Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-20T06:33:39.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gaspirali v. Il'Minskii: Two Identity Projects for the Muslims of the Russian Empire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Mustafa Özgür Tuna
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1913, an article in a Russian missionary journal compared two “very typical representatives” of Islamic studies in Russia: İsmail Bey Gaspıralı (1851–1914) and Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii (1822–1891). Nothing could better symbolize the two opposing points of view about the past, present and future of the Muslims of Russia in 1913. Il'minskii was a Russian Orthodox missionary whose ideas and efforts had formed the imperial perceptions and policies about the Muslims of the Russian empire in the late Tsarist period, while Gaspıralı was a Muslim educator and publisher whose ideas and efforts had shaped the Muslim society per se in the same period. Il'minskii, beginning in the 1860s, and Gaspıralı, beginning in the 1880s, developed two formally similar but inherently contradictory programs for the Muslims of the Russian empire. Schooling and the creation of a literary language or literary languages constituted the hearts of both of their programs. Besides their own efforts, both Gaspıralı and Il'minskii had a large number of followers that diligently worked to put their programs into practice among the Muslims of Russia. As a result of the inherent contradiction of these programs, a bitter controversy developed between what we may call the Il'minskii and Gaspıralı groups, which particularly intensified after the revolution of 1905. In this article, I will discuss the underlying causes and development of this controversy by focusing on the role of language in the programs of Gaspıralı and Il'minskii. Then, I will conclude my article with an evaluation of the legacies of these two individuals in their own time and beyond.

Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , June 2002 , pp. 265 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Ostroumov, Nikolai, “K istorii musul'manskogo obrazovatel'nogo dvizheniia v Rossii v XIX i XX stoletiiakh,” Mir Islama, Vol. 2, No. 5, 1913, pp. 316–326. “Ismail Bei Gasprinskii” is the English transliteration of the Russianized form of Gaspirah's name.Google Scholar

2. There is a vast literature about the lives, works, and influences of both Gaspirah and Il'minskii. The best works in English include the following. On Gaspirah: Lazzerini, Edward J., Ismail Bey Gasprinskii and Muslim Modernism in Russia, 1878–1914 (Seattle: University of Washington, unpublished , 1973). There is a concise and good discussion in Kırımlı, Hakan, National Movements and National Identity among the Crimean Tatars, 1905–1916 (Leiden, NY: E. J. Brill, 1996). On Il'minskii: Isabelle Teitz Kreindler, Educational Policies toward the Eastern Nationalities in Tsarist Russia: A Study of Il'minskii's System (New York: Columbia University, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1969). Unless indicated otherwise, I will use Kreindler's work for the biographical information on Il'minskii. Wayne Dowler, Classroom and Empire: The Politics of Schooling Russia's Eastern Nationalities, 1860–1917 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001) provides an account of Il'minskii from an educational point of view. Robert Geraci, Window on the East: Ethnography, Orthodoxy, and Russian Nationality in Kazan, 1870–1914 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001) discusses Il'minskii at length in relation to his missionary work.Google Scholar

3. Il'minskii's main activity, which is generally known as the “Il'minskii system,” was among the baptized non-Russians of the empire rather than the Muslims, but the boundary between the baptized non-Russian and Muslim domains in the East of the empire was rather vague and Il'minskii also developed a system for the Muslims of the empire.Google Scholar

4. “Inorodtsy” is the Russian plural for the word inorodets. “Inorodets”, literally “that of the other kind,” was used to denote non-Russians in general, and more commonly the non-Russian peoples of eastern Russia in particular.Google Scholar

5. This is not a full list of the languages Il'minskii knew. It is only a list of the languages in which he conducted translation works and linguistic studies.Google Scholar

6. Stamoolis, James J., Eastern Orthodox Mission Theology Today (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1986), p. 28.Google Scholar

7. For the missionary activities of Makarius and Veniaminov see Smirnoff, Eugene, A Short Account of the Historical Development and Present Position of Russian Orthodox Missions (London: 1903), pp. 16–23.Google Scholar

8. For the relationship between Makarius and Il'minskii, see Il'minskii, Nikolai I., “Pravoslavnoe bogosluzhenie na tatarskom iazyke,” in Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii: izbrannye mesta iz pedagogicheskikh sochinenii, nekotorye svedeniia o ego geiatel'nosti i o poslednykh dniakh ego zhizni (Kazan': Tipografiia imperatorskogo universiteta, 1892), pp. 22–29. In 1870, Veniaminov founded the Orthodox Missionary Society in Moscow. See C. R. Hale, “The Orthodox Missionary Society of Russia,” American Church Review, Vol. 30, 1878, pp. 344–360. This society supported Il'minskii's work from then on. For examples of how Il'minskii followed the Russian Orthodox missions and for the personal relationship between Il'minskii and Veniaminov, see Nikolai I. Il'minskii, Pis'ma N. I. Il'minskogo k Ober-prokuroru Sviateishego Sinoda Konstantinu Petrovichu Pobedonostsevu (Kazan': Tipo-litografiia imperatorskogo universitete, 1895), pp. 116–126, 180–187.Google Scholar

9. See Lemercier-Quelquejay, Chantal, “Les missions orthodoxes en pays musǔlmans de moyenne-et basse-Volga, 1552–1865,” Cahiers du Monde Russe et Soviétique, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1967, pp. 387–391; and Khodarkovsky, Michael, “‘Not by Word Alone’: Missionary Policies and Religious Conversion in Early Modern Russia,” Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 38, No. 2, 1996, pp. 283–287.Google Scholar

10. Kefeli-Clay, Agnes, “L'Islam populaire chez les Tatars Chretiens orthodoxes au XIXe siecle,” Cahiers du Monde Russe, Vol. 37, No. 4, 1996, p. 411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Il'minskii, Nikolai I., “O perevode pravoslavnykh kristianskikh knig na tatarskii iazyk, pri khristiano-tatarskoi shkole v Kazani,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (November 1870), Chapter 152, pp. 2–3. Il'minskii's student Nikolai Ostroumov has a similar argument in Nikolai Ostroumov, “Zametka ob otnoshenii Mokhammedanstva k obrazovaniiu kreshchenykh Tatar,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (June 1872), ch. 161, otd. 4, pp. 94–95.Google Scholar

12. Il'minskii and his followers developed a similar attitude to Buddhism later, but this remained a secondary issue for Il'minskii.Google Scholar

13. Lazzerini, , Ismail Bey Gasprinskii, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

14. Kırımlı, Hakan, Kırım Tatarlarında Milli Kimlik ve Millǐ Hareketler, 1905–1916 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1996), p. 38. This book is the Turkish edition of Kırımlı, National Movements and National Identity. Google Scholar

15. Lazzerini, , Ismail Bey Gasprinskii, pp. 4–11.Google Scholar

16. See Fisher, Alan W., “Enlightened Despotism and Islam under Catherine II,” Slavic Review, Vol. 27, No. 4, 1968, pp. 542–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17. On the Russian colonization and emigrations, see Fisher, Alan W., The Crimean Tatars (Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1987), pp. 78, 88, 92–93; and Kırımlı, Kırım Tatarlarında Millǐ Kimlik, pp. 11–17.Google Scholar

18. Bezchinskii, A., Putevoditel’ po Krymu (Moskva: Tipo-lit. T-va I. N. Kushnerev, 1903), p. 74. Prince Menshikov had in fact ordered deportation of the Crimean Tatars to Central Russia in 1854, but this proved to be practically impossible under the war conditions. Kırımlı, Kırım Tatarlarında Millǐ Kimlik, p. 15.Google Scholar

19. Ibid., p. 15.Google Scholar

20. A series of petitions to the Russian authorities in the 1880s from the Muslims of the Kazan region asking for the annulment of the laws that attempted to introduce Russian classes to the Muslim schools and required the mullahs to learn Russian is a good example of this fear and of the unwillingness of the Muslims of the Russian empire to get in contact with the outer Russian world. See Natsionalnyi Arkhiv Respubliki Tatarstana (The National Archive of the Republic of Tatarstan) (NART) f. 1, op. 3, d. 5881, 5882, 5883, 7797, 7798.Google Scholar

21. In 1913, Gaspirah wrote: “I would not let even one Turk move from his place in Russia if I had the power to do so, because one emigrating Turk is influencing ten others; he is leaving them in ambivalence, and he himself cannot find salvation in emigration; a homeland is being ruined, but another one is not being founded; nobody gains anything, everybody loses something.” Gaspirinski, İsmail, “Muhǎceret-i Muazzama,” Türk Yurdu, Vol. 2, 1328 (1913), p. 707. Quoted in Abdullah Saydam, Kırım ve Kafkas Göçleri (1856–1876) (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1997), p. 69. See also İsmail Gasprinskii, Russkoe Musul'manstvo (1881; reprint, Oxford: Society for Central Asian Studies, 1985), pp. 28–29.Google Scholar

22. There were two types of traditional Muslim schools: mektebs, elementary schools, and medreses, higher schools that had an exclusively religious character in nineteenth-century Russia until the reform movement that came toward the end of the nineteenth century. On the function of traditional education in the traditional Muslim societies in Russia, see: Khalid, Adeeb, The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism in Central Asia (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998), pp. 19–44. Although Khalid's work is confined to Central Asia, the situation in other parts of Russia was not much different.Google Scholar

23. Lazzerini, , Ismail Bey Gasprinskii, p. xx. School reforms of Şihabeddin Mercanǐ and Abdülqayyum Nasırǐ are two outstanding examples of these attempts.Google Scholar

24. Il'minskii, , “O perevode,” p. 3. For a case study about the impact of these everyday relations, see Kefeli-Clay, , “L'Islam populaire.”Google Scholar

25. Il'minskii, , Pis'ma, p. 4.Google Scholar

26. “İsmail Bey Gaspirinskiy ile Mülǎqat,” Tasvir-i Efkǎr, 27 June 1908.Google Scholar

27. Il'minskii, Nikolai I., “O primenenii Russkogo alfavita k inorodcheskim iazykam,” in Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii, pp. 5–6. Beginning from the late eighteenth century, the Holy Synod had engaged in the translation of Christian texts into the languages of the inorodtsy. In 1883, Il'minskii analyzed these translations in a long treatise. He contended that these translations were unsuccessful because they had not paid attention to the lexical, semantic, and syntactic rules of the vernaculars. Nikolai I. Il'minskii, Opyty perelozheniia khristianskikh verouchitel'nykh knig na Tatarskii i drugie inorodcheskie iazyki v nachale tekushchogo stoleiia (Kazan': Tipgrafiia Imperatorskogo Universiteta, 1883).Google Scholar

28. Il'minskii, , “O perevode,” p. 14.Google Scholar

29. Chicherina, Sophia, O iazyke prepodavanyia v shkolakh dlia vostochnykh inorodtsev (S-Petersburg: Tipografiia V. Ia. Mil'shteina, 1910), p. 7; and I. Iznoskov, “Pamiati Nikolaia Ivanovicha Il'minskogo,” in Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii, p. 95. Also see Il'minskii, “Pravoslavnoe bogosluzhenie,” and Nikolai I. Il'minskii, “O tserkovnom bogosluzhenii na inorodcheskikh iazykakh,” in Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii, pp. 30–40.Google Scholar

30. Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, p. 63.Google Scholar

31. “K voprosu ob ustroistve uchilishch dlia inorodcheskikh detei Kazanskogo uchebnogo okruga,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (April 1867), ch. 134, pp. 75–96; and Nikolai I. Il'minskii, “Shkola dlia pervonachal'nogo obucheniia detei kreshchenykh Tatar, v Kazani,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (June 1867), ch. 134, pp. 293–328.Google Scholar

32. Neverov, M. uses the term “Il'minskii system.” Neverov, M., “K voprosu ob obrazvanii inorodtsev,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (December 1869), ch. 146, p. 127.Google Scholar

33. For the details of the Il'minskii system, see Kreindler, Educational Policies, pp. 132–150.Google Scholar

34. Ibid., p. 84; Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, pp. 79–80, 177–187.Google Scholar

35. Il'minskii, Nikolai I., “Ob obrazovanii inorodtsev,” in Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii, pp. 18–19.Google Scholar

36. Il'minskii, , Pis'ma, p. 223. During the imperial period “Tatar” basically denoted any Muslim living in the Russian empire, but it was more specifically used for the Lithuanian Tatars, Crimean Tatars, Kazan Tatars and the Caucasian Muslims. Russians called today's Kazakhs the “Kyrgyz” and today's Kirgiz “Kara-Kyrgyz.” The most general term for the Muslims of sedentary Central Asia was “Sart.” One should be careful about this terminology. In particular the word “Tatar” could have different meanings in different contexts. It could mean all the Muslims of the Russian empire in Gaspirah's usage, while it could mean the sedentary Muslims of European Russia in distinction from the nomadic Turkic tribes to their east in a text by Il'minskii.Google Scholar

37. Il'minskii, Nikolai I., Vospominaniia ob I. A. Altynsarine (Kazan': Tipo-Litografiia V. M. Kliuchnikova, 1891), p. 4. Also see Isabelle Teitz Kreindler, “Ibrahim Altynsarin, Nikolai Il'minskii and the Kazakhh National Awakening,” Central Asian Survey, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1983, pp. 99–116. I should note that this article suffers from Kreindler's lack of knowledge about the Muslim reform movement that Gaspirah had initiated.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38. Quoted in Alektorov, A., “Iz istorii razvitiia obrazovaniia sredi Kirgizov Akmolinskoi i Semipalatinskoi Oblastei,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (December 1905), ch. 342, pp. 167–170. In his letter to the Minister of Education, dated 17 March 1888, Il'minskii had also praised Altınsarin's schools for their success in bringing the Kazakh and Russian students close to each other. NART, f. 968, op. 1, d. 53.Google Scholar

39. Alektorov, , “Iz istorii razvitiia,” p. 187. Ámos Komenský, Jan was the first known person to systematize and popularize the translative method. He arranged his books in columns with the same text in different languages. Thus the student would learn by comparing the foreign language with his native language. “Comenius, John Amos” Encyclopœdia Britannica Online. <http://www.eb.com:180/bol/topic?eu=25332&sctn=1> (accessed 6 April 2001). Il'minskii knew, respected, and quoted Komenský. Nikolai I. Il'minskii, “Besedy o narodnoi shkole,” in Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii, pp. 76–77.+(accessed+6+April+2001).+Il'minskii+knew,+respected,+and+quoted+Komenský.+Nikolai+I.+Il'minskii,+“Besedy+o+narodnoi+shkole,”+in+Nikolai+Ivanovich+Il'minskii,+pp.+76–77.>Google Scholar

40. Kreindler, , Educational Policies, pp. 57–58.Google Scholar

41. Il'minskii, , Vospominaniia, p. 192.Google Scholar

42. Il'minskii, , Pis'ma, pp. 247–248, 321–322.Google Scholar

43. Fisher, , Enlightened Despotism. Google Scholar

44. NART, f. 968, op. 1, d. 6.Google Scholar

45. Il'minskii, , “O primenenii,” p. 9.Google Scholar

46. Kreindler, , Educational Policies, p. 58.Google Scholar

47. Baldauf, Ingeborg, Schriftreform und Schriftwechsel bei den Muslimischen Russland—und Sowjettürken (1850–1937): ein Symptom Ideengeschichtliher und Kulturpolitischer Entwicklungen (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1993), p. 688.Google Scholar

48. Togan, Ahmet Zeki V., Bugünki Türkili (Türkistan) ve yakin tarihi (Istanbul: İbrahim Horoz ve Güven Basımevleri, 1942–1947), pp. 490–491; and Kreindler, “Ibrahim Altynsarin,” p. 109.Google Scholar

49. Quoted in Alektorov, , “Iz istorii razvitiia,” p. 168.Google Scholar

50. See Il'minskii's report to the General Governor of Turkistan in 1876. NART, f. 93, op. 1, d. 93.Google Scholar

51. Ibid. Google Scholar

52. Togan, , Bugünki Türkili, p. 501.Google Scholar

53. Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, pp. 143–145; and Kreindler, Educational Policies, p. 172.Google Scholar

54. Ibid, p. 173.Google Scholar

55. Il'minskii, , Pis'ma, pp. 338–339. Unfortunately Smirnov's letters to Il'minskii (NART, f. 968, op. 1, d. 145) are lost.Google Scholar

56. Smirnov, Vasilii, “Po voprosu o shkol'nom obrazovanii inorodtsev musul'man,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (June 1882), ch. 222, otd. 3, pp. 1–24. Stephen Blank cites this article as an example of the opposition against Il'minskii's ideas, but I cannot see the point in Blank's argument. Stephen J. Blank, “National Education, Church and State in Tsarist Nationality Policy: The Il'minskii System,” Canadian–American Slavic Studies, Vol. 17, No. 4, 1983, p. 476. Smirnov was apparently not in the camp that opposed Il'minskii. His opposition in this article was to a Caucasian school inspector, Semenov, and indirectly to Radlov, whose medrese reform plans Semenov wanted to copy in the Caucasus. Vasilii Radlov and Smirnov had also engaged in a quarrel earlier in 1877. See V. Smirnov, “Neskol'ko slov ob uchebnikakh russkogo iazyka dlia tatarskikh narodnykh shkol,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (January 1877), ch. 189, otd. 4, pp. 1–25; V. Radlov, “Eshche neskol'ko slov ob uchebnikakh russkogo iazyka dlia tatarskikh shkol,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (December 1877), ch. 194, otd 4, pp. 98–119; V. Smirnov, “Vozrazhenie g. Radlovu (po pvody ego stat'i o rukovodstvakh russkogo iazyka),” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (February 1878), ch. 195, otd. 4, pp. 147–156. I did not come across a document about an open quarrel between Il'minskii and Radlov, but apparently they had disagreements on many issues. In a letter to the Minister of Education in 1888, Il'minskii wrote that the Russian-native schools could not fulfill their purpose. NART, f. 968, op. 1, d. 53. Radlov was the inspector of these schools in the Kazan region. Also see NART, f. 93, op. 1, d. 93, p. 60.Google Scholar

57. Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, pp. 45–46.Google Scholar

58. Il'minskii, , Vospominaniia, p. 192.Google Scholar

59. Chicherina, , O iazyke prepodavanyia, p. 8.Google Scholar

60. See Il'minskii, , Pis'ma, pp. 174–176, 218–219, 247–248, 321–322, 410–411. See also: NART, f. 968, op. 1, d. 53.Google Scholar

61. These articles were later published as a book and reprinted in 1985: Gasprinskii, , Russkoe Musul'manstvo, pp. 63, 67–68.Google Scholar

62. Ibid., p. 26.Google Scholar

63. Kırımlı, , Kırım Tatarlarında Millǐ Kimlik, p. 46. After 1905, he would more frequently use “Turk.”Google Scholar

64. Gaspirinskiy, İsmail Bey, Tunguç, 1881. Quoted in Togan, Bugünki Türkili, p. 555.Google Scholar

65. Gasprinskii, , Russkoe Musul'manstvo, pp. 27–31.Google Scholar

66. Ibid., pp. 42–43, 46, 50, 61.Google Scholar

67. Ibid., p. 59.Google Scholar

68. Ibid., pp. 72–73.Google Scholar

69. Ibid, pp. 64–65.Google Scholar

70. See Kırımlı, , Kırım Tatarlarında Millǐ Kimlik, p. 40; Dilara M. Usmanova, “Die Tatarische Presse 1905–1918: Quellen, Entwicklungsetappen und Quantitative Analyse,” in Michael Kemper, Anke von Kügelgen and Dmitriy Yermakov, eds, Muslim Culture in Russian and Central Asia from the 18th to the Early 20th Centuries (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1996), pp. 239–278; Alexandre Bennigsen and Chantal Lemercier-Quelquejay, La presse et le mouvement national chez les musulmans de Russie avant 1920 (Paris: Mouton, 1964). Turkistan Vilayeti'nin Gazeti was published in Tashkent for 47 years between 1870 and 1917, but it was an official publication edited by Ostroumov.Google Scholar

71. Il'minskii, , “O primenenii,” p. 6.Google Scholar

72. Kırımlı, , Kırım Tatarlarında Millǐ Kimlik, pp. 48–49.Google Scholar

73. Ibid., p. 40.Google Scholar

74. Togan, , Bugünki Türkili, p. 556.Google Scholar

75. Ostroumov, Nikolai, “Musul'manskie maktaby i russko-tuzemnye shkoly v Turkestanskom krae,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (February 1906), new series, ch. 1, p. 137.Google Scholar

76. Khalid, , The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform, p. 24.Google Scholar

77. Ostroumov, , “Musul'manskie maktaby,” pp. 130–134.Google Scholar

78. Lykoshin, N. S., Polzhizni v Turkestane (Petrograd, 1916), pp. 223–224.Google Scholar

79. For a critique of medrese education from inside, see Abdürreşid İbrahimof, Tercüme-i Halim (Kazan, 1905).Google Scholar

80. Kırımlı, , Kırım Tatarlarında Millǐ Kimlik, p. 53.Google Scholar

81. This term was used in the Ottoman empire before Gaspirah introduced it in Russia.Google Scholar

82. Lazzerini, , Ismail Bey Gasprinskii, pp. 185–189. Lazzerini also gives a sample curriculum and classroom plan.Google Scholar

83. Kırımlı, , Kırım Tatarlarında Millǐ Kimlik, p. 54.Google Scholar

84. Sihabüddin Mercanǐ's attempt in Kazan is probably the first one.Google Scholar

85. İsmail Bey Gaspirinskiy ile Mülǎqat. Since the usǔl-i cedid schools were not always officially sanctioned and the Russian empire was not sufficiently successful to keep track of statistical numbers, the exact number of cedid schools are not known. Estimates are around 5,000–6,000. What we can certainly say is that there were enough schools to influence the entire Muslim society in the Russian empire.Google Scholar

86. For examples of this usage, see Il'minskii, , Pis'ma, pp. 396–397 and Il'minskii, “O perevode,” pp. 2–4.Google Scholar

87. Il'minskii, , Pis'ma. Google Scholar

88. Ibid., p. 53.Google Scholar

89. Ibid., pp. 62–63.Google Scholar

90. Ibid., p. 321.Google Scholar

91. Ibid., p. 322.Google Scholar

92. Pobedonostsev, Konstantin, “Iz vospominanii o N. I. Il'minskom,” in Nikolai Ivanovich Il'minskii, p. 111.Google Scholar

93. Bobrovnikoff, Sophia, “Moslems in Russia,” The Moslem World, Vol. 1, 1911, p. 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

94. Gasprinskii, , Russkoe Musul'manstvo, p. 65.Google Scholar

95. On the regulations of 1870, see Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, pp. 62–84.Google Scholar

96. Khalid, , The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform, pp. 178–179.Google Scholar

97. Quoted in Ibid., p. 180.Google Scholar

98. Ibid., pp. 179–180.Google Scholar

99. For the details of this trip see Lazzerini, Edward J., “From Bahchisarai to Bukhara in 1893: Ismail Bey Gasprinskii's Journey to Central Asia,” Central Asian Survey, Vol. 3, No. 4, 1984, pp. 77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

100. For more on this commission, see Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, pp. 174–187.Google Scholar

101. Quoted in Ostroumov, , “K istorii musul'manskogo,” pp. 322–326. Altınsarin's system, which used the Kazakh vernacular as the medium of instruction, had a limited usage by 1905. Russo-native schools generally used Russian as the language of instruction.Google Scholar

102. Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, p. 178.Google Scholar

103. Miropiev, N., “Russko inorodcheskie shkoly sistemy N. I. Il'minskogo,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (February 1908), new series, ch. 13, pp. 183–210.Google Scholar

104. See endnote 92. Quoted in Khalid, , The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform, p. 180.Google Scholar

105. For the government support to the traditionalists against the reformers, see Crews, R. D., Allies in God's Command: Muslim Communities and the State in Imperial Russia (Princeton: Princeton University, unpublished , 1999).Google Scholar

106. Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, p. 187.Google Scholar

107. Gaspirah, İsmail Bey, “Can Yaki Dil Meselesi,” Tercüman, 25 January 1905.Google Scholar

108. Gaspirinskiy, İsmail Bey ile Mülǎqat.Google Scholar

109. Arsharuni, Arshalius and Gabidullin, Khaci, Ocherki panislamizma i pantiurkizma v Rossii (Moscow: Bezbozhnik, 1931), pp. 115–116. The expression “literaturnyi rodnoi iazyk” in this Russian text is misleading. It is the translation of “edebǐ millǐ dil” in Turkish, which Gaspirah used to denote the common language he promoted for the entire Turkic world. Although “literary native language” is the literal translation of “literaturnyi rodnoi iazyk,” the correct expression should be “literary national language” for this better gives the meaning of “edebǐ millǐ dil.” Google Scholar

110. For examples, see “Ma'arif Kamisiyası,” Yulduz, 14 September 1907, No. 168; “Qafqaz Müslüman Mu'allimler Meclisiniñ Proğramı,” Beyan-ül Haq, 23 September 1906; “Mu'allimler Cem'iyyetiniñ Vazǐfeleri,” Beyan-ül Haq, 15 August 1906; Mekǎrce Cıyumnda Mu'allim ve Şakirdler,” Beyan-ül Haq, 24 September 1906.Google Scholar

111. Deliorman, Altan, “İsmail Gaspirah ve Tercüman Gazetesi,” Türk Kültürü, Vol. 6, No. 69, 1968, p. 655. Quoted in Lazzerini, , Ismail Bey Gasprinskii, p. 51.Google Scholar

112. Zenkovsky, Serge A., Pan-Turkism and Islam in Russia (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960), pp. 45–51.Google Scholar

113. “Vopros o musul'manskoi fraktsii Gosudarstvennoi Dumy,” Mir Islama, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1913, pp. 101–109.Google Scholar

114. ‘Alimcan İbrahimof, “Biz Tatarmiz,” Şǔrǎ, 15 April 1911, pp. 236–238.Google Scholar

115. Türkoğlu, , “Biz Türkmiz,” Şurǎ, 15 April 1911, pp. 238–241. Türkoğlu would write three more articles under this title in 1912: Şǔrǎ, 1 January 1912, pp. 19–21; Şǔrǎ, 15 January 1912, pp. 55–56 and Şǔrǎ, 1 February 1912, pp. 79–80.Google Scholar

116. Türkoğlu, , “Biz Türkmiz,” 1 February 1912.Google Scholar

117. Türkoğlu, , “Biz Türkmiz,” 15 January 1912.Google Scholar

118. Türkoğlu, , “Biz Türkmiz,” 1 February 1912.Google Scholar

119. For examples, see “Til ve İmlǎ Meselesi,” Şǔrǎ, 1 February 1911, pp. 79–82; Cihandarof, Feyzurrahman, “Qazaq Mekteblerine Dair,” Şǔrǎ, 15 February 1911, pp. 92–93; and Ahmed, “Her Kimniñ Ana Tili Özine Qıymetli,” Şǔrǎ, 15 April 1911, pp. 232–233. Although the period between 1905 and 1917 is the time when the Muslims of Russia most vocally discussed nationalism, territorial or extraterritorial, the precedents of their ideas were present earlier in the mid-nineteenth century in the works of people like Çokan Velixanov, Şihabüddin Mercanǐ and, as I try to explain in this article, İsmail Bey Gaspıralı.Google Scholar

120. See “‘Tercüman’ Babamiza Bir İki Söz,” Beyan-ül Haq, 29 May 1906; “İttifaq ve Islah,” Beyan-ül Haq, 20 September 1906; and Cemaleddin Velidof, “Yine Til Meselesi,” Yulduz, 1912, No. 786.Google Scholar

121. Reprinted from Tercüman in [İsmail Bey Gaspıralı], “Lisan Gerek Lisan,” Şǔrǎ, 1 January 1912, pp. 18–19.Google Scholar

122. Geraci, Robert, “Russian Orientalism at an Impasse: Tsarist Education Policy and the 1910 Conference on Islam,” in Brower, Daniel R. and Lazzerini, Edward J., eds, Russia's Orient: Imperial Borderlands and Peoples, 1700–1917 (Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1997), p. 140.Google Scholar

123. Znamenskii, Petr, Kazanskie Tatary (Kazan, 1910), p. 35.Google Scholar

124. For the details of this congress, see Geraci, , “Russian Orientalism at an Impasse,” and McCarthy, Frank T., “The Kazan Missionary Congress,” Cahiers du monde russe et sovietique, Vol. 14, 1973, pp. 308–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

125. “K voprosu o panislamizme,” Mir Islama, No. 2, 1913, pp. 1–12 and “Pantiurkizm v Rossii,” Mir Islama, pp. 13–30.Google Scholar

126. Kreindler, , Educational Policies, p. 80.Google Scholar

127. Shatalov, I., “Russkii iazyk v inorodcheskoi shkole,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (November 1870), ch. 310, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar

128. About this change, see Dowler, Wayne, “The Politics of Language in Non-Russian Elementary Schools in the Eastern Empire, 1865–1914,” The Russian Review, Vol. 54, No. 3, 1995, pp. 516–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

129. “Zhurnal osobogo soveshchaniia po vyrabotke mer dlia protivodeistviia tatarskomusul'manskomu vliianiiu v Privolzhskom krae.” Quoted in Arsharuni, A., “Iz istorii natsional'noi politiki tsarizma,” Krasnyi arkhiv, Vol. 4, No. 35, pp. 107–127.Google Scholar

130. Turdiev, Sherali, “La sǔretté Russe, les maǐtres d'école Tatars et le mouvement djadid au Turkestan,” Cahiers du Monde Russe, Vol. 37, Nos 1–2, pp. 211–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

131. Two examples are Abdürreşid İbrahim, who had organized the Muslim congresses after the revolution of 1905, and Yusuf Akçura, who had acted as the spokesman of the Muslim faction in the Duma.Google Scholar

132. Khalid, , The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform, p. 182.Google Scholar

133. Dowler, , Classroom and Empire, pp. 225–227. This was a blow to the Il'minskii system as applied to the baptized inorodtsy too, but it was in harmony with the ideas of the followers of Il'minskii about the Muslims of the empire.Google Scholar

134. Bobrovnikov, Nikolai, “Sovremennoe polozhenie uchebnogo dela u inorodcheskikh piemen vostochnoi Rossii,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia (May 1917), new series, ch. 135, pp. 51–84.Google Scholar

135. Kreindler, , Educational Policies, pp. 211–213; Isabelle Teitz Kreindler, “A Neglected Source of Lenin's Nationality Policy,” Slavic Review, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 86–100. In this article, Kreindler traces Il'minskii's influence on Lenin's ideas to the personal relationship between a loyal disciple of Il'minskii, I. Ia. Iakovlev and Lenin's father. Archival documents reveal that Lenin's father and mother had personally communicated with Il'minskii too. In a letter, dated 28 September 1889, Lenin's mother asks for Il'minskii's help for Lenin's readmission to the Kazan State University. NART, f. 968, op. 1, d. 157.Google Scholar

136. See NART, f. 968, op. 1, d. 43.Google Scholar

137. Gellner, Ernest, Nations and Nationalism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher, 1983), p. 53.Google Scholar

138. Usmanov, Mirkasım A., “O triumphe i tragedii idei Gasprinskogo,” in Ismail Bei Gasprinskii—Rossiia i vostok (Kazan': Tatarskoe knizhnoe izdatel'stvo, 1993), pp. 3–15.Google Scholar

139. Being a Turk and having an academic interest in the affairs of the Turkic world, I personally witnessed and continue to witness the appearance of these ideas, and it is impossible to cite all of them. For a few concrete examples, read through the following Web pages: SOTA Turkic Web Pages <http://www.turkiye.net/sota/sota.html> and Erk Democratic Party of Uzbekistan <http://www.uzbekistanerk.org/>.+and+Erk+Democratic+Party+of+Uzbekistan+.>Google Scholar

140. See <http://www.ismailgaspirali.org> (a Web page designed for the 150th anniversary of Gaspırah's birth).+(a+Web+page+designed+for+the+150th+anniversary+of+Gaspırah's+birth).>Google Scholar

141. For a collection of the summaries of the works presented in this conference, see Chervonnaia, Svetlana M., Ismail Gasprinskii—prosvetitel'naraodov Vostoka, k 150-letiiu co dnia rozhdeniia, Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii (Moscow: N.I.I. teorii i istorii izobrazitel'nykh iskusstv Rossiiskoi Akademii khudozhestv, 2001).Google Scholar