詳細検索結果
以下の条件での結果を表示する: 検索条件を変更
クエリ検索: "東方問題"
151件中 1-20の結果を表示しています
  • 今井 淳子
    東欧史研究
    1991年 14 巻 97-110
    発行日: 1991年
    公開日: 2018/12/01
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
  • 渡辺 正志
    国際政治
    1988年 1988 巻 88 号 188-192
    発行日: 1988/05/21
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 小川 浩之
    国際安全保障
    2019年 47 巻 2 号 114-118
    発行日: 2019/09/30
    公開日: 2022/03/14
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 石川 勝二
    西洋古典学研究
    1970年 18 巻 165-167
    発行日: 1970/03/23
    公開日: 2017/05/23
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 板垣 雄三
    年報政治学
    1978年 29 巻 70-78
    発行日: 1980/03/26
    公開日: 2009/12/21
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 国際政治のなかの中東
    奥田 泰広
    国際政治
    2005年 2005 巻 141 号 101-114,L13
    発行日: 2005/05/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    Sir Robert Morier (1826-93) was a lifelong rival of Bismarck, firstly as a friend of Crown Prince Frederick and Princess Victoria in the German court, secondly as an ambassador at St. Petersburg. In his earlyy career, he was a keen Cobdenist who believes in Free Trade as the key to international peace and an advocate of German liberals in the course of German Unification. But the advent of Bismarck becoming chancellor makes him to recognize its danger to European peace because “Bismarck's Peace” by alliance policy consisted of mutual suspicion among great powers. “The dangerous element in Europe is not Germany but Bismarck. He is getting just as dangerous as Napoleon I was after Austerlitz.”
    In the Eastern Crisis in the 1870s, he analyzed that an Anglo-Russian understanding would reduce Bismarck to produce influence within Europe. Therefore, he made a proposal of a joint English and Russian occupation of the Ottoman Empire. But the British government chose to threaten Russia and achieved the diplomatic triumph at the Berlin Congress in 1878. But, at that time, “the Eastern Question” and “the Great Game” were beginning to be closely linked. Russia wanted to compensate for their blunder in Turkey by expanding in Central Asia, at Pendjeh in 1885. The rumor was spread that Britain and Russia were on the brink of war.
    Although war was avoided, the crisis continued. On November 1885, Morier arrived at St. Petersburg as an Ambassador when the Russo-Afghan boundary needed to be precisely demarcated. Finally, he played an important role in the last phase of the boundary negotiations and the agreement was signed in July 1887. His belief in the necessity of an Anglo-Russian under-standing melted antagonism between two states and marked the beginning of the end of a “Great Game.”
    This paper examines analytically Morier's suggestions for British foreign policy from the view of an interconnection of two systems: “the Eastern Question, ” the core of European balance of power, and “the Great Game, ” the global rivalry between Britain and Russia.
  • ――ロシアの対イギリス政策の視点から――
    矢口 啓朗
    国際政治
    2022年 2022 巻 206 号 206_17-206_33
    発行日: 2022/03/25
    公開日: 2022/03/31
    ジャーナル フリー

    The Quadruple Alliance, which was signed by Russia, Great Britain, Austria and Prussia on November 20, 1815, established the foundation of the Congress System. However, the main object of this Alliance was the prevention of another instance of French aggression. In the 1830s, the international order was threatened by the French July Monarchy, which wanted to influence neighboring countries through ideas of liberalism. The autocrat of Russia, Tsar Nicholas I, who was afraid of these ideas, tried to prevent the spread of French influence. Many previous studies have emphasized that he strengthened relationships with the Holly Alliance. However, this study focuses on Russia’s relationship with Great Britain and reveals the Russo-British partnerships in the Quadruple Alliance for the defense of the Vienna System when Britain was governed by the liberal Whig Party during most of the 1830s.

    Although there was a liberal ideological identity, in both Great Britain and France in the 1830s, the two countries had many conflicts of interest in Europe and the Near East. The Whig government never permitted France to expand its influence over Belgium and Syria. For example, when a son of the King of France was recommended as the new Belgian king in January 1831, the British Foreign Secretary Palmerston rejected this idea, because Britain could not agree to the practical annexation of Belgium by France. In addition, since Britain showed negative attitudes to France in 1831, Russia could be sure of Britain’s commitment to the Continent through the Quadruple Alliance. Although in 1832 the ideological differences between Russia and Britain appeared with the passing of the Reform Act in Britain and by means of Belgian independence, Russia relied on Britain to deflect French aggression to neighboring countries. However, after the Treaty of Unkiar-Skelessi, which was signed by Russia and the Ottoman Empire on July 8, 1833, Britain approached France because they did not agree with the expansion of Russia’s influence in the Near East.

    Nevertheless, during the Second Syrian Crisis, when the divergent and conflicting of Anglo-French interests in the Near East resurfaced, Russia approached Britain and took the initiative to develop the First Straits Convention, signed without France on July 15, 1840. Since “disgraced” France was threatening its neighboring countries into signing another convention, Russia demanded Britain’s commitment to defend Europe. Britain agreed to deflect the French invasion, although it did not want to sign a formal agreement. Russia used the Quadruple Alliance as a tool for involving liberal Britain in consistent defense against France in the 1830s. This Alliance contributed to the preservation of the Vienna System even after the collapse of the Congress System through the continued solidarity of the Four Powers against France.

  • 藤田 進
    日本中東学会年報
    1994年 9 巻 351-367
    発行日: 1994/03/31
    公開日: 2018/03/30
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 藤田 治彦
    美学
    1996年 46 巻 4 号 1-12
    発行日: 1996/03/31
    公開日: 2017/05/22
    ジャーナル フリー
    By the mid-19th century, the restoration of medieval churches had gained great popularity in Britain. It was done with ecclesiastical and ecclesiological enthusiasm. But, it was also a profitable business for a few famous architects. At the end of the 18th century, some members of the Society of Antiquaries had protested against inadequate restoration, and afterwards an early foundation for preservation theory was laid by John Milner, Edward A. Freeman and some others. In the mid-19th century, John Ruskin revolutionalized the theory of preservation. Ruskin completely denied the identity between original and replica. For him, an ancient building was not a historical record but history itself. In comparison with this extreme view, what Milner and Freeman had thought was not preservation but a kind of restoration. William Morris undoubtedly followed Ruskin. But, it is also a fact that, before reading Ruskin, Morris had showed his own appreciation of the undistorted history which could be found in the fabrics of old buildings. In 1877, Morris founded the S.P.A.B. (Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings) and started the "Anti-Scrape" movement, after gaining insight into social and political action through involvement with the Eastern Question Society. The S.P.A.B. is still active and playing an important roll in the British preservation movement. The "Anti-Scrape" was also significant in the development of Morris' philosophy. It was also a central idea in his first lecture, "The Lesser Arts" given in December 1877. The whole philosophy and art theory of Morris took definite shape from then on. Morris' activities in the "Anti-Scrape" have been regarded as an rather incidental part of his life, probably because he has been considered a founder of "Modern Design." But, those activities were much more important even for the whole history of design as well as for his own later public life.
  • 池田 明史
    ユダヤ・イスラエル研究
    2013年 27 巻 75-
    発行日: 2013年
    公開日: 2020/09/16
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
  • 今井 淳子
    東欧史研究
    1981年 4 巻 1-31
    発行日: 1981年
    公開日: 2017/09/28
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
  • 利光 功
    美学
    1990年 41 巻 3 号 49-
    発行日: 1990/12/31
    公開日: 2017/05/22
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 真下 とも子
    史学雑誌
    1985年 94 巻 12 号 1920-1927
    発行日: 1985/12/20
    公開日: 2017/11/29
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 矢口 啓朗
    ロシア史研究
    2015年 96 巻 76-
    発行日: 2015/06/30
    公開日: 2017/07/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 福田 安志
    史学雑誌
    1989年 98 巻 5 号 911-914
    発行日: 1989/05/20
    公開日: 2017/11/29
    ジャーナル フリー
  • ―その意義についての再検討―
    黛 秋津
    ロシア・東欧研究
    2008年 2008 巻 37 号 94-105
    発行日: 2008年
    公開日: 2010/05/31
    ジャーナル フリー
    Undoubtedly, the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union played an important role in modern Balkan history. In international politics, the treaty of Kuchuk Kainardji (1774) is considered as one of the most significant points for Russian advancement into the Balkans. This article outlines the significance of this treaty by analysing its background and stipulations.
    After the Ottoman Empire lost its predominance over the West European countries and Russia at the end of the seventeenth century, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, the Habsburg Empire and the newly emerging Prussia coexisted in the first half of the following century and these four countries gradually strengthened their ties. In this situation, Russia attempted to expand its influence into the Balkans. However, at that time the Ottoman control over the Balkans was still so firm that such attempts were unsuccessful.
    This situation, however, changed when the Russo-Ottoman war broke out in 1768. In this war, the Russian troops defeated the Ottoman troops at most fronts including Greece and the Danubian principalities. As Russia's victory continued, the orthodox subjects in the Balkans began to expect Russian protection. Consequently, the Habsburg Empire and Prussia sensed an impending crisis due to the expansion of the Russian influence into the Balkans, and they began to intervene in this war as mediators. In the peace negotiations, although Russia occupied most of the territory of Wallachia and Moldavia, it was obliged to return both countries to the Ottoman Empire because of immense pressure from both the mediators. Nevertheless, Russia attempted to maintain its influence on the Danubian principalities and to obtain some clues for its advancement into the Balkans in the future. In 1774, Russia and the Ottoman Empire signed a peace agreement at Kuchuk Kainardji.
    Then, we analyse the contents of this treaty. We consider that there were three articles that enabled Russian advancement into the Balkans. Firstly, Article 16 stipulates Ottoman protection for the local subjects in Wallachia and Moldavia and in this article Russia obtained a voice concerning the affairs of both principalities. This right allowed Russia to officially involve itself in the issues pertaining to the Danubian principalities, and these two countries provided the base for Russia's further advancement into the Balkans. Secondly, some researchers have conjectured that owing to this treaty, Russia obtained the right to protect the orthodox Christian subjects in the Ottoman Empire; however, this is not true. Article 7 states that the orthodox Christian subjects in the Ottoman Empire must be protected by the Porte and not by Russia. The above-mentioned misunderstanding was caused due to Russia's exaggerated insistence on the eve of the Crimean War that in this treaty, it had obtained the right to protect the orthodox Ottoman subjects. However, it is true that this treaty was indirectly the beginning for Russia's insistence. Thirdly, Article 11, which stipulates the activities of merchants, provides Russia the right to open consulates anywhere within the territory of the Ottoman Empire. Using this right, Russia opened consulates and vice-consulates in the Danubian principalities in the 1780s, followed by those in the other Balkan areas in the nineteenth century. These consulates played an important role in Russian advancement into the Balkans by collecting information, maintaining contact with local leaders, ecclesiastics and other local influential men.
    Thus, this treaty was of great significance for Russian advancement into the Balkans.
  • 地学雑誌
    1914年 26 巻 7 号 566a-567
    発行日: 1914/07/15
    公開日: 2010/12/22
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 地学雑誌
    1914年 26 巻 7 号 567-568
    発行日: 1914/07/15
    公開日: 2010/12/22
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 河原 弥生
    史学雑誌
    1997年 106 巻 8 号 1542-1543
    発行日: 1997/08/20
    公開日: 2017/11/30
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 石丸 由美
    日本中東学会年報
    2000年 15 巻 205-223
    発行日: 2000/03/31
    公開日: 2018/03/30
    ジャーナル フリー

    It has always been necessary to define terms whenever discussing ideas about nationalism. The Ottoman Empire was no exception and possessed several terms referring to social, religious andethnic groups. The meanings of these terms, however, differed both according to the writers or the context in which writer was speaking, Semseddin Sami (1850-1904), who had an Albanian nationality, is credited with linguistic contributions to the Ottoman Empire. Especially he is recognized as an pioneer of cultural Turkish Nationalism by helping the growth of Turkish self-awareness. And also he is recognized as a pioneer of cultural Albania Nationalism by creating new letters for Albanian and other cultural contributions to Albania. The main purpose of this paper is to study the transformation of the self-identity of Semseddin Sami which seems tobe complicated by defining the terms for nationalism that were used by him from 1876 to 1882. In 1876 Sami published a dairy newspaper, Sabah in Istanbul. At that times the Ottoman empire was involved in the Eastern question. Sabah, therefore, spared many spaces for this question too. Sami regarded this situation as the crisis to Vatan (the Ottoman Empire) and claimed that an Ottoman nation should be united against this crisis. An idea of Ottoman nation was derived from the new policy Osmanlilik which granted non-muslims in the Empire full rights as Ottoman citizens, Referring to an Ottoman nation, Sami implied the equality between muslims and non-muslims as well. Five years later (1881) he published a magazin of enlightenment, Hafta. Sami showed the ideas of Vatan, which all Ottoman citizens should be demonstrate loyalty to, and an Ottoman Nation. We, however, can find a little change of idea of an Ottoman nation in his statements in Hafia. He defined an Ottoman nation as all Ottoman citizens among which there was no ethnic and national distinction. In fact his idea of Ottoman nation in Hafta came to be based on the ethnic and national equality, not the religious equality. As one of the reasons of this change, the Albanian issue (1878) could be counted. Whenever Sami refered to this issue he showed innate, sentimental attachment to another Vatan (Albania) as the fatherland of Albanians. The fact that this issue made his ethnic consciousness clearer and made him interested in ethnic groups around him could bring this change of the idea. Sami showed many interests to ethnic groups and used many terms to express the notion of ethnic groups in Hafta. First of all, the notion of ummet, which, is used in a religious sense in the Islamic world, conjured up a community where people spoke a common language buo lived beyond and geographic goundaries for Sami. The most widely used word meaning ethnic group in Ottoman Turkish was the term kavim. What constituted the difference between ummet and kavim for Sami was the population numbers involved and the scale of civilization which that population which that population had reached. He was convinced that every kavim could become ummet if it had its own language and literature as guidelines towards civilization. The word cins also came to be used to signify race. We find several examples of cins in Hafta. According to Sami's usages, cins denttes an ethnic group based on language, so for him, the term cinsiyet (an abstruct noun derived from cins) perfectly coincided with kavmiyet (the abstraction of kavim). In addition it was common for him to apply the term millet to an ethnic group (kavim) in Hafia. It can be easily recognized that Sami tried to regard Ottoman language as Turkish language and spread the Turkish self-awarenss among Ottoman Turks as for as this cotevt Hafia was concered. By the way, Sami, who identified himself as an Ottoman with Albasnian consciousness, gave a definition to being an Ottoman with ethnic consciousness. Being an Albanian was an innate and cultural consciousness for him. On the

    (View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

feedback
Top