2025 Issue №1

The article examines the image of Russia and Russians in the works of the Polish writer Józef Ignacy Kraszewski during the period following the suppression of the January Uprising, specifically in the second half of the 1860s. It explores how the events of 1863—1864, the repressive measures of the Tsarist authorities after the uprising, and the policy of Russification in the Kingdom of Poland were reflected in Kraszewski’s literary works. Special attention is given to the various types of Russian characters depicted in the author’s novels. Despite the predominance of negative portrayals of Russian military personnel and government officials, Kraszewski’s writings also contain positive depictions of ordinary Russian people, characterized by their basic humanity.

At present, among the Finno-Ugric ethnic groups of the Middle Volga region, in particular the Mari people, active processes of revival and transmission of autochthonous beliefs continue. The key role in this is played by religious functionaries, whose priestly institution has been developing for several centuries. In an effort to identify and document new sources on this subject and to facilitate further comparative-historical research, the author analyzes materials from the State Archive of the Republic of Mari El (GARME) to trace the development trends of the priesthood within the Mari traditional religion and to reconstruct the broader context of religious practices among the Mari population living in the Mari Autonomous Region during the 1920s—1930s, according to the administrative division in force at the time. The findings of the study complement previously accumulated ethnographic data, shed light on specific features of the development of the Mari traditional religion, and provide insight into several of its spiritual leaders during the first third of the 20th century. The examined materials allow the author to conclude that autochthonous beliefs and ritual practices persisted among the Mari during the studied period, despite prohibitions, anti-religious campaigns, and educational efforts in the Mari region. At the same time, the development of the priesthood also exhibited certain negative trends, which are likewise addressed in the article.

The article analyzes colonial settlement projects proposed by Polish émigrés during the Second World War. Interest in overseas colonization emerged in interwar Poland in connection with the activities of the Maritime and Colonial League. During the war years, similar projects were developed by contributors to the émigré journal Polska na Morzach. These initiatives were primarily aimed at improving Poland’s socio-economic position through access to colonial resources and emigration to countries in South America and Africa. In occupied Poland, overseas colonization projects were formulated by members of the underground movement “Sword and Plough.” A distinguishing feature of these projects was their greater emphasis on enhancing Poland’s international standing and their inclusion of racist practices toward the indigenous populations of the colonies. Overall, Polish overseas colonization projects during the Second World War continued the legacy of the Maritime and Colonial League.

Based on unpublished archival materials and employing a microhistorical approach, this article examines postwar party and state policies toward the personal house farming (PHFs) of collective farmers, using the agricultural enterprise Novaya Zhizn in Pravdinsky District of Kaliningrad Oblast as a case study. The aim is to identify the specific features of policy implementation at the level of an individual collective farm and to analyze the attitudes of the collective farmers themselves toward this policy. The article presents an analysis of party and government decrees concerning personal farms, as well as the forms in which these policies were implemented by district and kolkhoz leadership. It explores the changing significance of PHFs for collective farmers from 1946 to 1991. The study concludes that over the course of the period in question, the Soviet leadership’s position on PHFs underwent a transformation: while the late Stalinist era and Khrushchev’s Thaw were marked by a nearly continuous offensive against subsidiary farming, from the Brezhnev era onward, such farms came to be viewed as “allies” of collective production, with certain measures introduced to support them. Nevertheless, a significant proportion of collective farmers abandoned their PHFs, driven in part by the perceived possibility of a renewed repressive policy.