The eighteenth-century natural philosopher Mikhail Vasil'evich Lomonosov (1711-1765) has long been represented by Russian writers and scholars as an encyclopedic figure who not only pioneered the dissemination of a scientific ethos in Russia, but whose own innumerable contributions to science make him eminently worthy of inclusion in a pantheon among the greatest scientific minds. A robust mythology extolling Lomonosov's role in Russian science and culture formed in the years immediately following his death, and would increase in vigor while adapting to changing historical circumstances until well into the twentieth century. This dissertation explores the evolution of Lomonosov's imposing stature in Russian thought from the middle of the eighteenth century to the first decades of the Soviet period. It reveals much about the intersection in Russian culture of changing attitudes towards the meaning and significance of science, as well as about the rise of a Russian national identity of which Lomonosov became an outstanding symbol. / The processes by which myths can be used to create and shape historical memory are highlighted throughout this inquiry. At first, Lomonosov was depicted very generally as the pioneering Russian natural philosopher; later his contributions, still broadly framed, were conflated with select institutional agendas; finally historians of various disciplines appropriated his life in order to reinforce their own professional strategies. Even as the myth of Lomonosov grew more elaborate, however, it was the inspiring idea of Lomonosov's heroic determination to propagate science, culture, and education within Russia and his successful struggles against myriad obstacles to achieve this end that remained the primary and enduring biographical element. It is this image with which my study is principally concerned.

No description available.

National identity provides the interpretive framework through which foreign policy makers understand their role in the world and the actions of other states, and can also be utilized as a tool to mobilize public support behind foreign policy maneuvers. Foreign policy in turn is both shaped by constructions of national identity, and often used to forge and substantiate the narratives of national identity which best serve the regime’s domestic interests. This thesis will seek to establish the mutually constitutive relationship between national identity and foreign policy through an analysis of the interaction of these elements in the Russian Federation under President Vladimir Putin. Russian national identity will be considered in its formation with respect to the Historical, Internal, and External ‘Others’ in post-Soviet discourse originally identified by the constructivist analysis of Ted Hopf, with particular emphasis on the evolution of identity narratives disseminated from the Kremlin.

No description available.

This dissertation concerns the development and interaction of Kazakh and Russian identities in post-Soviet Kazakhstan. My research questions were: (1) what was the character of these identities in 2003/04 (the time of my research); (2) how have these identities interacted to form dominant and subordinate identities, and (3) how can the character of these identities and their interaction be explained? In order to research these questions I used a general questionnaire followed up by open ended interviews of a representative sample of Kazakhstani citizens. While my research findings show continued uncertainty and provisionality in both Kazakh and Russian identities, which confirms the broad trend of previous surveys, they also indicate signs of change in the emergence of more consolidated dominant and subordinate identities in the less Russianised areas like Chimkent and among the younger generation, while by contrast the older generations of Russians, particularly in the more Russianised areas, find it difficult to accept the delegitimation of their dominant status as reflected in the nationalizing policies pursued by the new state. In theoretical terms these findings confirm the importance of the study of ethnic stratification, which has not received sufficient attention in previous research in this area. In explaining these developments I found that the character of the transition and also of the ‘prior regime type’ in Kazakhstan has had a significant effect on ethnic relationships, but also that international factors, such as those presented in Brubaker’s triadic model, and internal factors, elaborated by Schermerhorn and Horowitz, were also important.