We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Taking three photographs of the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century ports of Izmir, Thessaloniki, and Istanbul as points of departure, the chapter investigates the question of why these highly diverse populations and the urban space they inhabited have been relegated to the margins of national and imperial histories of the Eastern Mediterranean. In particular, it claims that the port cities' myriad ways of blending particular aspects of modern Western and Central European culture with more regional characteristics warrants more attention in historiography.
The problem of identity in modern Russia is commonly framed in terms of the elemental tension between the country's alternative embodiments as empire or nation. This chapter explores identity in pre-revolutionary Russia by examining three configurations of the imperial vision: as a European empire, as an anti-European empire, and as a national empire. The Europeanisation of Russia's imperial image involved many things including the need for a basic perceptual rebounding and rebranding of its domestic geographical space. The most important element of the ideological inversion proved to be the civilisational juxtaposition between Europe and Asia. There was an alternative response to the dilemmas thrown up by Russian nationalism regarding the quality of the country's identity vis-a-vis the West. The fact that the vision of Russia as an anti-European empire continued to accept the civilisational distinction between Europe and Asia set out in the eighteenth century insured that it would remain encumbered with the fundamental nationalist dilemma regarding Russia's European identity.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.