The Russian Empire as a Subject of East European Historical Research. Some Reflections on Its Prospects at the 7th Iccees World Congress In Berlin

446 J. Kusber, TheRussianEmpireasaSubjectofEastEuropeanHistoricalResearch... For some years, the cultural turn has significantly influenced historical research on Tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union.1 This similarly applies to the historical preoccupation with what is associated with the field of “empire studies.” The definition of empire loses its sharpness the more intensively one studies this phenomenon. Herfried Münkler, in his synchronically and diachronically comparative political study of empires, has developed a catalogue of criteria to describe the phenomenon of empire that includes the spatial extent, the possession of formally or informally held territories or colonies, and the exercise of power through interventions.2 With an eye on the sole world power at present, the United States, Münkler is of the opinion that the possibility of ultimately unchallenged intervention (that is, intervention that is impossible for other states and powers to prevent) is the only justifiable criterion for an imperium. In many cases taking up and Jan KUSBER THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE AS A SUBJECT OF EAST EUROPEAN HISTORICAL RESEARCH. SOME REFLECTIONS ON ITS PROSPECTS AT THE 7TH ICCEES WORLD CONGRESS IN BERLIN 1 R. Lindner. Im Reich der Zeichen. Osteuropäische Geschichte als Kulturgeschichte // Osteuropa. 2003. Bd. 53. H. 12. S. 1757-1771. 2 H. Münkler. Imperien. Die Logik der Weltherrschaft - vom Alten Rom bis zu den Vereinigten Staaten. Berlin, 2005. S. 11-35. 447 Ab Imperio, 3/2005 bringing together older theories on imperialism,3 he starts out from the need for a catalogue of criteria, reduced to a few items, for the definition of an empire, in order to obtain the possibility of systemic comparison from the perspective of political history. The more recent history of civilization would consider such a view from outside to be questionable, because it disregards those situations in which a state entity is perceived by its inhabitants as being an imperium. It is thus limited in many cases to the “reconstruction of historical environments”4 and calls the comparability of such large units as empires into question. And, certainly, there is a rationale in cultural studies’ critique of the bird’s eye perspective of comparative studies. If one wishes to turn to the history of empires, it is certainly not sufficient to just take the power of external intervention as a criterion for a definition. To put the Russian example at the center: the tsarist realm, which, by the way, Münkler only analyzes on a very limited basis,5 was therefore not only an “empire” because it was in position, for instance in the epoch of Catherine the Great, to make gains in territory in the South in the wars against the Ottoman Empire and in the West in the course of the Partitions of Poland. It was an empire not only because it was able in the nineteenth century to establish a colonial empire more successfully in Central Asia than in the Far East,6 which came to be regarded as evidence of imperial greatness in comparison to the British Empire or the US after 1898. It was an empire because, in addition to its physical expanse and power potential, a large number of actors within the state came to perceive the Russian state as an imperium. It was this awareness that constituted if not a guiding principle for historical actors’ actions, then a component of their own environment.7 I consider this to be essential in the light of the observation that not only did imperial elites feel the fall of 3 He refers mainly to: W. J. Mommsen. Imperialismustheorien. Ein Überblick über die neueren Imperialismusinterpretationen. 3rd expanded edition. Göttingen, 1987. 4 R. Vierhaus. Die Rekonstruktion historischer Lebenswelten. Probleme moderner Kulturgeschichtsschreibung // H. Lehmann (Hg.). Wege zu einer neuen Kulturgeschichte. Göttingen, 1995. S. 7-25. 5 Above all, see D. Geyer. Der russische Imperialismus. Studien über den Zusammenhang von innerer und auswärtiger Politik 1860-1914. Göttingen, 1977. 6 On the significance of the Far East in elite discourse, see David Schimmelpenninck van der Oye. Towards the Rising Sun. Russian Ideologies of Empire and the Path to war with Japan. DeKalb, Ill., 2001. 7 Understood here in a broader sense, not just related to expansion and mission, but...