The role of the Mordovian Republican Library in patriotic initiatives and its valuable support for the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War (1941–1945) is analyzed. Based on archival documents from the Central State Archive of the Republic of Mordovia, it is demonstrated how the library expanded its mission in the wartime by engaging in military and defense training, mastering skills in air raid preparedness and sanitary defense within its self-defense unit, and actively participating in campaigns to collect warm clothing for the front. The financial contributions made by the library’s staff to the national defense fund, including the donations that helped build a tank column and an air squadron, are detailed. The library’s collaboration with rear units and subunits of the Red Army, as well as evacuation hospitals stationed in the Mordovian ASSR, is discussed. Despite the war hardships, the library’s employees, who were mostly women, successfully fulfilled their duties. Their achievements in facilitating mass mobilization were recognized by the Soviet leadership as an important part of the national war effort. Several employees from the library’s staff were honored with state awards in the post-war period.

Due to the limited availability of primary sources, the history of Russian river transport is still sketchy and lacks a systematic description. Existing historical accounts are based on the results from the analysis of the activities of individual steamship enterprises that have been extrapolated to the entire water transport system of the region. In order to verify the validity of such generalizations, this study undertakes a comprehensive two-stage reconstruction of the fleet composition in Udmurtia’s Kama enterprises: at the first stage, the fleet composition and its evolution are reconstructed using the archival records of local enterprises; at the second stage, the completeness and reliability of the obtained dataset are verified against the records provided by the Udmurt Statistical Office. The proposed approach is found to be effective for the period of the Great Patriotic War, also when applied to the reconstruction of the fleet of enterprises not represented in the archival records (the Sarapul Distillery and the Sarapul Timber Depot). However, it is methodologically unsound to extrapolate the results obtained for the Kama steamships to the full scope of river transport in the region. In addition, the workflow of Udmurt enterprises during the wartime is considered. They were engaged into fulfilling critical defense orders and, with the loss of the Donbass, were forced to switch to alternative energy sources (firewood and peat), which had to be transported over 30–40 km, thus increasing the strategic value of the fleet. As a result, the vessels used by Udmurt enterprises were not mobilized, and the regional fleet even slightly expanded by the end of the war. To further optimize available resources, the vessels were redistributed between different people’s commissariats.

The building of combat-ready reserves for the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War is analyzed based on the results of an archival research on universal military training in North Ossetia. Using the materials from the Central State Archive of the Republic of North Ossetia–Alania and the State Archive of the Modern History of the Republic of North Ossetia–Alania, a historical perspective on the military training in the region without disruption to industrial production under the wartime conditions is provided. Special attention is paid to variations in the organization of military training across the North Ossetian ASSR territory. The quality of pre-conscription training in North Ossetia during the early years of the war, the development of infrastructure for universal military training, the resolution of organizational challenges, and the role of universal military training in ensuring the timely preparation of combat reserves for the front are assessed. Key obstacles and limitations in the implementation of universal military training, as well as strategies employed to overcome them, are identified using the archival records and existing historiographical sources. It is concluded that the Soviet leadership not only successfully trained and integrated the conscription pool into the Red Army but also developed an effective system of universal military training for all citizens, which enabled the rapid deployment of combat reserves.

The Tehran Conference had the utmost significance for the Allied military strategy in World War II and decided the fate of the post-war world order for generations to come. It was a critical juncture, a bifurcation point, in the course of international relations. This article examines the situation in which the meeting between the three Allied powers took place. In line with the systematic approach to global realities, two main stages can be distinguished in the development of world diplomacy during the first half of the 20th century: in the aftermath of World War I and following World War II. In this light, the Tehran Conference is seen as a symbolic bridge from the unstable Versailles–Washington system, with its ineffective League of Nations, to the emerging global bipolarity. It was also the moment when the United Nations, a valid arena for navigating global issues, came into being. It is concluded that a better understanding of how the Allied conferences were organized and the wartime interactions proceeded gives access to a clearer vision of the historical milestones that determined the evolution of international relations in the 20th century and continue to influence global political dynamics. The complexities in the organization of the Tehran Conference are discussed. The Soviet Union’s role in selecting the venue and ensuring the safety of the event is defined.

Kayum Nasyri’s work as a teacher of the Tatar language at Orthodox theological schools in Kazan during the period from 1855 to 1870 is explored. In the micro-secular society of that time, his ties to the traditional Muslim community were weakened, distancing his religious practices and everyday life from “public oversight.” At the same time, this setting integrated him into a new intellectual world that aligned with his teaching and research interests. Despite being part of the Orthodox educational system, K. Nasyri maintained his Muslim way of life, even as the absence of a strong confessional community led to a slight decline in his religious activities. His dedication to scholarship and pedagogy, along with the support from prominent figures of the Russian and Tatar intelligentsia, shaped him into an outstanding linguist, ethnographer, and methodological expert. Within this micro-secular context, his enlightenment program took form. Engaging with scholarly literature, periodicals, and discussions with Kazan’s leading Turkologists and Orientalists, K. Nasyri became one of the most educated members of the Russian intelligentsia.

The historical and cultural heritage of Kayum Nasyri (1825–1902), a Tatar scholar and enlightener of the second half of the 19th century, is analyzed in anticipation of the 200th anniversary of his birth. The role of written texts as vessels of memory, both about him and his work, is demonstrated. The evolution of commemorative events that have been held from the 1920s up to now in order to honor K. Nasyri is described. The problem regarding his exact birth date is addressed. For commemorative purposes, it has been accepted that the scholar was born in 1825. However, a detailed analysis of archival sources, including his passport (1898) and the census records (1858), reveals a different possible birth year, from 1828 to 1829. Thus, further studies on K. Nasyri’s biography are needed. The anniversary commemorations dedicated to him help preserve his heritage and spread awareness of his contribution to science and education. Despite the exposed contradictions with the archival sources, the tradition of commemorations tied to 1825 has solidified K. Nasyri as a symbol of Tatar culture and history.

The entrepreneurial activities pursued by the Old Believer merchants in the Kazan Governorate during the 19th and early 20th centuries are examined, with the focus on flour production and steelmaking as the two industrial sectors they specialized in by either renting state-owned enterprises or building new mills and factories. The most influential Old Believer merchant dynasties of that time involved the Okonishnikovs, Shamovs, Romanovs, etc. They all succeeded by effectively navigating their enterprises, using the latest equipment, and relying on support from their local communities. The working conditions at the enterprises managed by the Old Believers are described, as well as their efforts in providing healthcare support to workers by organizing sick funds and the problems they faced while trying to balance their religious values and entrepreneurial practices. It is concluded that, despite numerous challenges, including bureaucratic hurdles while trying to rent the enterprises, poor transportation, and the need to rely on local resources, the Old Believer merchants in the Kazan Governorate contributed significantly to the industrial modernization of the region, especially by developing the industrial sectors that were locally grounded and less dependent on transportation networks.

The influence of Tatar Jadid madrasas on the establishment of the Kazakh educational system is examined. Using a problem-oriented chronological approach, the spread of education among the Turkic peoples of the Russian Empire is traced. The dynamics of both qualitative and quantitative changes is discussed. The results obtained from the study reveal that, before the revolution, most madrasas in urban areas across the Kazakh Steppe were Tatar institutions financed by Tatar entrepreneurs. During that period, the majority of well-educated Kazakhs studied at these madrasas. The latter also provided a reference point for the development of the Kazakh educational system. In the early 20th century, following the Tatar model, Kazakh Jadid madrasas emerged.

This article sketches out the portraits of scholars who represented the church history school of the Kazan Theological Academy during the 19th century and also performed their research outside its walls, at Kazan Imperial University. It is recognized as a separate school of thought because it developed and continued as a certain perspective on historical research. Here, the scholarly contributions of the professors from the Department of Church History at Kazan Imperial University are analyzed, with particular emphasis on their role in the advance of church historiography, as well as in the study of religious movements and cultural aspects of Orthodoxy. The key directions, themes, and problems addressed in their works are explored, and the most notable publications are discussed. Their views and methodological approaches to church history are summarized.

This article continues a series of the authors’ previous publications dedicated to Nikolai Nikolaevich Parfentiev, a prominent professor of mathematics at Kazan University. Here, his work as a dean of the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics in the post-revolutionary years is explored. His important role in the organization of the educational and research processes during the early decades of the Soviet era is demonstrated, as well as his initiatives to sustain and further advance Kazan University’s school of mathematics, celebrate the centennial of the discovery of non-Euclidean geometry by N.I. Lobachevsky, and establish the Research Institute for Mathematics and Mechanics. Some thoughts on the scholar’s research trip abroad in 1928 are provided. Using archival documents, published sources, and the memoirs of contemporaries, N.N. Parfentiev’s diverse contributions to the development of Soviet higher education in physics and mathematics are analyzed. Photographs from the Kazan University History Museum and T.Yu. Mirakova’s family archive are included.

The Tatar and Middle Volga trade offices of Torgsin in the Middle Volga region and their interaction with local party authorities are studied. Using previously unpublished archival sources, key features of this process are identified. The tactics employed by Torgsin’s leaders to influence political officials for their own benefit are revealed. Analysis of the conflicts between Torgsin and the party demonstrates that Torgsin’s leaders were well aware of the vital role that their organization played in mobilizing values and financial resources. Therefore, they were ready to protect their organizational interests and advance their agenda further. The study concludes that the interaction between the two offices of Torgsin and local party authorities in the Middle Volga region was surrounded by contradictions: although controlled by the local government, they wielded their influence through the central directorate of Torgsin and higher-level party structures.

The efforts undertaken by the Soviet Pioneer Organization to reduce illiteracy rates in the Tatar ASSR schools during the 1920s and 1930s are analyzed. Under the political and social challenges caused by the revolutionary events and economic hardships, the Pioneers became an important tool for promoting literacy among young people. The key initiatives and campaigns launched by the Pioneers to raise educational attainment and support children in learning are considered. Special attention is also given to the socialist agreements aimed at improving literacy and boosting the active participation of the Pioneers in implementing Soviet educational policies. The study demonstrates that the Pioneer Organization played a crucial role in eradicating illiteracy and improving the conditions for the education of Tatar youth, thus contributing immensely to the success of the literacy campaigns.

This article examines the role of religious (confessional) affiliation in the development and sustaining of the ethnocultural identity among the Azerbaijanis living in the Republic of Tatarstan. The study is based on a qualitative approach, which includes the investigation of theoretical sources and empirical field data obtained from the in-depth interviews with members of different generational cohorts, the participant observations at religious ceremonies and family events, and the content analysis of ethnic media narratives. Key mechanisms by which religious practices, primarily associated with the Shiite tradition of Islam, influence the cultural self-identification of the Azerbaijanis in the multicultural and multiconfessional environment of Tatarstan are revealed. Manifestations of religious beliefs in everyday life, family and community rituals, and interethnic relations are explored. The results of the study indicate that religious affiliation is crucial not only for preserving and adapting traditional customs and cultural activities within the ethnic group but also for structuring everyday social interactions. The importance of the confessional factor, a critical element of communication between various ethnic groups, in shaping the relations between the Azerbaijani community and other ethnoconfessional groups of the Republic of Tatarstan is demonstrated.

This study focuses on the self-reflection in Ukrainian Soviet historiography during perestroika. It was a paradoxical period marked by the flourishing of Marxist historiography and yet the beginning of its decline, which resulted in a massive rejection of the Marxist paradigm by researchers. The ideas expressed by the authors of the seminal work “Historiography of the History of the Ukrainian SSR”, which defines the general trajectory of historiographical research in the Ukrainian SSR and its state at the moment of a major historical change, are reconstructed. The book was published at the dawn of glasnost policy and quickly became outdated and emblematic of a bygone era. The subsequent advance of historiography in the region was closely linked to the socio-economic, political, and national shifts caused by perestroika. Here, particular attention is paid to the studies on the historiography of the pre-Mongol period in the history of the Eastern Slavs and the reunification of Ukraine with Russia. Both of them were less ideologically influenced and thus revising them proceeded more naturally than studying the issues in the contemporary history of Ukraine. The analysis shows that Ukrainian Soviet historiographical research, even in these less politicized areas, experienced a shift from identifying itself as an integral part of Soviet Marxist historiography to prioritizing national uniqueness, which appeared not so much a consequence of natural evolution as the result of external influences from the social transformations driven by perestroika.

This article examines an intellectual debate between N.I. Kareev and L.Z. Slonimsky, which unfolded in Russian journals in 1883, following the publication of N.I. Kareev’s monograph “Key Issues in the Philosophy of History” based on his doctoral dissertation, which introduced his original but controversial perspective of the hierarchy of sciences, the nature of the laws of history, and the “progress” formula. New, previously unexplored anthropological contexts of the polemical exchange between the two scholars are explored that help uncover the reasons behind the sharp differences in how they understood the structure of the historical process and the place of the human being in it. The results show that, with respect to the idea and theory of the nation perceived as the central theoretical components of intellectual pursuits at that time, N.I. Kareev and L.Z. Slonimsky’s views reflect their fundamentally different personal experiences, as well as the alternative analytical and rhetorical traditions they accepted. Because they pursued different goals in their theorizing, their reasonings developed at different levels of meta-reflection.

A previously unpublished letter sent in January 1931 by N.I. Radtsig, a historian of the modern era, to N.I. Kareev, his colleague, is introduced into academic discourse and analyzed. Found in N.I. Kareev’s collection at the Manuscripts Department of the Russian State Library, this letter is the last known contact between the two scholars who studied at Moscow University under V.I. Guerrier, one of the greatest historians of his time, and maintained a long correspondence thereafter. They did not only discuss the history of France, in which they were both interested, but also developed a friendly relationship, as evidenced by N.I. Kareev’s notebooks, where he recorded all his visits and the correspondence he received or sent in 1920–1930, as well as by several letters from N.I. Radtsig, including the last one, that were written in 1925, 1930, and 1931.