THE MOBILIZATION POLICY OF THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE IN TURKESTAN AND THE EVENTS OF 1916
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55640/Keywords:
Turkestan region, World War I, the 1916 uprising, military obligation, mobilization, Russian Empire, colonial policy, indigenous population, inorodets (non-Russian population), military tax.Abstract
This article analyzes the military policy pursued by the Russian Empire in the Turkestan region during the years of World War I, with particular attention to the issue of involving the indigenous population in military service. The study examines the privileges granted to the local population by the imperial authorities, their gradual abolition, and the socio-economic consequences of the mobilization policy.
Downloads
References
1.Statute on Military Service. St. Petersburg, 1912.
2.Russia. State Duma. Stenographic Reports of the Sessions (1914–1916).
3.Central State Archive of the Republic of Uzbekistan (CSARU), f. I-1, op. 31, d. 945.
4.Central State Archive of the Republic of Uzbekistan (CSARU), f. I-17, op. 1, d. 312.
5.Ganin, A.V. 1916 in Central Asia: The Uprising and Its Suppression. Moscow: Nauka, 2016.
6.Bekmakhanov, E.B. Kazakhstan in the 20s–40s of the 19th Century. Alma-Ata, 1947.
7.Petrov, K.I. The Uprising of 1916 in Central Asia and Kazakhstan. Moscow, 1957.
8.Abdurakhmanov, A. The 1916 Uprising in Turkestan. Tashkent: Fan, 1991.
9.Ryskulov, T.R. The Uprising of the Indigenous Population of Turkestan in 1916. Alma-Ata, 1927.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all Open Access articles are disseminated under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC-BY), which licenses unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is appropriately cited. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations.

Germany
United States of America
Italy
United Kingdom
France
Canada
Uzbekistan
Japan
Republic of Korea
Australia
Spain
Switzerland
Sweden
Netherlands
China
India