Giuliana D’Oro

On the 19th Century Crimean Tatar Migration: Ismail Gasprinskij's point of view in the pages of the journal Perevodčik-Teržiman

Giuliana D’Oro

University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy

giuliana.doro[at]uniroma1.it

Abstract: Through the reading of excerpts from the Tatar-Russian newspaper Perevodčik-Teržiman, published by Ismail Gasprinskij in 1883, this article intends to provide not only an in-depth study of an insufficiently studied subject, such as the migration of the Crimean Tatars in the 19th Century, but also to give ideas of reflection on the concepts of identity and otherness, applied to the condition of the emigrant in the country of adoption, a situation that is as timely as ever.

Keywords: Migration; Crimean Tatars; I.Gasprinskij; identity; otherness;

1. Introduction

The reading of Andreas Kappeler’s study, Russland als Vielvölkerreich[1], has opened the issue of the complexity and multi-ethnicity of the Russian empire, which has now fully entered the field of historiography[2]. However, from a cultural and literary point of view, the variegated and heterogeneous Russian demographic panorama finds it difficult to enter and consolidate itself; the studies on the subject to date do not give an exhaustive picture of the Russian socio-political-cultural and literary mosaic provided by the realities, so to speak, on the margins of the Russian Empire first and the Soviet Union then. Russia’s history as a whole cannot be said to be exhaustively studied without integrating the variegated constellation of peoples with a different cultural, literary, economic and political heritage from which it was and it is nowadays constituted. The paradigm that through which the study of a minor literature there is gives a clear and privileged point of view from which to approach the major one, it can also be applied to the question issueof the heterogeneity of Russia: thanks to the understanding of the micro realities which it consists of, the deepest soul of the motherland itself is recognized. The history of this country becomes clear only if it is considered comparatively not only towards the West and the East but recognizing it as a multi-ethnic and multinational empire, lacking in the ethnic-racial barriers and radical differences between Russians and non-Russians, typical characteristics of other Western European empires[3]. While I will open a broader overview of the Tatar culture and literature of emigration in my PhD work, focusing on the twofold gaze to and from Russia, starting from a stereotype rooted for centuries, here I would like to focus on just one of the groups that are placed under the ethnonym Tatar, that of the Crimea and that of the emigration of this people towards the Ottoman Empire and Europe. The Crimean nature itself is perfectly functional to the discourse of the Russian multicultural universe, given both the geographical space in which it is located - peripheral to Russia and oriented towards the West - and for the ethnic and cultural melting pot of the people it hosts, created primarily by the numerous emigrations that took place between the end of the eighteenth Century and throughout the nineteenth Century[4].

2. Tatar ethnonym

The Tatar ethnonym has gone through a complex path of identity building: since the 12th Century - when Genghis Khan and his horde reached Europe and the Tatars were assimilated to these fighters: this term has been associated, especially in Germany[5], but also in Poland and Italy to the wild hordes, to the devils on horseback, to the barbarians and savages[6] and still today the stereotype, so firmly rooted, is difficult to eradicate, still causing a certain fear, fear of an exotic and unknown other. From that moment, the term Tatar did not for a long time refer to specific people, but was considered as a collective name to indicate the barbaric hordes coming from the East; moreover, the negative meaning of the ethnonym is not limited to the Christian-European context, but it is also extended in the Russian empire , where the term tjurko-tatary is used by orientalists to refer to all Turkish people, Muslims of Russia, speaking a language related to Turkish[7]. It was only with the flowering of national Tatarian movements at the end of the nineteenth Century that the ethnonym acquired a positive value, so to speak, and was accepted as a popular denomination[8]. Today, under the ethnonym Tatar, people belonging to different groups come together, although linked by common characteristics: the Volga Tatars, the Kazan Tatars - who live in the Republic of Tatarstan, in the Bashkiria and in the adjacent areas, of which they make part subgroups such as the Mišari and Teptars, the Tatars of Siberia and the Crimean Tatars, among which also the Dobrujan Tatars - who live in Romania, Moldavia and other Balkan countries - are included[9].

2.1 The Crimean Tatars

As anticipated, in this article I will mainly deal with the Crimean Tatars , who, in the investigations that have been conducted on the heterogeneous history of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, are surely among those ones who have attracted the most attention and curiosity of researchers especially in recent years. Research on the annexation of Crimea by the Catherine II’s Russian empire in 1783, the policies applied by the government towards ethnic minorities, Russia's role in conveying purely Russian ideas to non-Slavic groups, are functional to the vivid illustration of the Russian fresco. The Russian conquest met with strong resistance, which lasted from 1783 to 1864 and already in the 1980s, several thousand Tatars left Crimea[10], a process of voluntary emigration that will find continuity in the following Century. About 100,000 Tatars left the peninsula in the years following the Russian conquest, towards Anatolia, in the Balkans, especially in Dobruja[11]. At the same time Crimea saw a considerable allocation of Christian communities of Russian, Ukrainian, German, Bulgarian, Greek, Armenian and Italian origin, mainly from Puglia[12], emphasizing the multi-ethnic and multi-confessional nature of the Crimea, causing a profound change in the political, social, cultural and ethnological sphere[13]. Following the Crimean War in the mid-nineteenth Century, when the Russian empire made the so-called repopulation of the region, to allow the settlement of Russian and German colonies on the peninsula, that should have led to a development projected towards Europe of the Green Island[14], the emigration of the Tatars from the Crimea to the Ottoman Empire was favoured; the number of the Tatar emigrants was very high, like about five million people fleeing from Russia, even if this number is probably overestimated[15]. The much-desired Ottoman territory, was called by the Mirzas emigrated aqtopraq, which means white soil or soil of justice , since they defined their migration as an egira similar to that of the prophet to Muhammad during his flight to Medina[16], this parallel has to be read, I believe, in a highly symbolic key, since -as it is well known- the beginning of the Muslim era - 622 AD is traced back to the abandonment of Mecca by Mohammed[17] -, so the emigration of the Crimean Tatars, in particular of the cultural élite , would be taken as a point of fracture with the past - linked to the prejudice and to the ancillary relationship with Russia - and therefore as a starting point for a cultural awakening. In the history of the Crimean Tatar people, therefore, the pages concerning emigration constitute a painful chapter: the entry to a political, socially and culturally different space has caused a bewilderment in the Crimean Tatar people, the perception of uprooting from their roots and, consequently, the lack of rights compared to the ones of the new settlers brought by the Russian government from the other territories of the empire, as well as the almost total isolation from the centers of world Muslim culture. A black Century was the one lived by the Tatar-Crimean population during the war years that shook the green island and those subsequent thereto; a period that received a great deal of attention from the historiographical studies, from the diplomatic point of view, as well as from the military and economic one, which however largely ignored the causes and consequences of the emigration of the Crimean Tatars. A migration flow, so to speak, perpetual and continuous that began with the Russian annexation of Crimea to Russia (1783) and especially affected the people of the Nogai Tatars and those residing in the northern part of the neo-Tauride, recorded one of the highest peaks following the Crimean War, in the 60s of the nineteenth Century and it can be said that it continued with ups and downs until around 1917 - it is this last phase we will mostly deal with in this article, without neglecting the causes and the consequences of previous migratory waves. The subject was not thoroughly investigated until the end of the Soviet period and on which strong grey areas are lying still[18].

3. Considerations following the Crimean Tatar emigration in the 1860s

The fate of the Tatars emigrated from the Crimea was very diversified and yet, although it is possible to admit that what united most of them was the devastation and deplete caused by this uprooting, the problems of the emigration processes of this people and, in particular, their consequences remain almost completely unexplored to date. Beginning at the end of the 18th Century, with the advent of the new government, the phenomenon of repopulation of the Crimea is simultaneously important, a crucial event to understand and analyze this complex problem. The consequences of emigration include the transformation of the ethnic and cultural tissue of the Crimea, hence the changes in the socio-cultural development of the peninsula, the decline of agriculture due to labor shortages throughout the region, due to the impossibility of implementing a immediate resettlement of the Crimea with the same number of new settlers[19]. We read from E.L.Markov «After the Crimean War, in 1860-1863, according to official data, 192360 souls of both sexes, ie 2/3 of the total population, migrated in Turkey from Crimea» (E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, 2009, p.290)[20], while another source indicates the official number of the Tatars who emigrated from Crimea during those years with 18,177 people[21]; finally I. Gasprinskij reported the number of 200 thousand immigrants[22]; considering the large number of emigrants who came out of the country illegally and without passports, it is clearly complicated to provide the precise number of Tatar-Crimean emigrants at that precise historical moment. Some time after the emigration the peninsula was completely devastated, especially the central and northern regions. Vast expanses of fields remained uncultivated and, due to the low yields, clearly the prices of foodstuffs soared, in addition, due to the lack of labour, the abandoned lands were drastically devalued, as we read in Sergeev: «the value of she fell from 20 rubles to 6 and 3 rubles per desjatina» (A.A.Sergeev, Uchod Tavričeskich Nogajcev v Turciju v 1860 g., 1913, p.213)[23]. In September 1860 A.F.Revelioti, general of the Russian army and a large landowner of Crimea, presented a report to the Minister of the Interior, in which he expressed his concerns about the situation of Crimea:

«the whole part of the steppe of the peninsula already represents a desert: villages without inhabitants, unploughed fields and there is no doubt that with the arrival of next spring, the mountainous part, where the movement of the Tatars with respect to the steppe is still not very evident, will present itself in the same way as the desert [...]. Hardly the bloodiest war, the general famine or the pestilence could have devastated the region in so little time as the administration did by accelerating the transfer of the Tatars» (S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, 1893, pp. 542-543)[24]

and the adjutant of General Revelioti, E.I. Totleben, confirms: «the report reported above by the general represents the current state of the region fairly correctly and without exaggeration» (S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, PC, 1893, p.545)[25]. The emigration’s consequences, and therefore the ruin of the Crimean peninsula, do reflect themselves also in the pages of the local literature of the second half of XIX Century; in particular E.L. Markov writes: «Where there was a populous, desolate village, now there is a desolate land; these desolate lands, like the former villages, now fill entire counties. The high cost of labor and basic necessities, due to the departure of the Tatars, has grown to unsustainable proportions» (E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, 2009, p.111)[26], and again from the guide of Crimea of ​​M.A. Sosnogorova: «through the Crimean steppes, you can drive for dozens of kilometers away without encountering any dwelling, although the remains of the Tatar cemeteries in the form of scattered stone slabs protruding from the earth, indicate that once the area was densely inhabited by a population»(M.A.Sosnogorova, G.E.Karaulov, K.A.Verner, N.A.Golovkinskij, Putevoditel’ po Krymy, 2010, p. 74)[27]. In the literature that flourished during periods of emigration, individual or mass, voluntary or forced, the component of abandonment is very strong, since it is precisely in these contexts, in this detachment, that literature becomes the bearer of advice, which derives from a a lived and authentic life, it is a reference to the concreteness of the look[28]. Perfectly adhering to these concepts, are the words of B.Ronchetti:

«The reflections of the writers (emigrants – candidate’s addition ) while moving from different existential and political conditions, allude to a common inability to see the present, to a discomfort in distinguishing facts and things with limpid clarity when the object to be observed and understood is part of everyday life; this reduction of the visual field in front of our world transforms reality into a kaleidoscope (or a chaotic set of facts)» (B.Ronchetti, Sguardo multiforme e presente transazionale. Letteratura contemporanea e prospettive interculturali, ‘900 Transnazionale 1)[29]

in which the writer tries to recompose these fragments of life lived, making them available to the community, to share his personal experience in communion with those who live and move within his own geographical and temporal space. The population decreased not only in rural areas but also in the city - we report the example of Karasubazar «[...] revenue (economic) the city with from houses, shops etc. instead of the previous 4 or 7 thousand (rubles) it is estimated they fell the following year (1861) to only a hundred rubles» (N.Ščerban, Pereselenie krymskich tatar, Zabveniju ne podležit, 1992, p. 40)[30]. As a result of the emigration of peasants living in rural areas of the Crimea, city dwellers began to suffer from the lack of food: «there will be no one to supply the markets» (S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, 1893, p. 40)[31]. In order to stop the complete ruin of Crimean agriculture, the government had to take certain measures, including the suspension of passport issuance, but nevertheless the Tatar migration flow continued. The Russian government established a special commission to investigate the problems related to the emigration of the Tatars from Crimea, concluding that it was necessary: ​​«[...] to strengthen the coast guard and to have cruisers intercepting the escaping Tatars» ( G.P.Levickij, Pereselenie tatar iz Kryma v Turciju, 1882, p.618)[32]. The attitude of the Russian authorities towards the Tatar population of Crimea, was the subject of study «at the beginning, the Russian government saw only a positive effect in the migratory flows that began in the peninsula» (S.J.Kozlov, L.V.Čužova, Tjurskie narody Kryma: Karaimy. Krymskie tatary. Krymčaki, 2003, p. 250)[33]; we read in the meticulous work of A.Fisher «the encouragement of their exit [of the Tatars] was the result of a conscious government policy» (A.W.Fisher, The Crimean Tatars, 1978, p.106)[34]. Following the ban on leaving Crimea in early August 1860 in Simferopol’, the nobility of the Tauride governorate was urgently called to discuss the economic and political situation in the region: it was concluded that the Russian government wouldn’t have forced any emigration force no emigration; and yet the exhortations were useless[35]. The policy of colonizing the Crimean lands abandoned by the emigrants thus became an absolute priority for the local administration. After several at propaganda measures, peasants from various parts of the Russian Empire and settlers from abroad began to be resettled in Crimea, especially Germans: «the government has looked at the settlements in Crimea of ​​peasants and fleeing soldiers» (S.A.Usov, Naselenie Kryma za 150 let v svjazi s ekonomikoj kraja, 1928, p.69)[36]. The new Russian settlers, transplanted to Crimea, knew nothing about the peninsula's economy, as we read from the pages of Usov: «the Tatars, as workers of special cultures, were much more accustomed to these ones than to the cultures of the Russians» (S.A.Usov, Naselenie Kryma za 150 let v svjazi s ekonomikoj kraja, Krym, 1928, p.70)[37]or those of the deputy general E.I.Totleben, «replacing the Tatars, who have long been engaged in gardening and viticulture, it is impossible without causing the decline of this part of rural industries»[38] (S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, 1893, p.546). Clearly, due to the mass emigration of the Crimean Tatars and being constant, instead, the number of the new settlers, the cattle farms in the peninsula decreased significantly, as well as the ethnic and confessional composition of the whole region changed, the toponyms of the region were modified[39]. The steppe that stretches from the center to the North of Crimea became almost deserted, so it can be said that emigration mainly affected the population of rural areas; while consequent to this there was an increase of the population in urban areas[40]: approximately in 1850 the rural population of the Crimea reached 230 thousand people, in the years of the emigration, the number amounted to about 112-115 thousand inhabitants[41]. The mass emigration affected not only the economic and demographic sphere of the Tauride, but also, more personally, the fate of the emigrants themselves and their countrymen: the emigrant, in fact, belonging mainly to the world he left and only to a small extent to the new one, risks living in a perennial condition of dissatisfaction and unhappiness, being both emigrant and foreigner at the same time[42]; the emigrant redefines his personal identity based on his past experience and the one to which he is projecting, committing himself to assimilating new cultural codes[43] and interpreting the migration experience as a catastrophic change[44], characterized by the uprooting of emotionally significant places of memory and therefore by the loss of security and quiet, so that what is not familiar (Das Unheimliche[45]) transmits. We know that during the first waves of the Tatar migration flow from Crimea (at the end of the 18th Century), most of the emigrants from the peninsula were the Mirzas , the clergy, therefore the representatives of the intellectual quarrel of the Crimean Tatar people; a similar situation occurred during the emigration of the mid-nineteenth Century, as A.Fisher noted: «The Crimean War was the last straw for a large number of Tatars who could not adapt to the needs of the Russian service: after the war a large number of the remaining Tatar Crimean élite emigrated to the Ottoman Empire» (A.W.Fisher, The Crimean Tatars, 1978, p. 113)[46]. Having been robbed of the leading representatives of the Tatar culture, there has been talk of paralysis in popular art[47]; this situation lasted until the 1880s, that is before the so-called national awakening and awareness of the Tatar national identity. It is in this context that the spread of Jadidism is placed, from Usûl-i jadîd , or new method[48], promulgated strongly by the reform school of Ismail Gasprinskij and conveyed mainly by the magazine Perevodčik-Teržiman. Gasprinskij, was one of the most important Tatarian enlighteners and his main contribution to his own people was the creation and spread among the Crimean Tatars of a reformed school system, which significantly influenced educational plans in other Muslim countries over time; Gasprinskij formalized the creation of a literary Tatar language and this led, in conjunction with the spread of the Gazette Teržiman, the birth of a new Crimean Tatar intelligencija. Example of how the goal of awakening the national culture of a people has been strongly pursued not by a group of intellectuals but by one person, Gasprinskij - one of the founders of the Pan-Turkish ideal and author of works of great value, as Russkoe musul'manstvo (Russian Islam)[49] - it can be said it was the reflection of an urgency, of the necessity of the Crimean Tatars (and of all the Muslim peoples of Russia) to emerge and rise. Although the analysis of Gasprinskij's work is interesting, aimed at recovering the collective memory of his people, a necessary basis for building a future open to education and innovation, we will focus here exclusively on his editorial work. The Perevodčik-Teržiman gazette was published for over thirty years, from 1883 to 1914 and was read by Turkish intellectuals not only from Crimea, but from all parts of Asia and Europe[50], it was published weekly and, thanks to the skill and passion lavished by Gasprinskij and his collaborators, was certainly the most authoritative and influential publication of the Russian-Turkish press in Russia[51]. For this reason it is believed that Gasprinskij's editorial production on the problem of emigration of the Crimean Tatars is a very important piece to contribute to the reconstruction of the past of the Tatar people and, more generally, of the great multi-ethnic and multi-confessional Russian state.

4. Short description of the gazete “Perevodčik-Teržiman” and its objective

From the first issue of Perevodčik-Teržiman of 10 April 1883 we read:

«The “Translator” (Perevodčik-Teržiman) will serve to provide sober and useful information about the life of the Muslim cultural environment and will return to let the Russians know their life, their attitudes and their needs. Aware of the importance and difficulties of the tasks undertaken, the editors come to strength with the hope that many respectable people in society will be well informed and will not refuse the understanding and help of their work. [...] Starting the business in the name of Allah, we take the pen to serve truth and enlightenment» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, № 1, 10 apr.1883)[52].

The Journal Perevodčik-Teržiman assumed, and still assumes, an encyclopedic value, rich in information on the socio-cultural life of the Crimean Tatars between the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries, and the religious component is clear from these first lines properly Tatar - to highlight immediately the importance of the Muslim confession for the Tatar people, who do not want to abandon it in the name of a national and political Russian unity - is the strong enlightenment and, therefore, reformist imprint of Gasprinskij. Perevodčik-Teržiman therefore dealt with political, economic and cultural issues of the Muslim population in Russia and neighboring countries. The objective of Gasprinskij 's magazine was therefore to educate the people and, specifically, a new generation of Tatars open to collaborations with Russia and with Europe; main features were the clarity of the exposures, the accuracy and reliability of the sources[53]. In his numerous articles, Gasprinskij analyzed the political strategies of Russia towards the Tatars, and more generally, Muslims of the empire, especially with regard to the educational aspect, not underestimating the journal's chronical nature, aimed at informing readers of events in their country and around the world[54]. The pressure of the authorities and the strong censorship activity have accompanied the birth and the evolution of this singular typographic work; referring to the early years of the publication of Teržiman , Gasprinskij wrote: «in my thoughts I was so attentive that it was not possible to find fault with even one word. My every word corresponded to the provisions of not one but five laws» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Maktubati chufja, № 108, 1905)[55]; however, despite Gasprinskij's continued efforts to exalt Russian domination on the Tatar people and local ethnic groups belonging to the diverse imperial constellation, many representatives of the Russian ruling class were hostile to Teržiman and his publisher[56].

4.1 The journalistic activity’s fervor on the subject of Tatar emigration: some articles from Perevodčik-Teržiman[57]

In the articles on emigration published in the Gazette Perevodčik-Teržiman, Gasprinskij considers the journey to a new land as an experience that will not allow to find anything other than the condition left, it will not lead anywhere, since the emigrants Tatars did not carry out a conscious emigration (such as was the case for Europeans towards America); it will be a journey without success, in which the present can only be nostalgia and a wounded memory. We can perceive from the pages of Teržiman on emigration, a critical reflection on the limits of emigration and on the illusion of the hope of finding other places, making the traumatic nature of identity emerge from the conflict of emotions and from the problematic political and cultural situation of the Tatar people, a dialectical identity, characterized by the absence of roots and the logic of oppression, by the clash between the rulers and the losers, and which is tragically expressed in the struggle between memory and the awareness of a tragic present. With a language understandable by the masses, Gasprinskij expresses concepts formalized only several decades later regarding the condition of the emigrant and which, unfortunately, still constitute an important point of reflection. In fact, Ismail Gasprinskij knew well the causes and consequences of the emigration of his people and being deeply concerned about the issue, he dedicated to it a fair amount of articles, published on the pages of Teržiman[58]. The first article about the emigration of the Tatars of Russia was published in 1886 and dealt with the mass emigration of peasants from the Caucasus mountains to Turkey[59]; in the same year Gasprinskij, referring to the steppe regions of the Tauride province, wrote that «now in the steppes there are more tombstones than people» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, O byvščem stepom naselenii, № 27, 18 apr.1886)[60], bringing up the problem of devastation in the northern part of Crimea, caused, according to the publisher, not by emigration, but by ignorance and the lasciviousness of the population. In the following two years, articles of a purely informative nature are traced: a first one, dated 1887, in which Gasprinskij warned the Tatar emigrants, directed towards the Ottoman Empire, that the Turkish government had blocked circulation and import of currency foreign in the country, consequently the emigrants would have had to provide for the supply of gold and Turkish money before departure[61]. The following year Gasprinskij informed the population that if at first the Turkish empire granted a grace from the military point of view to the Russian Muslim emigrants, the military ministry ordered instead to involve them in battle on a par at par with the local Muslims[62]. In December 1901 Gasprinskij published his first article on the movement of emigration of the Tatars from the Crimea, entitled Počemu uchodjat tatary?, in which he expressed considerations and reactions to articles published especially in the Крымский вестник[63], regarding the theme of emigration:

«Some of our esteemed colleagues see the impetus and the cause of the emigration movement in economic insecurity, and some in the circumstances of a moral and religious order. Which of these opinions is closer to the truth? Let the following facts answer to this question. They say: "The Crimea has seen more than one emigration of the Tartars. The first happened after the conquest of the country, when the Nogai and Budjaki went away from the peninsula. The second great migration dates back to the 60s of XIX Century”. At that time, around 200 remained thousand inhabitants and almost all from the Crimean steppes, where the Tatars did not have and have neither their own land nor an angle. Now the emigration movement has started again in the steppe of the district of Yevpatoria, and again [it spreads] among the homeless, deprived of power of the proletarian village. It is obvious that emigration is nourished by disadvantages, by privations, by insecurities [...]. If during the conquest [...] of Crimea, care was taken to supply the land to the workers-inhabitants of the Crimean villages, as the possessions were provided to the Mirzas and the Mullahs , there would have been no obvious emigration» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Počemu uchodjat tatary?, 15 dek., 1901)[64].

For the emigrants, who, as we read in Gasprinskij, abandoned their land above all because they did not recognize any rights, the struggle for the conquest of freedom and the prosperity of the homeland constituted the highest form of sacrifice; the patriotism that reigns in the emigration literature, however, stumbles into a wall of despair, exalting feelings of pride for the past merged with a sense of transience and an awareness of the end, which forces us to run farther and farther, leaving behind not only the material things, but all the baggage of traditions, language, faith and the memory of ancestors. In the 1902 article Ob emigracii , Gasprinskij turned to those who intended to emigrate, publishing, upon request by the Consulate General of Sevastopol and the Governor of Tauride, a report in which it was read that before embarking on the journey, the Tatars would have needed a special immigration permit from the Turkish government, providing the list of members of the family close to emigration; Gasprinskij observed that this order «It should upset many Muslims and alleviate Turkey from many problems» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ob emigracii, № 17, 7 maja., 1902)[65] from same article we read:

«Now in one, now in another village, the Tartars sell their lands and their livestock, which means they will move to Turkey. If this is serious, it is necessary to regret these people who do not know what they are doing: you must have good reasons to leave your country. Any unreasonable movement leads to impoverishment, destruction and death. We see no reasons that can justify the abandonment of the Crimea, we see nothing that can attract people to Turkey, where tens of thousands of people go here and in the Black Sea coast to work» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ob emigracii, № 17, 7 maja., 1902)[66].

Gasprinskij repeatedly reiterated the belief that those who embarked on the path of emigration, in most cases had no idea what they were going to meet, as trying to address the objective difficulties in their native country, migrants could not radically change their destiny; instead they could, for Gasprinskij, be able to preserve and defend national spirit and identity. Every new obstacle unites people in the struggle to defend their national identity, as we read in Edward Said, since the protective mechanisms of the emigrants allow, better than in any other condition, to strengthen national self-awareness[67]. The collective historical memory of emigration is formed through the bitterness of this condition, the struggle to reach a new condition of happiness in another space combined with the continuous and intimate desire to come back home, the latter condition, in the idea of Gasprinskij, inevitable. Also, before embarking on the journey to the Ottoman Empire:

«The Turkish government accepts as migrants only those who, having received permission from their government, have a resettlement passport, that is, the withdrawal of Russian citizenship. And those naive who, taking a passport for business or for family visits, thinking of settling down in Turkey as immigrants, profoundly mistaken [...] having spent their money, they will have to live in poverty and to live in poverty here if, as often happens, they return to Crimea» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ob emigracii, № 17, 7 maja, 1902)[68].

Finally Gasprinskij urged «to think forty times, before selling and undertaking unknown journeys with children and the elderly» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ob emigracii, № 17, 7 maja, 1902)[69]. This topic was treated also on the number of 15thMay 1902, in a Note from the title Ešče po povodu emigracii , in which Gasprinskij wrote:

«we hope that the prudence of the population and the paternal care of the authorities will calm the emigration movement among the Crimean Tatars. God forbid this movement to develop , and that emigration to expand on a large scale, since the consequences will not be happy, neither for those who leave, nor for the region» (Teržiman-Perevodčik, Ešče po povodu emigracii, 15 maja, 1902)[70].

The use of expressions such as the paternal care of the authorities is striking, as if there was the will to reveal to the Tatars who intend to emigrate, the ancestral relationship between them and the mother-country Russia, which intends to protect, as if they were children, in a single immense domestic space: the close connection between a parent, often a mother, and the homeland symbolizes the spirit of unity and attachment of many cultures, not only Russian. During the French revolution, for example, the image of La Patrie, as a woman giving birth to a child was very popular, as in Cyprus the image of the woman who cries, expressing her pain, became a symbol of unity of Cypriots against Turkish invaders[71]. The first memories, the first associations and the first knowledge of culture passes through the mother, that is why the image of the motherland is fundamental to the construction of the national self. The theme of motherhood makes it possible to transform, in literature, the image of the biological mother into the abstract mother-country, which plays a fundamental role in the formation of the pre-Oedipal personality[72]. The article Ešče po povodu emigracii , continues with words of undisguised bitterness towards Tatar previous wave of migration to Turkey, in the 60s, which did not lead to the desired results, that is the repopulation of the peninsula thanks to the Slavic blood, but to the increase of the German population, growing and practically unstoppable:

«The emigrants of the 1860s from Crimea to Turkey settled in the Dobruja and on the borders of modern Bulgaria. The emigrants had barely time to settle down and settle in new places, when the Russian-Turkish war of 1877 broke out and this time they began to leave the country for Antalya. For the region as a suburb of the Turkish state, the emigration of the Tatars did not lead to any benefit. Often the press of that period found consolation in the fact that Crimea was inhabited by [people] of Russian blood, but this did not happen. Now, forty years after the great emigration of the Tatars, the great Russian land ownership decreased significantly, the peasant one increased slightly, but the Germans increased by 20 times and became so strong as to grow in a completely natural way» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ešče po povodu emigracii, 15 maja, 1902)[73].

Gasprinskij concluded, reiterating again, that: «the prudence of the population itself and the paternal care of the authorities could save Crimea from a new economic and ethnographic transformation. God grant that it is so» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ešče po povodu emigracii, 15 maja, 1902)[74]. Again, only a figurative extension of the Pater Patriae, Russia, could have saved the peninsula from an economic and cultural crisis with its care. In his article Neobchodimij sovet, Gasprinskij brought the example of other resettlement and migration flows, such as those of Europeans to America and stated that: «they move knowingly and skillfully, they have enough information about the country they are going to. This cannot be said about our Tartars. They don't know where they will be housed, how they will be accommodated and what they will do there» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Neobchodimij sovet, № 20, 31 maja, 1903)[75]. Gasprinskji in his articles, particularly in Neobchodimij sovet, repeatedly urged his compatriots to gather information on the new land, on the life and rules of the community, on working conditions, on the land to - eventually - cultivate, on the climate etc. In fact, in the context of the Ottoman Empire, unprepared for reception, the Tatar immigrant will find a hostile environment, because in addition to the classic phobia of the different, a more complex feeling is built, the union of fear and recognition - the other threatens our cultural integrity, yet without confrontation with the different from us, we cannot affirm and define our identity. The dialectical nature of the phenomenon of emigration gives identity a mobile character, capable of understanding in itself the otherness and of recognizing in the other itself; Georg Simmel describes the character of the foreigner referring to the concept of ambivalence of the condition of emigrant, as a social figure[76], which enacts the dynamics of the relationship between the self and the other that provide for the change of the context within which the relationship takes place[77]. This cultural duplicity allows us to look to the future without forgetting the past[78]: the emigrant does not choose to identify himself in another cultural model at the expense of the native one but accepts and partly refuses both, in an attempt to relativize the differences, mediating and trying to eradicate the prejudice[79]. In addition, the publisher recalled that those who had renounced to Russian citizenship in favor of the Ottoman citizenship would not have had the right to return to Crimea one day; in case if the emigrant had not intended to renounce Russian citizenship, to obtain the Turkish one he would have had to reside in the Ottoman territory for more than five years:

«before selling their property and land, thinking of emigrating, they should get permission from the Interior Minister to lose Russian citizenship. And only after receiving such a permit they will be able to get a passport [...] under the laws of Turkey, [the government] does not grant citizenship to anyone unless it is not the be revoked citizenship from his government» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Neobchodimij sovet, № 20, 31 maja, 1903)[80].

To paraphrase the excerpts of Gaprinskij's articles read so far, we can deduce that his concerns about mass emigration of this kind have been due to the idea that the sudden arrival of a foreigner, within a community already solidly integrated, could create a model of interaction, a new territory, an hybrid, in which both newcomers and natives play a role: immigrants, strangers to the cultural space in which they want to enter and therefore into a situation of marginality, they will tend to behave (at least at an early stage) inadequately and not in accordance with the rules, reinforcing the prejudice of the stabilized group, which by instinct will try to defend its status from the external threat. At the end of the article, he wrote: «we are asking to our readers to spread our advice to those who did not have read it. We ask the clergy to instruct the congregation with our advice. We must try not to let people go blindly into ruin» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Neobchodimij sovet, № 20, 31 maja, 1903)[81]. The discourse is far more complex than it was expressed by the Tatar enlightenment: today as yesterday, the will or the need to emigrate opens the doors, rather than a ruin as Gasprinskij says, to a variety of positive opportunities that allows the emigrated to access resources and conditions unthinkable in the country of origin; the condition of emigrant, this duality by which it is characterized, can unite what appears instead irreconcilable, can allow to respond to opposite socio-cultural expectations, to relativize[82], to harmonize the differences in view of a productive intercultural cohabitation not only from the social, but also political and economic point of view. On the 31st of January 1903, Gasprinskij again exposed himself to the problem of the Tatar emigration from Crimea; in his speech he identified another serious reason for emigration: the first was the continuation of the resolution of the waqf problem[83], inextricably linked with religious institutions and Muslims’s educational institute. Gasprinskij proposed to the assembly to exercise their legal right to appeal to the Emperor and the Council, after having thoroughly discussed the matter, following a lively debate, unanimously approved the following resolution: «on the nobility’s petition of the Tauride’s province, so that the command of the Highest be urged to accelerate the resolution of the waqf case, according to the Sharia and the modern needs of the population» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Dvorjanskie vybori, 31 janv., 1903)[84]. In March 1903, Gasprinskij informed that those who intended to move to Turkey should declare it to the Turkish consulate and only after receiving an admission notification they could turn to the Ottoman coasts, otherwise the Turkish government would not have hired any responsibility for the living conditions of the Crimean Tatar emigrants. On the same issue, in Pis'mo emigranta, the story of Maksumaij Chalima was published, a man who left Bachčisaraj and who sent a letter to the editorial office of the newspaper, not presenting the petition to the Turkish consulate to proceed with resettlement. Chalima complained that none of the emigrants were left in Constantinople, but all were taken to the easternmost part of the empire, in which it was almost impossible to stabilize due to the precarious conditions in which they were abandoned, unable to request land or work because they did not recive a reception’s certificate: «a cold question is asked: did you get kicked out of Russia and did someone call you here?» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Pis’mo emigranta, № 10, 14 marta, 1903)[85]. The immigrant's feeling of abandonment in the new country is evident both in the pages of Teržiman and, one can say, in most of the literary works that flourished in periods of migration, especially as it is in this particular social phenomenon that a double transformation occurs in the identity perception of the self and the other: the relationship between migration and identity is based on the complex combination of a range of facets: the representation of cultural identity, the relationship between the homeland of origin and the land of adoption, the importance of a stereotype rooted over the centuries as a founding tool in the formulation of the self, the will to open an intercultural dialogue[86], not without difficulties. All these elements are just some of the variables that combine, intersect, in the flow of time and history, which make each civilization the product of a continuous multicultural and multi-ethnic exchange. Emigration ignites the discussion around a series of considerations that have to do with a duplicity, the presence of two opposite and interconnected existences and in equal measure necessary for the social action of man[87]. We know from the article Glasnyj gubernskogo zemskogo sobranija, from 1903, that, in order to investigate the conditions of the Crimean Tatars emigrated to Turkey, a member of the district assembly of the province of Tauride V.V.Keller made a trip to the Ottoman lands, thanks to a coverage’s letter of the Governor of the Tauride to the Russian ambassador in Constantinople[88]. In August 1903 Gasprinskij reported with joy that the migration wave of the Crimean Tatars to Turkey had stopped; in the article My s radost'ju otmečaem (1903) were commented the letters of the emigrants from Turkey to relatives in Russia and the stories of those who returned to the Crimea after a short stay in the Ottoman Empire[89]. But in the Autumn of the same year on Teržiman it was announced that, according to the order of the Governor of Tauride, the police would expel all the Crimean Tatar emigrants who had lost Turkish citizenship and would return to the Crimea[90]. In October 1903 another article by Gasprinskij was published, entitled K emigracii tatar , in which he wrote:

«Now life itself, already the first, but let's hope, even last time, loudly protests against this social disease. Listen to you, kind people, the voice of life, look at the facts. Nobody has called you in Turkey nor is calling you now: are Turkish the beggars that roam our villages year after year, thousands of Turks who live among us and, without words, nevertheless eloquently, tell us where there are work, money and a better life. Of those who have abandoned [the homeland] in the past, many have already returned, an even greater number are preparing to return, if they find the means. But alas, a large part of those who have emigrated are dying there, in a foreign land, injuring their families with malaria, on which many warning letters were received in the Crimea. But still dozens of working-families rise from their posts and face a certain death. There are all the evidences that those who are leaving will be the last victims of the emigration disease» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Kemigracii tatar, 20 okt., 1903)[91].

Clearly Gasprinskij's convictions about emigration, the emigracionnaja bolezn’ (emigration disease) mentioned by him, are to be considered in a political context of oppression and in a particular geographical space, stretching towards the Mediterranean sea but linked to Eastern Europe and in a historical moment, where the will to make their own voice emerge, the voice of the Tatar people, becomes a necessity, an urgency impossible to repress and for Gasprinskij, the only viable way to achieve the goal, was to remain in Russia and to assert itself culturally and politically under the aegis of the Russian empire, collaborating with it and not emigrating to an unknown elsewhere, in which you can live only like an alien, impoverished materially and from a cultural point of view. In the Winter of 1902 an article was published, as we have just mentioned, on the consequences of the Tatar emigration to Turkey, which would have brought nothing but ruin and death and then, in an article of 1903, titled Nesčast'e, one of the effects of that strong migratory wave was reported, concerning the kicked out Tatars, who tried to return home: «only one in a hundred can return to his native Crimea» (Perevodčik-Teržiman, Nesčast’e, № 51, 29 dek., 1903)[92]. In fact, on their return home, these re-emigrants had to face the obstacle of the ban on returning to Crimea. This is why Gasprinskij in the article appealed to the mercy of the Russian government. In 1904 Teržiman announced the apparent end of the Crimean Tatar migration movement. Once again Gasprinskij expressed its hope that the Russian government would grant permission to the re-emigrants to obtain Russian citizenship again, and that this grace was granted to all emigrants[93]. The Crimean Tatar emigration pages take on a tragic tone, especially for the fate that it touched to a large number of people who died at sea in an attempt to reach the coasts of the Ottoman Empire; we read from V.C.Kondaraki that only two-thirds of the emigrants reached Turkey unharmed: «a third of them, that is 60 thousand people, died in the Black Sea, due to pitching, hunger and shipwrecks. Every day the sea brought the bodies of migrants to the shore» (A.A.Sergeev, Uchod Tavričeskich Nogajcev v Turciju v 1860 g., 1913, p. 205)[94]. «Crimea died with the abandonment of the Tatars» (E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, 2009, p. 111)[95], we read from Markov , and this death has manifested itself in the significant changes that have influenced and modified the structure of the entire region. Precisely for this reason we can assert that the different migratory flows that affected the Crimean peninsula were the main cause of the demographic, economic, ethnic, cultural and confessional decline of the Tauride and, in parallel, the repopulation of the Crimea, wanted by Russian government, negatively affected the social and cultural standard of living of the Tatars left behind. Gasprinskij and his intense journalistic activity, become precious witnesses of the de-territorialization that took place between the middle of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth Century, leaving behind a precious mosaic of information on this phenomenon; that is why even today, Gasprinskij's work establishes itself as one of the most relevant in the research on the problem of the Crimean Tatar emigration. Gasprinskij tried to inform his people about the difficulties of life as an immigrant, he felt the terrible consequences of forced migration, not sufficiently studied; nevertheless it occurred and the damages were considerable, at least from the ethno-cultural point of view. Gasprinskij always considered himself son of the Crimean Tatars, he knew the problems, the many facets and all the activities he promulgated , were constantly devoted to improving the educational and cultural level of the Tatars, consolidating the moral and material well-being of his people. Although contradictory and full of complications, the relationship between the natives and migrants is declined in terms of mutual dependence: the formers define their own identity and their social role, because there are the latter and viceversa, what they have in common and what they share, are their differences; each is what the other is not[96]. Exclusion and inclusion, as well as rejection and acceptance or fear and recognition, are all asymmetricrelationships that characterize the relationship between insiders and outsiders with exclusivity[97]. The objective and subjective precariousness of the emigrant’s condition, never entirely within the new community but not even excluded by it, decrees its strength and its weakness[98], because the look of the other, of the immigrant, allows the natives to ask themselves and, therefore, imposes a change, as if it represented the personification of the critical conscience of the people. The identity mechanism, within the migration phenomenon, becomes a strategy to maintain the values ​​of one's own country and identify oneself with those of the new community, giving life to a bipolar, hybrid identity[99]. It is in the emigration literature that the migrant tries to reinvent his own cultural tradition, leading it to a different place, with other rules, other codes, rewriting his own historical memory thanks to a new writing method. The bitter awareness of forced migration from the motherland, nourished, as Gasprinskij said, by deprivation, indifference on the part of the institutions and insecurity, combined with separation from family and affections became the central topics in the works of the Tatarian writers[100], as was the theme of patriotism in the context of the exodus from the Crimea, enriched by the desire to escape from the existing reality to return to a more natural state, to a domestic space. Studying the theme of patriotism through the prism of migration, in the Tatar-Crimean emigration reading is not a unique phenomenon, but is part of a wider tradition of writers, politicians, religious who, for different reasons, were forced to leave their own land. In the first half of the 20th Century, marked by wars, political and ethnic persecutions, terror, genocide, revolutions and the advent of totalitarian regimes, a Century of confused redefinition of borders, in which mass migration represented a daily phenomenon, the theme of patriotism in the context of migration returns cyclically in literature and art[101]. During the First World War, in which Romania tooks an active part, patriotism set fire to the hearts of all participating states and it is following this line that one must approach the Crimean-Tatar literature in Romania, Turkey and Europe, considering it as an integral part of a global literary process dependent on many global factors. Unlike many emigration writers, exiles who lived in solitude, from Ovid to Nabokov, the Crimean Tatar writers lived the diaspora of their own people not so much as a personal tragedy, but collective and the shared, and this concept is subtly transmitted in the works of the Tatarian writers. And yet what unites the Ovid’s Tristia with the works of the Tatar emigrants, is the feeling of extraneousness with respect to a strange space, other, that one breathes by reading their pages, the uncertain outcome of an exile without return, a human drama of long unhappiness and, above all, the need, the urgency to literally transpose one's personal experience, to talk about oneself to share the sufferings of the individual experience with the community, in an attempt to place the personal fragile, fragmentary and disconnected dimension in strange space[102]. It is the bitterness for the loss of the homeland that forces literature to seek deep motivations and in an attempt to preserve the unity of the community, the artists reconstruct the historical memory in their literary works, often referring to the glorious past by opposing it to the deplorable present, while others actively invite their compatriots to fight for their right to return home. The imposition of the national paradigm on the individual experiences of writers, has provided, over the centuries - from Ovid to contemporary writers - to the phenomenon of emigration literature a strong sense both artistic and thematic. Going in search of one's roots is one of the fundamental objectives of narrative in general and adapting to the extraneous situation, the difficulty of being able to integrate and preserving one's belonging to the space and culture of the country of origin, leave a profound emotional imprint on almost every literary work of the Tatar emigrants: according to Georgy Gachev, one of the founders of contemporary cultural studies, every person is worried about his own identity: where do I come from? Do I belong to a group or am I a child of a mixture of peoples? But above all, who am I?[103]. This is the first and most important question resulting from a movement of cultural and social awakening. For this reason the emigrant Tatar writer proposes a threefold task: to know himself, learn about the world and make himself known, an objective that becomes, as repeatedly stated in the article, an urgency, a necessity, due to the failure of a series of economic, socio-political and religious issues that led to the wave of Tatar’s migrations from Crimea, to seek a better life, free from government pressure, and which led, consequently, to a substantial aggravation of the identity issue, which through the literature has tried to tackle.

Bibliography

A.A.Sergeev, Uchod Tavričeskich Nogajcev v Turciju v 1860 g., ITUAK, 1913.

A.Calabrò, Di che parliamo quando parliamo d’identità?, in Quaderni di sociologia, Straniero a chi? I figli di immigrati in Italia, Rosenberg&Selier, Open Edition Journal, pp. 85-114, URL https://journals.openedition.org/qds/422.

A.Dal Lago, Non-persone. L’esclusione dei migranti in una società globale, Milano, Feltrinelli, 2004.

A.Ferrari, E.Pupulin (edited by), La Crimea tra Russia e Impero ottomano, coll. Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale, Edizioni Ca’Foscari, Digital Publishing, 2017.

A.Ferrari, Quando il Caucaso incontrò la Russia. Cinque storie esemplari, Guerini e Associati, Milano, 2015.

A.Kappeler, Rußland als Vielvölkerreich: Entstehung – Geschichte – Zerfall. Beck, München, 1993.

A.W.Fisher, The Crimean Tatars, Hoover Institution Press, Stanford, 1978, p. 113. B.G.Williams, The Crimean Tatars: The Diaspora Experience and the Forging of a Nation, Brill's Inner Asian Library 2, Brill, Boston, 2001.

B.Ronchetti, Sguardo multiforme e presente transazionale. Letteratura contemporanea e prospettive interculturali, ‘900 Transnazionale 1, 1 (Marzo 2017), ISSN: 2532-1994, open access: URLhttps://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:LjhrmAHgtA0J:https://ojs.uniroma1.it/index.php/900Transnazionale/article/download/13811/13578+&cd=1&hl=it&ct=clnk&gl=it&client=safari.

D.I.Abibullaeva, Problema emigracii krymskich tatar na stranicach gazety “Teržiman”, Resupublikanskoe vysšee učebnoe zavedenie, “Krymskij inženerno-pedagogičeskij universitet”, Učenye zapiski Tavričeskogo nacional’nogo universiteta im.V.I.Vernadskogo- Serija “Istoričeskie nauki”, tom. 23, n.1: Specvypusk “Istorija Ukrainy”, 2010.

E.J.Lazzerini, Ismail Bey Gasprinskii and Muslim modernism in Russia, 1878-1914, Unpublished Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1973.

E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, Stilos, 2009.

E.Lazzerini, Crimean Tatar: The Fate of a Severed Language, Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Soviet National Languages, Mouton De Gruyter, Berlin, 1985.

E.Said, Reflections on Exile and Other Essays, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2003.

Enciclopedia treccani online, URLhttp://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/egira/.

F.Kafka Eine Kreuzung, in Beim Bau der Chinesischen Mauer, Berlin, 1931.

F.Remotti, L’ossessione identitaria, coll. Anticorpi, Laterza, Bari, 2010.

G.Cimbalo, Il ritorno del waqf , in Stato, Chiese e pluralismo confessionale, Rivista telematica (www.statoechiese.it) n. 14 del 2016, 18 aprile 2015 ISSN 1971- 8543.

G.P.Levickij, Pereselenie tatar iz Kryma v Turciju, Vestnik Evropy, N.10, 1882.

G.Simmel, Soziologie. Untersuchungen über die Formen der Vergesellschaftung, Dunker & Humblot, Berlin, 1908.

H.Jankowski, Karaim and Krymchak, Handbook of Jewish Languages, Brill’s Handbook in Linguistics 2, Brill, Boston, 2016.

H.R.Gomez, Migrazioni italiane in Crimea e Nuova Russia: tracce, fonti, contesti, in A.Ferrari, E.Pupulin (edited by), La Crimea tra Russia e Impero ottomano, coll. Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale, Edizioni Ca’Foscari, Digital Publishing, 2017.

I.Gasprinskij, O nacional’noj idee, Stilos, Poluostrov, Simferopol’, 2009.

I.Gasprinskij, Russkoe musul’manstvo. Mysli, zametki i nabljudenija, INTERLOS – Intellektual’naja Rossija: elektr. žur. 2017, URL: http://intelros.ru/index.php?newsid=200 (Дата обращения: 03.04.17).

I.Levi, Un'analisi del dissenso tra Freud e Jung. La genealogia di un turbamento, Dialegesthai. Rivista telematica di filosofia [online], anno 4 (2002) [insert on the 16th of July 2002], available on World Wide Web: <https://mondodomani.org/dialegesthai/>, [115 KB], ISSN 1128-5478.

I.Z.Zaidovna, Katalog izdanij Ismaila Gasprinskogo v fondach Respublikanskoj krymskotatarskoj biblioteki, Vedušij bibliograf GBUK RK “Krymskotatarskaja biblioteka im.I.Gasprinskogo, open access URL http://krarkh.cfuv.ru/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/001islyamova.pdf.

VV.AA., Istorija tatar s drevnejšich vremen v semi tomach, MPGU, ISBN 978-5-4263-0620-2, Moskva, 2002.

J.Lebedynsky, La Crimée, des Taures aux Tatars, L’Harmattan, Paris, 2014.

J.Potin, V.Zuber, Dizionario dell’Islam, K.Azmoudeh (edited by), Translation by R.Fabbri, coll.Fondamenta, EAN 9788810432129.

K.O’Neill, Constructing Russian Identity in the Imperial Borderland: Architecture, Islam, and the Transformation of the Crimean Landscape, Ab Imperio, 2, 2006.

Krymskij Vestnik, journal edited in Sevastopol’ dal 1888 al 1918, Russkaja periodičeskaja pečat’, edited form 1702 to 1894, URL http://feb-web.ru/feb/periodic/pp0-abc/pp1/pp1-6821.htm.

L.Grinberg, R.Grinberg, Psicoanalisi dell’immigrazione e dell’esilio, Franco Angeli, Milano, 1990.

L.McDowell, J.Sharp (edited by), Space, Gender, Knowledge: Feminist Readings, Routledge Taylor&Francis Group, New York, 1997.

M.A.Sosnogorova, G.E.Karaulov, K.A.Verner, N.A.Golovkinskij, Putevoditel’ po Krymy, Stilos, 2010.

M.A.Usmanov, O triumfe i tragedii idei Gasprinskogo, in Ismail Bei Gasprinskij – Rossija i Vostok, Tatarskoe knižnoe izdatel’stvo, Kazan, 1993.

M.Combi, Cultures and technology. An analysis of some of the changes in progress: digital, global and local culture, in K.J. Borowiecki, N. Forbes, A.Fresa (eds.), Cultural Heritage in a Changing World, Springer International, Berlin, 2016.

M.Epstein, The Origins and Meanings of Russian Postmodernism, in Re-entering the Sign: Articulating New Russian Culture, E.E.Berry, A.M.Pogar (eds), University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1995.

M.Hotopp-Riecke, S.Theilig, Fremde, Nähe, Heimat, 200 Jahre Napoleon Kriege:Deutsch-Tatarische Interkulturkontakte, Konflikte und Translationen, Berlin, 2014.

M.Kozelsky, Christianizing Crimea. Shaping Sacred Space in the Russian Empire and Beyond, Northern Illinois University Press, DeKalb, 2009.

M.Talamoni, Di nessun luogo: la figura del migrante tra identità e transculturalità, in A.Passerini, M.Talamoni (edited by), Migranti: transculturalità ed esperienza immaginativa, Alpe, Roma, 2012.

M.Weber, Wissenschaft als Beruf, in Schriften 1894 – 1922, edited by Dirk Kaesler, Kröner (Kröners Taschenbuchausgabe; Band 233) r, Stuttgart, 2002 ISBN 3-520-23301-0.

N. Elias N., J.H. Scotson (1965), The established and the outsiders, London: Frank Cass & Co, Het Spectrum, Utrecht and Antwerp, 1977.

N.Ščerban, Pereselenie krymskich tatar, Zabveniju ne podležit, Tatarskoe kn.izd., Kazan, 1992.

R.Chakimov, Kto takie bulgary?, Suvary.rf, URL http://сувары.рф/ru/content/rafael-hakimov-kto-takie-bulgary.

R.D.Aliev, Problema migracij krymskich tatar v publicistike I.Gasprinskogo, in RGNF Naučnogo proekta N.15-31-10145: Migracionnye processy krymskotatarskogo naselenija Rossijskoj imperii vo 2-j polovine XIX – načale XX vv.

R.I.Chajali, Krymskie tatary v etničeskom sostave naselenija Kryma v konce XIX – načale XX v., Kul’tura narodov Pričernomor’ja, N.66, 2005.

R.M.Amirchanov, Očerki istorii tatarskoj obščestvennoj mysli, Tatarkoe knižnoe izd-vo, Kazan, 2000.

R.S.Chakimov (redactor), M.M.Gibatdinov (project’s coordinator), M.M.Gibatdinov, S.Theilig, M.Hotopp-Riecke (edited by), Tatars Materials in German Archives/ германия архивларында татар чыганаклары, Sh.Marjani Institute of History of the Tatarstan Academy of Sciences Institute for Caucasica-, Tatarica- and Turkestan Studies Series «Yazma Miras. Pis'mennoe Nasledie. Textual Heritage», Kazan 2016.

S.A.Usov, Naselenie Kryma za 150 let v svjazi s ekonomikoj kraja, Krym, 1928.

S.Cwiklinski, Die Wolga an der Spree: Tataren und Baschkiren in Berlin, Miteinander leben in Berlin, Ausländerbeauftragte des Senats, Berlin, 2000.

S.Freud, Das Unheimliche, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, ISBN-10: 154058528X, 2016.

S.J.Kozlov, L.V.Čužova, Tjurskie narody Kryma: Karaimy. Krymskie tatary. Krymčaki, Nauka, Moskva, 20903.

S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, PC, 1893.

S.Tabboni S., Vicinanza e lontananza. Figure dello straniero nella teoria sociologica, Angeli, Milano, 1986.

U.Bodaninskij, Archeologičeskoe i etnografičeskoe izučenie tatar v Krymy, Simferopol’, 1930.

V.Strada, La questione russa. Identità e destino, Marsilio Editori, Venezia, 1991.

Z.Abdirašidov, I.Gasprinskij i stanovlenie gazety Teržiman, in Id. Gasyrlar Avazy, Echo vekov, Naučno-dokumental’nyj žurnal, n.3/4, 2015, (80/81), ISSN 2073-7475.


[1] A. Kappeler, A.Kappeler, Rußland als Vielvölkerreich: Entstehung – Geschichte – Zerfall. Beck, München, 1993.

[2] A.Ferrari, E.Pupulin (edited by), La Crimea tra Russia e Impero ottomano, coll. Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale, Edizioni Ca’Foscari, Digital Publishing, 2017, p 10.

[3] V.Strada, La questione russa. Identità e destino, Marsilio Editori, Venezia, 1991, p 14.

[4] A.Ferrari, E.Pupulin (edited by), La Crimea tra Russia e Impero ottomano, coll. Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale, Edizioni Ca’Foscari, Digital Publishing, 2017, p 11.

[5] The German literary tradition on the subject is vast; for a general overview on the topic, see the studies of the ICATAT research center in Magdeburg, including: M.Hotopp-Riecke,, S.Theilig, Fremde, Nähe, Heimat, 200 Jahre Napoleon Kriege:Deutsch-Tatarische Interkulturkontakte, Konflikte und Translationen, Berlin, 2014; R.S.Chakimov (redactor), M.M.Gibatdinov (project’s coordinator), M.M.Gibatdinov, S.Theilig, M.Hotopp-Riecke (edited by), Tatars Materials in German Archives/ германия архивларында татар чыганаклары, Sh.Marjani Institute of History of the Tatarstan Academy of Sciences Institute for Caucasica-, Tatarica- and Turkestan Studies Series «Yazma Miras. Pis'mennoe Nasledie. Textual Heritage», Kazan 2016.

[6] The travel literature, produced by merchants, missionaries and adventurers from Italy in search of fortune in the East, who along the way came across Tatarian villages is vast and probably the most famous example remains "Il Milione" by Marco Polo. For an in-depth study of the Tatar stereotype rooted in Europe and especially in Germany, conveyed by literature, see the aforementioned studies of the ICATAT research center in Magdeburg.

[7] S.Cwiklinski, Die Wolga an der Spree: Tataren und Baschkiren in Berlin, Miteinander leben in Berlin, Ausländerbeauftragte des Senats, Berlin, 2000.

[8] R. Chakimov, Kto takie bulgary?, Suvary.rf, URLhttp://сувары.рф/ru/content/rafael-hakimov-kto-takie-bulgary.

[9] Istorija tatar s drevnejšich vremen v semi tomach, MPGU, ISBN 978-5-4263-0620-2, Moskva, 2002, p. 13.

[10] A.Ferrari, Quando il Caucaso incontrò la Russia. Cinque storie esemplari, Guerini e Associati, Milano, 2015, p 34.

[11] On this issue, in-depth studies are dedicated to:A.W.Fisher, The Crimean Tatars, Hoover Institution Press, Stanford, 1978, p.88; E.Lazzerini, Crimean Tatar: The Fate of a Severed Language, Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Soviet National Languages, Mouton De Gruyter, Berlin, 1985, p.p. 118-119; J.Lebedynsky, La Crimée, des Taures aux Tatars, L’Harmattan, Paris, 2014, p.126.

[12] J.Lebedynsky, La Crimée, des Taures aux Tatars, L’Harmattan, Paris, 2014, p.127; H.R.Gomez, Migrazioni italiane in Crimea e Nuova Russia: tracce, fonti, contesti, in A.Ferrari, E.Pupulin (a cura di), La Crimea tra Russia e Impero ottomano, coll. Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale, Edizioni Ca’Foscari, Digital Publishing, 2017, pp. 117-144.

[13] For further details see the studies of: K.O’Neill, Constructing Russian Identity in the Imperial Borderland: Architecture, Islam, and the Transformation of the Crimean Landscape, Ab Imperio, 2, 2006, pp. 163-92; M.Kozelsky, Christianizing Crimea. Shaping Sacred Space in the Russian Empire and Beyond, Northern Illinois University Press, DeKalb, 2009.

[14] B.G.Williams, The Crimean Tatars: The Diaspora Experience and the Forging of a Nation, Brill's Inner Asian Library 2, Brill, Boston, 2001, p. 167.

[15] H.Jankowski, Karaim and Krymchak, Handbook of Jewish Languages, Brill’s Handbook in Linguistics 2, Brill, Boston, 2016, p. 455.

[16] Istorija tatar s drevnejšich vremen v semi tomach, MPGU, ISBN 978-5-4263-0620-2, Moskva, 2002, p. 25.

[17] Enciclopedia treccani under the voice ‘egira’, URL http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/egira/.

[18] D.I.Abibullaeva, Problema emigracii krymskich tatar na stranicach gazety “Teržiman”, Resupublikanskoe vysšee učebnoe zavedenie, “Krymskij inženerno-pedagogičeskij universitet”, Učenye zapiski Tavričeskogo nacional’nogo universiteta im.V.I.Vernadskogo- Serija “Istoričeskie nauki”, tom. 23, n.1: specvypusk “Istorija Ukrainy”, 2010, pp. 3-9.

[19]On the demographic situation in Crimea: S.A.Usov, Naselenie Kryma za 150 let v svjazi s ekonomikoj kraja, Krym, 1928, pp. 64-85; on the Nogai Tatar’s emigration: A.A.Sergeev, Uchod Tavričeskich Nogajcev v Turciju v 1860 g., ITUAK, 1913, pp. 212-213; on the picturesque descriptions of the Crimean landscapes: E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, Stilos, 2009; on the daily life of Crimea: S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, PC, 1893.

[20] E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, Stilos, 2009, p.290. From this quotation onwards, the translation by the candidate will be included in the text, the original will be indicated in the note: «после крымской войны, в 1860–1863 гг., переселились в Турцию из Крыма, по официальнымсведениям, 192360 душ обоего пола, т. е. 2/3 всего населения».

[21] M.A.Sosnogorova, G.E.Karaulov, K.A.Verner, N.A.Golovkinskij, Putevoditel’ po Krymy, Stilos, 2010, p. 72.

[22] I.M.Gasprinskij, O nacional’noj idee, Stilos, Poluostrov, Simferopol’, 2009, p.62.

[23] A.A.Sergeev, Uchod Tavričeskich Nogajcev v Turciju v 1860 g., ITUAK, 1913, p.213. Orig. «ценность земли упала с 20 руб. до 6 и 3 руб. за десятину».

[24] S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, PC, 1893, pp. 542-543. Orig. «Вся степная часть полуострова представляет уже вид пустыни: села без жителей, поля не вспаханы, и нет сомнения, что с будущею весною и горная часть, в которой движение татар относительно к степной еще мало заметно, представит ту же пустынную картину, […] Едва ли самая кровопролитная война, общий голод, или моровая язва могли бы в столь короткое время обезлюдить край, как его опустошило самой администрацией ускоренное переселение татар».

[25] Ivi, p. 545. Orig. «Приведенный рапорт губернского предводителя представляет совершенно верно и без преувеличения настоящее положение края».

[26] E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, Stilos, 2009, p.111. Orig. «Где была многолюдная, промышленная деревня, – там теперь пустырь; и эти пустыри, как прежние деревни, наполняют теперь целые уезды... Дороговизна рук и жизненных припасов с уходом татар возросла до невыносимых размеров».

[27] M.A.Sosnogorova, G.E.Karaulov, K.A.Verner, N.A.Golovkinskij, Putevoditel’ po Krymy, Stilos, 2010, p. 74. Orig. «по Крымской степи можно проехать десятки верст, не встретив человеческого жилья, хотя остатки татарских кладбищ в виде разбросанных и торчащих из земли каменных плит указывают, что некогда здесь было густое население».

[28] B.Ronchetti, Sguardo multiforme e presente transazionale. Letteratura contemporanea e prospettive interculturali, ‘900 Transnazionale 1, (March 2017), ISSN: 2532-1994, open access: URL https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:LjhrmAHgtA0J:https://ojs.uniroma1.it/index.php/900Transnazionale/article/download/13811/13578+&cd=1&hl=it&ct=clnk&gl=it&client=safari.

[29] Idem.

[30] N.Ščerban, Pereselenie krymskich tatar, Zabveniju ne podležit, Tatarskoe kn.izd., Kazan, 1992, p. 40. Orig. «городской доход с домов, лавок и т. п. вместо прежних 4 или 7 тысяч, на будущий год (т. е. 1861 год – авт.) исчислен всего чуть ли не в сотню рублей».

[31] S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, PC, 1893, p. 40. Orig. «некому будет являться с припасами на базары».

[32] G.P.Levickij, Pereselenie tatar iz Kryma v Turciju, Vestnik Evropy, N.10, 1882, p.618. Orig. «усилить береговую стражу и завести крей- серы, которые перехватывали бы бегущих татар».

[33] S.J.Kozlov, L.V.Čužova, Tjurskie narody Kryma: Karaimy. Krymskie tatary. Krymčaki, Nauka, 2003, Moskva, p. 250. Orig. «Российское правительство поначалу видело только положительный эффект в начавшихся на полуострове миграционных потоках».

[34] A.W.Fisher, The Crimean Tatars, Hoover Institution Press, Stanford, 1978, p.106.

[35] A.A.Sergeev, Uchod Tavričeskich Nogajcev v Turciju v 1860 g., ITUAK, 1913, p. 212.

[36] S.A.Usov, Naselenie Kryma za 150 let v svjazi s ekonomikoj kraja, Krym, 1928, p.69. Orig. «Правительство смотрело сквозь пальцы и на поселение в Крыму беглых помещичьих крестьян и беглых солдат».

[37] Ivi, p.70. Orig. «татары, как работники по специальным культурам, стояли гораздо выше непривычных к этим культурам русских».

[38] S.P.Zykov, O vyselenii tatar iz Kryma v 1860 gody: Zapiska general-ad’’jutanta E.I.Totlebena, PC, 1893, p.546. Orig. «Заменить татар, занимающихся издавна садоводством и виноделием, – невозможно без совершенного упадка этой части сельской промышленности».

[39] On the ancient toponyms of the vast territories of the Crimean steppes, which were abandoned and partially forgotten after emigration, see the essay by E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, Stilos, 2009, p 281.

[40] S.A.Usov, Naselenie Kryma za 150 let v svjazi s ekonomikoj kraja, Krym, 1928, p. 68.

[41] R.I.Chajali, Krymskie tatary v etničeskom sostave naselenija Kryma v konce XIX – načale XX v., Kul’tura narodov Pričernomor’ja, N.66, 2005, p. 76.

[42] A.Calabrò, Di che parliamo quando parliamo d’identità?, in Quaderni di sociologia, Straniero a chi? I figli di immigrati in Italia, Rosenberg&Selier, Open Edition Journal, pp. 85-114, URLhttps://journals.openedition.org/qds/422.

[43] M.Talamoni, Di nessun luogo: la figura del migrante tra identità e transculturalità, in A.Passerini, M.Talamoni (edited by), Migranti: transculturalità ed esperienza immaginativa, Alpe, Roma, 2012, p.57.

[44] L.Grinberg, R.Grinberg, Psicoanalisi dell’immigrazione e dell’esilio, Franco Angeli, Milano, 1990.

[45]S.Freud, Das Unheimliche, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, ISBN-10: 154058528X, 2016, p.29.

[46] A.W.Fisher, The Crimean Tatars, Hoover Institution Press, Stanford, 1978, p. 113.

[47] U.Bodaninskij, Archeologičeskoe i etnografičeskoe izučenie tatar v Krymy, Simferopol’, 1930, p. 21.

[48] J.Potin, V.Zuber, Dizionario dell’Islam, K.Azmoudeh (edited by), Translation by R.Fabbri, coll.Fondamenta, EAN 9788810432129, p. 75.

[49] .Gasprinskij, Russkoe musul’manstvo. Mysli, zametki i nabljudenija, INTERLOS – Intellektual’naja Rossija: elektr. žur. 2017, URL: http://intelros.ru/index.php?newsid=200 (Дата обращения: 03.04.17).

[50] M.A.Usmanov, O triumfe i tragedii idei Gasprinskogo, in Ismail Bei Gasprinskij – Rossija i Vostok, Tatarskoe knižnoe izdatel’stvo, 1993, Kazan pp. 3-15.

[51] E.J.Lazzerini, Ismail Bey Gasprinskii and Muslim modernism in Russia, 1878-1914, Unpublished Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1973, p. 40.

[52] Perevodčik-Teržiman, № 1, 10 apr.1883. The original version of I. Gazprinsky's Gazette was digitized and is available for online consultation following registration at the National Library of the Russian Federation. Orig. «Переводчик (Терджиман) будет служить по мере сил проводником трезвых, полезных сведений из культурной жизни в среду мусульман и обратно знакомить русскую с их жизнью, взглядами и нуждами. Сознавая всю важность и трудность взятой на себя задачи, редакция укрепляет себя надеждой, что среди общества найдется немало почтенных сведущих людей, кои не откажут ей в сочувствии и помощи своими трудами […] Приступая к делу во имя Аллаха, беремся за перо, чтобы служить правде и просвещению».

[53] I.Z.Zaidovna, Katalog izdanij Ismaila Gasprinskogo v fondach Respublikanskoj krymskotatarskoj biblioteki, Vedušij bibliograf GBUK RK “Krymskotatarskaja biblioteka im.I.Gasprinskogo, open access URLhttp://krarkh.cfuv.ru/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/001islyamova.pdf.

[54] Z.Abdirašidov, I.Gasprinskij i stanovlenie gazety Teržiman, in Id. Gasyrlar Avazy, Echo vekov, Naučno-dokumental’nyj žurnal, n.3/4, 2015, (80/81), ISSN 2073-7475, p. 216.

[55] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Maktubati chufja, № 108, 1905. Orig. «В своих мыслях я был так осторожен, что невозможно было придраться ни к одному слову. Каждое мое слово соответствовало положениям не одного, а пяти законов».

[56] Z.Abdirašidov, I.Gasprinskij i stanovlenie gazety Teržiman, in Id. Gasyrlar Avazy, Echo vekov, Naučno-dokumental’nyj žurnal, n.3/4, 2015, (80/81), ISSN 2073-7475, p.217.

[57] The issue of the Crimean Tatar emigration and the contribution of I.Gasprisnkij on the subject were deepened, among others cited in the notes and in the bibliography, in an article by the researcher D.I.Abibullaeva, Problema emigracii krymskich tatar na stranicach gazety “Teržiman”, Resupublikanskoe vysšee učebnoe zavedenie, “Krymskij inženerno-pedagogičeskij universitet”, Učenye zapiski Tavričeskogo nacional’nogo universiteta im.V.I.Vernadskogo- Serija “Istoričeskie nauki”, tom. 23, n.1: Specvypusk “Istorija Ukrainy”, 2010, and in the article by R.D.Aliev, Problema migracij krymskich tatar v publicistike I.Gasprinskogo, in RGNF Naučnogo proekta N.15-31-10145: Migracionnye processy krymskotatarskogo naselenija Rossijskoj imperii vo 2-j polovine XIX – načale XX vv.”; The considerations in this part of my article, therefore, are to be considered as complementary to the studies already carried out, integrating them with theoretical insights especially on the concept of identity construction by the emigrant in a strange space.

[58] According to R.D.Aliev in the magazine Teržiman, about thirty articles on the subject of emigration were published by Gasprinskij;

unfortunately only a small part will be analyzed here; the remainder will be investigated in the final thesis of my Phd.

[59] R.D.Aliev, Problema migracij krymskich tatar v publicistike I.Gasprinskogo, in RGNF Naučnogo proekta N.15-31-10145: Migracionnye processy krymskotatarskogo naselenija Rossijskoj imperii vo 2-j polovine XIX – načale XX vv.”, p.4.

[60] Perevodčik-Teržiman, O byvščem stepom naselenii, № 27, 18 apr.1886. Orig.: «ныне в степях этих больше надгробных камней, чем людей.

[61] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Dlja svedenija eduščich v turezkie zemli, № 9, 8 mart., 1887.

[62] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Iz Achalcicha, №16, 3 apr., 1888.

[63] Krymskij Vestnik, journal edited in Sevastopol’ dal 1888 al 1918, Russkaja periodičeskaja pečat’, edited from 1702 to1894, URL http://feb-web.ru/feb/periodic/pp0-abc/pp1/pp1-6821.htm.

[64] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Počemu uchodjat tatary?, 15 dek., 1901. Orig. «Некоторые из наших почтенных коллег видят стимул и причину эмиграционного движения в экономической необеспечен- ности, а некоторые в обстоятельствах морального и религиозного порядка. Какое из этих мнений ближе к истине? На этот вопрос пусть дают ответ следующие факты. Они говорят: «Крым видел не одну эмиграцию татар. Первая произошла по покорении страны, и ушли кочевавшие вне полуострова ногайцы и буджакцы. Вторая большая эмиграция была в 60-х годах XIX века. Тогда ушло до 200 тысяч жителей и почти все из степных уездов Крыма, где татары-поселяне не имели и не имеют ни собственного клочка земли, ни собственного угла. Сейчас эмиграционное движение началось опять в степи в Евпаторийском уезде и опять среди бездомного, бесправного деревенского пролетария. Очевидно, что эмиграцию питает недоля, лишения, необеспеченность […] Если бы при покорении […] Крыма было обращено внимание на обеспечение землицей крымских поселян-работников в той же степени, как были обеспечены сословия мурз и мулл, то не было бы ни одной заметной эмиграции».

[65] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ob emigracii, № 17, 7 maja, 1902. Orig. «должно отрезвить многих мусульман и избавить Турцию от многих хлопот».

[66] Ibidem, Orig. «То в одной, то в другой деревне татары продают свои участки и скот, имея в виду переселиться в Турцию. Если это серьезно, то приходится пожалеть этих людей, не ведающих, что творят: чтобы покинуть родину надо иметь веские основания. Всякие неразумные необоснованные передвижения ведут к обеднению, разрушению и гибели. Мы не видим причин, которые оправдали бы уход из Крыма, мы не видим ничего, что могло бы привлекать людей в Турцию, откуда десятки тысяч людей идут сюда и на прибрежье Черного моря на заработки».

[67] E.Said, Reflections on Exile and Other Essays, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2003, p. 182.

[68] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ob emigracii, № 17, 7 maja, 1902. Orig. «Турецкое правительство принимает в качестве переселенцев только тех, кто, получив на то разрешение своего правительства, имеют переселенческие паспорта, т. е. выход из русского подданства. А те простаки, которые, взяв паспорт для торговли или свидания с родственниками, думая поселиться в Турции на правах переселенца, глубоко ошибаются […] прожив свои средства, придется бедствовать, и бедствовать тут, если, как часто бывает, они возвратятся в Крым».

[69] Ibidem, Orig. «oбо всем сорок раз подумать, prima di распродаваться и пускаться в неизвестные путешествия с детьми и стариками».

[70] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ešče po povodu emigracii, 15 maja, 1902. Orig. «Мы надеемся, что благоразумие населения и отеческая заботливость властей успокоят эмиграционное движение среди крымских татар. Не дай Бог, если движение это разовьется, и эмиграция примет широкие размеры, то последствия будут не радостные для уходящих и для края».

[71] L.McDowell, J.Sharp (a cura di), Space, Gender, Knowledge: Feminist Readings, Routledge Taylor&Francis Group, New York, 1997, p.405.

[72] I. Levi, Un'analisi del dissenso tra Freud e Jung. La genealogia di un turbamento, Dialegesthai. Rivista telematica di filosofia [online], year 4 (2002) [insert on the 16th of July 2002], available on World Wide Web: https://mondodomani.org/dialegesthai/>, [115 KB], ISSN 1128-5478.

[73] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Ešče po povodu emigracii, 15 maja, 1902. Orig. «эмигрировавшие в 60-х годах XIX столетия из Крыма в Турцию были поселены в Добруджи и в пределах нынешней Болгарии. Едва-едва успели эмигранты осесть и кое-как устроиться на новых местах, как грянула русско-турецкая война 1877 года, и они стали вновь уходить на этот раз в Анталию. Для края как окраины русского государства выселение татар тоже не принесло пользы. Часто пресса в то время утешала себя тем, что Крым будет заселен кровными русскими людьми, но этого не произошло. Теперь, спустя сорок лет после большой эмиграции татар, крупное русское землевладение значительно убавилось, крестьянское увеличилось немного, но зато немецкое возросло в 20 раз и окрепло настолько, что будет расти и расти вполне естественным образом».

[74] Ibidem. Orig. «благоразумие самого населения и отеческая заботливость властей могли бы избавить Крым от новой экономической и этнографической перетрубации. Дай Бог, чтобы это так и было».

[75] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Neobchodimij sovet, № 20, 31 maja, 1903. Orig. «они переселяются сознательно и умеючи, имеют достаточно сведений о той стране, куда направляются. Нельзя этого сказать о наших переселенцах-татарах. Им неизвестно, где их поселят, как поселят, и что они будут там делать».

[76] G G.Simmel, Soziologie. Untersuchungen über die Formen der Vergesellschaftung, Dunker & Humblot, Berlin, 1908, p.49.

[77] A.Calabrò, Di che parliamo quando parliamo d’identità?, in Quaderni di sociologia, Straniero a chi? I figli di immigrati in Italia, Rosenberg&Selier, Open Edition Journal, pp. 85-114, URLhttps://journals.openedition.org/qds/422.

[78] Idem

[79] F.Remotti, L’ossessione identitaria, coll. Anticorpi, Laterza, Bari, 2010.

[80] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Neobchodimij sovet, № 20, 31 maja, 1903.Orig. «Прежде чем распродавать тут свои имущества и земли, думая эмигрировать, они должны получить разрешение министра внутренних дел по оставлению русского подданства. И только после получения такого разрешения можно будет получить заграничный паспорт. […] по законам Турции […] она никого не принимает в подданство, если желающий не уволен из подданства своим правительством».

[81] Ibidem, Orig. «Мы просим наших читателей передать наш совет тем, кто не читал. Мы просим духовных лиц наставлять прихожан нашим советом. Надо стараться, чтобы народ не шел слепо на разорение».

[82]A.Calabrò, Di che parliamo quando parliamo d’identità?, in Quaderni di sociologia, Straniero a chi? I figli di immigrati in Italia, Rosenberg&Selier, Open Edition Journal, pp. 85-114, URL https://journals.openedition.org/qds/422 .

[83] Definition of waqf from G.Cimbalo, Il ritorno del waqf , in Stato, Chiese e pluralismo confessionale, Rivista telematica (www.statoechiese.it) n. 14 of 2016 April 18, 2015 ISSN 1971- 8543: «The waqf is a complex and multi-purpose tool that allows Muslim believers to allocate, through donations and legacies, resources to the construction, maintenance and activities of religious buildings, but also to social activities that they revolve around community structures and mosques, and manage assets, escaping the inheritance laws, typical of Islamic law. For this set of reasons the waqf have accumulated immense wealth over the centuries».

[84] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Dvorjanskie vybori, 31 janv., 1903. Orig. «о прошении дворянства Тавриче ской губернии о ходатайстве о том, дабы было повеление Высочайшего ускорить разрешение вакуфного дела, согласно шариата и современных нужд населения».

[85] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Pis’mo emigranta, № 10, 14 marta, 1903. Orig. «задается холодный вопрос — разве вас из России гонят, а сюда кто-либо зовет?».

[86] A. Dal Lago, Non-persone. L’esclusione dei migranti in una società globale, Milano, Feltrinelli, 2004, p. 25.

[87] M.Weber, Wissenschaft als Beruf, in Schriften 1894 – 1922, edited by Dirk Kaesler, Kröner (Kröners Taschenbuchausgabe; Band 233) r, Stuttgart, 2002 ISBN 3-520-23301-0, p. 63.

[88] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Glasnyj gubernskogo zemskogo sobranija, № 28, 21 julja, 1903.

[89] Perevodčik-Teržiman, My s radost’ju otmečaem, № 31, 11 avg., 1903.

[90] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Tavričeskij gubernator Trepov cirkuljarno prikazal, № 42, 27 okt., 1903.

[91] Perevodčik-Teržiman, K emigracii tatar, 20 okt., 1903. Orig. «Теперь сама жизнь, уже первый, но надеемся, последний раз, громко протестует против этой социальной болезни. Прислушайтесь, добрые люди, к голосу жизни, присмотритесь к фактам ее. В Турцию вас никто не звал и не зовет: нищие турки, обходящие наши деревни из года в год, тысячи рабочих турок, живших между нами, без слов, но красноречиво говорят нам о том, где есть работа, деньги и лучшая жизнь. Из ушедших в прошлом многие уже вернулись, еще большее число готовится возвратиться, если найдет средства. Но, увы, огромная часть ушедших гибнут там, на чужбине, болея целыми семьями малярией, о чем получают в Крыму десятки писем с предупреждениями. Но все же десятки рабочих семей подымаются со своих мест и идут навстречу верной гибели. Есть все данные, что уходящие ныне - последние жертвы эмиграционной болезни».

[92] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Nesčast’e, № 51, 29 dek., 1903. Orig. «удается добраться обратно одному из ста в родной Крым».

[93] Perevodčik-Teržiman, Emigracionnoe dviženie, № 2, 6 janv., 1904.

[94] A.A.Sergeev, Uchod Tavričeskich Nogajcev v Turciju v 1860 g., ITUAK, 1913, p. 205. Orig. «Треть их, т. е. 60 тысяч чело- век, погибла в Черном море от качки, голода и крушений судов. Море каждый день выбрасывало на берег трупы переселенцев».

[95] E.L.Markov, Očerki Kryma: Kartiny krymskoj žiznii, istorii i prirody, Stilos, 2009, p 111. Orig. «Крым погиб после удаления татар».

[96] Idem

[97] N. Elias N., J.H. Scotson (1965), The established and the outsiders, London: Frank Cass & Co, Het Spectrum, Utrecht and Antwerp, 1977, p. 92.

[98] S. Tabboni S., Vicinanza e lontananza. Figure dello straniero nella teoria sociologica, Angeli, Milano, 1986, p. 21.

[99] On this concept, rich in food for thought are the works of Franz Kafka, who calls himself a ‘Zwitterwesen’, a hybrid being, halfway between two identities; exemplary is Eine Kreuzung, in Beim Bau der Chinesischen Mauer, Berlin, 1931.

[100]A.Ferrari, E.Pupulin (edited by), La Crimea tra Russia e Impero ottomano, coll. Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale, Edizioni Ca’Foscari, Digital Publishing, 2017, p. 11.

[101]R.S.Chakimov (redactor), M.M.Gibatdinov (project’s coordinator), M.M.Gibatdinov, S.Theilig, M.Hotopp-Riecke (edited by), Tatars Materials in German Archives/ германия архивларында татар чыганаклары, Sh.Marjani Institute of History of the Tatarstan Academy of Sciences Institute for Caucasica-, Tatarica- and Turkestan Studies Series «Yazma Miras. Pis'mennoe Nasledie. Textual Heritage», Kazan 2016.

[102] M.Combi, Cultures and technology. An analysis of some of the changes in progress: digital, global and local culture, in K.J. Borowiecki, N. Forbes, A.Fresa (eds.), Cultural Heritage in a Changing World, Springer International, Berlin, 2016, p.14.

[103] M.Epstein, The Origins and Meanings of Russian Postmodernism, in Re-entering the Sign: Articulating New Russian Culture, E.E.Berry, A.M.Pogar (eds), University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1995, p. 166.