Muslim Resistance to the Tsar; Henze, “Fire and Sword in the
Caucasus”; Henze, “Circassia in the Nineteenth Century.”
On colonial administration in the Caucasus, see Rhinelander, “Russia’s
Imperial Policy”; Rhinelander, “The Creation of the Caucasian Viceger-
ency”; Esadze, Istoricheskaia zapiska ob upravlenii Kavkazom; less valuable
is Esadze’s military history commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the
end of the Caucasus War: Pokorenie zapadnogo Kavkaza i okonchanie
Kavkazskoi voiny.
21 Zhigarev, Russkaia politika v vostochnom voprose.
22 Consider, for example, the socio-economic determinism that shaped the
efforts of scholars in the former Soviet Union to explain the origins and
course of the Caucasus War. The terms of debate included wars of “na-
tional liberation” (Shamil’s), economies characterized by a “feudal social-
economic” level of development (the mountaineers) or a “feudal-serf
system [undergoing] a deep crisis” (Russia), and historical moments of
“progress” (alignment with Russia) and “backwardness” (the influence of
Turkey and Persia). See Ibragimbeili, “Narodno-osvoboditel’naia bor’ba
gortsev severnogo kavkaza”; Ortabaev and Totoev, “Eshche raz o
kavkazskoi voine”; Bliev, “K probleme obshchestvennogo stroia gorskikh
(vol’nykh) obshchestv”; Bliev, “Kavkazskaia voina.” For examples of
post-Soviet scholarship, see Kavkazskaia voina; and Georgiev et al., Sbornik
russkogo istoricheskogo obshchestva. Less scholarly but intriguing is Dziuba,
‘Kavkaz’ Tarasa Shevchenko.
23 Baddeley, The Russian Conquest of the Caucasus; Gammer, Muslim Resistance
to the Tsar. Nineteenth-century studies of the war include Romanovskii,
Kavkaz i Kavkazskaia voina; Dubrovin, Istoriia voiny i vladychestva russkikh na
Kavkaze; and Potto, Kavkazskaia voina v otdel’nykh ocherkakh, epizodakh,
legendakh i biografiiakh.
24 “bibliografia,” droeba, no. 19 (19 May 1872):1; ”iveriis redaktsiisagan,”
iveria, no. 1 (January 1882):3.
Notes to page 7