Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Mapping Lithuanians: The Development of Russian Imperial Ethnic Cartography, 1840s–1870s

2011; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 63; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/03085694.2011.521332

1479-7801

Vytautas Petronis,

Philippine History and Culture

ABSTRACT The importance of maps in the construction of national territories has already received much attention from scholars; however, the discussion has mostly centred around the creation of political boundaries in emerging regions or states. Ethnic cartography, on the other hand, remains little studied, despite the fact that it also produced powerful symbolic meanings, advanced science and became a tool for various political ideologies. This article introduces the role that the mapping of ethnic territories played in political discourse in nineteenth-century Russia. L'importance des cartes dans la construction des territoires nationaux a déjà reçu beaucoup d'attention de la part des chercheurs, cependant la discussion s'est surtout focalisée sur la création des limites politiques dans les régions ou états émergents. La cartographique ethnique, par ailleurs, reste peu étudiée en dépit du fait qu'elle a également produit des significations symboliques fortes, fait progresser la science et constitué un outil pour diverses idéologies politiques. Ici on discute le rôle que la cartographie ethnique des territoires a joué dans le discours politique en Russie au 19e siècle. Die Relevanz von Karten bei der Konstruktion nationaler Territorien fand bereits große Aufmerksamkeit in der Wissenschaft. Allerdings fokussierten sich die meisten Diskussionen auf die Festlegung politischer Grenzen bei der Entwicklung von Regionen oder Staaten. Ethnographische Kartographie wurde dagegen kaum untersucht – abgesehen von den Erkenntnissen, dass sie mächtige Symbole hervorbrachte, die Wissenschaft beförderte und von diversen politischen Ideologien benutzt wurde. Der Autor möchte in diesem Beitrag die Rolle, die Karten ethnischer Territorien im politischen Diskurs Russlands im 19. Jahrhundert spielten, darstellen. La importancia de los mapas en la construcción de territorios nacionales ha recibido ya mucha atención por parte de los investigadores. Sin embargo, el debate se ha centrado mayoritariamente alrededor de la creación de las fronteras políticas en regiones y estados emergentes. Por otra parte, la cartografía étnica permanece poco estudiada, a pesar del hecho de que también trajo consigo poderosos significados simbólicos, contribuyó al avance científico y llegó a ser un instrumento de diferentes ideologías políticas. Este articulo presenta el papel que los mapas de los territorios étnicos jugaron en el discurso político en la Rusia del siglo XIX. KEYWORDS: Ethnic cartographyethno-linguisticsethno-stastisticsnationalismRussian EmpireLithuaniaRussian Imperial Geographical SocietyPetr Keppen (Peter Köppen)Roderich von ErckertAleksandr F. RittikhPompei N. BatiushkovPavel Jozef Šafárik Acknowledgements I am grateful to the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC; Grant 6796), U.K., for financial support for my research. Notes NOTES AND REFERENCES 1. For examples of the relationship between cartography and nationalism, see Larry Wolff, Inventing Eastern Europe: The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment (Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1994); Anssi Paasi, Territories, Boundaries and Consciousness: The Changing Geographies of the Finnish-Russian Border (Chichester, Wiley, 1996); Thongchai Winichakul, Siam Mapped: A History of the Geo-Body of a Nation (Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press, 1994); Raymond B. Craib, ‘A nationalist metaphysics: state fixation, national maps and the geo-historical imagination in nineteenth-century Mexico’, Hispanic American Historical Review 82:1 (2002): 33–68; Piotr Eberhardt, Polska i jej granice. Z historii polskiej geografii politycznej (Lublin, Wydawnictwo Uniwesytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, 2004); Karen Culcasi, ‘Cartographically constructing Kurdistan within geopolitical and orientalist discourses’, Political Geography 25 (2006): 680–706. 2. ‘Distortion’ is used here despite John Pickles's association of the word specifically with propaganda cartography: John Pickles, A History of Spaces: Cartographic Reason, Mapping and the Geo-Coded World (London and New York, Routledge, 2004), 37). I argue that such a restricted view is difficult to apply to nineteenth-century (and even contemporary) ethnic maps because of their high level of abstraction. Paradoxically, all ethnic maps are distorted to greater or lesser extent, which means that it is not easy to decide to what extent the cartographer intended to deceive. The context within which the map was made thus becomes especially important, if the map in question is to be properly understood. 3. I make this assumption on the basis of my previous research: Vytautas Petronis, Constructing Lithuania: Ethnic Mapping in Tsarist Russia, ca. 1800–1914 (Stockholm, Intellecta, 2007), 174–269. 4. The links between mapping and exercising power in early modern Russia have been discussed in Valerie A. Kivelson's studies: ‘Cartography, autocracy and state powerlessness: the uses of maps in early modern Russia’, Imago Mundi 51 (1999): 83–105; Cartographies of Tsardom: The Land and Its Meanings in Seventeenth-Century Russia (Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 2006); ‘“Between all parts of the universe”: Russian cosmographies and imperial strategies in early modern Siberia and Ukraine’, Imago Mundi 60:2 (2008): 166–81. 5. See Alexei V. Postnikov, Russia in Maps: A History of the Geographical Study and Cartography of the Country (Moscow, Nash Dom–L'Age d'Homme, 1996), 82–173; also Alexei V. Postnikov, ‘Outline of the history of Russian cartography’, in Regions: A Prism to View a Slavic-Eurasian World. Towards the Discipline of ‘Regionology’, ed. Kimitaka Matsuzato (Sapporo, Slavic Research Center, 2000), 1–49; S. A. Tarkhov, ‘Izmeneniia administrativno territorial'nogo deleniia Rossii za poslednie 300 let’, Geografiia: Ezhenedel'noe Prilozhenie k Gazete ‘Pervoe sen'tiabria’, 15, 21, 28 (2001); online version, http://geo.1september.ru/article.php?ID=200101502, last accessed 26 August 2010; Darius Staliūnas, ‘Kaip bandyta keisti Kauno gubernijos ribas. Slapti valdžios projektai’, Darbai ir Dienos 28 (Kaunas, Vytautas Magnus University, 2001): 67–84; Leonid E. Gorizontov, ‘In search of internal balance: debate on changes in the territorial-administrative division of the Russian Empire in the 1830s and 1840s’, in Imperiology: From Empirical Knowledge to Discussing the Russian Empire, no. 13 (Sapporo, Slavic Research Center, 2007), 179–98. 6. Dmitrii Anuchin, ‘O zadachakh Russkoi etnografii’, Etnograficheskoe Obozrenie 1 (1889): 6. The long search for a suitable system for the collection of statistical data was only partially solved by the end of the nineteenth century. For more on this question, see Artur Bushen, Ob ustroistve istochnikov statistiki naseleniia v Rossii (St Petersburg, 1864); V. M. Kabuzan, Narodonaselenie Rossii v XVIII–pervoi polovine XIX v. (po materialam revizii) (Moscow, Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1963); V. M. Kabuzan, Narody Rossii v XVIII veke. Chislenost’ i etnicheskii sostav (Moscow, Nauka, 1990). 7. Petr P. Semenov [Tian’-Shanskii], Istoriia poluvekovoi deiatel'nosti Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva, 1845–1895 (St Petersburg, 1895), 1: 40–41; Susan Smith-Peter, ‘Defining the Russian people: Konstantin Arsen'ev and Russian statistics before 1861’, History of Science 45:1 (2007): 47–64. 8. Artur Bushen, Ob ustroistve istochnikov (see note 6), 86–122; Petr Keppen, Deviataia reviziia: izsledovanie o chisle zhitelei v Rossii v 1851 godu (St Petersburg, 1857), vii, ix–x; Petr Keppen, ‘Predislovie’, in Materialy dlia statistiki Rossiiskoi Imperii, izdavaemye, s Vysochaishego soizvoleniia, pri statisticheskom otdelenii Soveta Ministerstva Vnutrennikh Del (St Petersburg, 1859); Semenov, Istoriia (see note 7), 42. The practice in this article is always to use the Russian names in the text for all Russian-born individuals, but to give also, at first mention, the German version that is more commonly found in Western catalogues and reference works. 9. The French Société de Géographie was founded in 1821, the German Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin in 1828, and the Royal Geographical Society in 1830. 10. Peter Simon Pallas (1741–1811), German zoologist, botanist, and traveller; Ivan Ivanovich Lepekhin (1740–1802), Russian traveller and botanist; Johan Gotlieb Georgi (1729–1802), German geographer and chemist. 11. The document is reprinted in Lev S. Berg, Vsesoiuznoe geograficheskoe obshchestvo za sto let (Moscow, Leningrad, Izd-vo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1946), 33–34. The emphases are those of the original. Most of the statistical programme implied by paragraph 2 closely followed the ideas and theories of the German geographer Carl Ritter (1779–1859), especially in terms of its understanding of geography and statistics. 12. For a history of the early years of the Russian Geographical Society, see Semenov, Istoriia (note 7), 1–18, 37–47; Berg, Vsesoiuznoe (note 11), 22–48. 13. See S. D. Rudin, Mezhevoe zakonodatel'stvo i deiatel'nost’ mezhevoi chasti v Rossii za 150 let. 19 sen'tiabria 1765 g.–1915 g. (Petrograd, Tip. V. F. Kirshbauma, 1915), 186–345, and Pavel Jozef Šafárik, Slovanský Národopis (Praha, Nakladatelství Českoslověnské akademie věd, 1955), 9–10 (reprint of 1842 book). The so-called ‘Reymann map’ (Topographische Spezialkarte von Mitteleuropa) was in fact a series of topographical maps started by Reymann in 1806, updated versions of which continued to be published until 1908, as described by Walter Satzinger, ‘Grand Atlas d'Allemagne edited by Johann Wilhelm Jaeger, Frankfurt am Main, 1789’, Imago Mundi 28 (1976): 94; and Josef Hůrský, ‘Vznik a poslání Šafaříkova Slovanského Zemlěvidu’, in Šafárik, Slovanský Národopis (see above), 228. 14. Pavel J. Šafárik, Slavianskoe Narodopisanie (Moscow, 1843). Šafárik's focus on the Slavs rather than the Germans ran counter to interests within the Austrian Empire, where a policy of Germanization was being introduced: see Henry Robert Wilkinson, Maps and Politics: A Review of the Ethnographic Cartography of Macedonia (Liverpool, University Press, 1951), 27–32. 15. Vytautas Petronis, ‘Pinge, Divide et Impera: vzaimovliianie etnicheskoi kartografii i natsional'noi politiki v pozdneimperskoi Rossii (vtoraia polovina XIX veka)’, in Imperium inter pares: rol’ transferov v istorii Rossiiskoi imperii (1700–1917), ed. Martin Aust, Ricarda Vulpius, Alexei Miller (Moscow, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2010), 308–29; Hůrský, ‘Vznik a poslání Šafaříkova’ (see note 13), 255–62. 16. Petr Keppen, Etnograficheskii atlas Evropeiskoi Rossii, sostavitel’ Petr Keppen, chlen Russkago Geograficheskago Obshchestva [Ethnographical Atlas of European Russia, created by Petr Keppen, Member of the Russian Geographical Society] (St Petersburg, Russkoe Geograficheskoe Obshchestvo, 1848), Petr Keppen, Etnograficheskaia Karta Evropeiskoi Rossii [Ethnographical Map of European Russia] (St Petersburg, Imperatorskoe Russkoe Geograficheskoe Obshchestvo, 1851). 17. Peter Köppen, ‘Der Litauische Volksstamm: Ausbereitung und Stärke desselben in der Mitte des XIX. Jahrhunderts’, Bulletin de la classe des Sciences Historiques, Philologiques et Politiques de l'Academie Imperiale des Sciences de Saint-Petersbourg 8:18–19 (1851): 275, n.7; Efim F. Karskii, Belorussy (Warsaw, Tipografiia Varshavskago Uchebnago Okruga, 1903), 1: 235. An exemplar of the atlas is in the cartographic archive of the Russian Geographical Society in St Petersburg. 18. Keppen based his classification of ethnic groups on that introduced by the Russian academician, Andreas J. Sjögren (1794–1855); see Köppen, ’Der Litauische Volksstamm (note 17): 25–26. 19. [His Majesty's Own Depot of Maps] Podrobnaia karta Rossiiskoi imperii i blizlezhashchikh zagranichnykh vladenii sochinena, gravirovana i pechatana pri Sobstvennoi Ego Imperatorskago Velichestva Depo kart (St Petersburg, 1801). 20. Petronis, ‘Pinge, Divide et Impera’ (see note 15). Keppen was a prolific worker and meticulous statistician. His card file contained every detail he could obtain about the inhabitants of every place, in towns and villages down to individual farms, all over European Russia. 21. There were at least three reprints before 1855, of which the 3rd (1855) depicted only the northwestern part of European Russia, that is, the Baltic provinces (Courland, Livland and Estland), the Grand Duchy of Finland and the territories around St Petersburg. 22. ‘Etnograficheskie issledovaniia’, Zapsiki Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva 1 (1864): 118–25. From the lists and reviews of the ethnographic works that were published in Russia in 1863, it can be seen that the South Western and North Western regions were the centre of attention. 23. For further insights, see Theodore R. Weeks, ‘Defining us and them: Poles and Russians in the “Western provinces”, 1863–1914’, Slavic Review 53:1 (Spring 1994): 26–40; Witold Rodkiewicz, Russian Nationality Policy in the Western Provinces of the Russian Empire (Lublin, Scientific Society of Lublin, 1998); Darius Staliūnas, ‘“The Pole” in the policy of the Russian government: semantics and praxis in the mid-nineteenth century’, Lithuanian Historical Studies 5 (2000): 45–67; Mikhail Dolbilov, ‘Kul'turnaia idioma vozrozhdeniia Rossii kak faktor imperskoi politiki v Severo-Zapadnom krae v 1863–1865 gg.’, Ab Imperio 1–2 (2001): 227–68; Mikhail Dolbilov, ‘The stereotype of the Pole in imperial policy: the “depolonization” of the Northwestern Region in the 1860s’, Russian Studies in History 44:2 (Fall 2005): 44–88. 24. The question of Russification remains a broad and complicated topic. For different perspectives and arguments, see Darius Staliūnas, ‘Rusifikacijos samprata XIX a. Lietuvos istorijoje: istoriografija, metodologija, faktografija’, Lietuvos Istorijos Metraštis / The Year-Book of Lithuanian History 2 (2002): 63–72; Darius Staliūnas, ‘Termino “rusinimas” prasmės istorija (XIX a. 7-tas dešimtmetis)’, Lituanistica 67:3 (2006): 24–37; Andreas Kappeler, ‘The ambiguities of Russification’, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 5:2 (Spring 2004): 291–97; Alexei Miller, ‘Rusifikatsiia ili rusifikatsii?’ in Aleksei Miller, Imperiia Romanovykh i natsionalizm. Esse po metodologii istoricheskogo issledovaniia (Moscow, Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie, 2006), 54–77. 25. The restriction on the use of Latin script lasted from 1865 to 1904. It impeded the flowering of literature not only in Polish, but also in Lithuanian and other languages that used this alphabet. See Edward C. Thaden, Russia's Western Borderlands, 1710–1870 (Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1984). 26. Aleksandr F. Rittikh and Pompei N. Batiushkov, Atlas narodonaseleniia Zapadno-Russkogo kraia po ispovedaniiam (St Petersburg, 1862 (restricted dissemination), 1864 (revised for general publication)). 27. Respectively, Atlas ethnographique des provinces habitées, en totalité ou en partie, par des Polonais, par R. d'Erkert, capitaine aux gardes, membre effectif de la Société Géographique Impériale de la Russie (St Petersburg, 1863), and Etnograficheskii atlas Zapadno-Russkikh gubernii i sosednikh oblastei. Sostavlen R. F. Erkertom, gvardii polkovnikom, deistvitel'nym chlenom Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva [The Ethnographical Atlas of the West-Russian Provinces and Neighbouring Districts, created by R. F. Erckert, Colonel of the Guards, and Member of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society] (St Petersburg, 1863). 28. The first material was acquired in 1821. Köppen, ‘Der Litauische Volksstamm’ (see note 17), 284; also Petr Keppen, Ob etnograficheskoi karte Evropeiskoi Rossii, Petra Keppenna, izdannoi Imperatorskim Russkim Geograficheskim Obshchestvom (St Petersburg, 1852), 14–15 . 29. Mikhail Lebedkin, ‘O plemennom sostave narodonaseleniia Zapadnogo Kraia Rossiiskoi Imperii’, in Zapsiki Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva 3 (1861): 139. 30. See the statistical tables in Rittikh and Batiushkov, Atlas narodonaseleniia (note 26), 2. 31. Darius Staliūnas, ‘Nationality statistics and Russian politics in the mid-nineteenth century’, Lithuanian Historical Studies 8 (2003): 95–122; Vladas Sirutavičius, ‘Tautiškumo kriterijai multietninių visuomenių statistikoje. XIX a. Vidurio Lietuvos pavyzdys’, Lietuvos istorijos metraštis / The Year-Book of Lithuanian History, 1998 (Vilnius, Lietuvos Istorijos Instituto leidykla, 1999), 81. 32. For example, Lebedkin indicated the existence of the Jatvingian ethno-linguistic group, which had already been assimilated by the end of the eighteenth century (Lebedkin, ‘O plemennom sostave’ (see note 29), 142, 151). Most probably Lebedkin misinterpreted some local dialect as Jatvingian. 33. Petronis, Constructing Lithuania (see note 3), 128–73. 34. On the late imperial and early Soviet ethnographic investigations, see Francine Hirsch, Empire of Nations: Ethnographic Knowledge & the Making of Soviet Union (Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press, 2005). 35. Ludmila Lapteva (in ‘Znachenie tvorchestva P. I. Shafarika dlia razvitiia slavianovedeniia v Rossii’, in Pavol Jozef Šafárik a slavistika. Zborník príspevkov z vedeckej konferencie a dokumentov z osláv 200. výročia narodenia P. J. Šafárika (Martin, Matica slovenská, 1996), 219, ns 9 and 10), quotes Slavist Izmail Sreznevskii's (1812–1880) review of Šafárik's Slovanský národopis, where he indicated that in the case of Russia this ethno-linguistic work clearly presented Slavic (sic) habitation names spelled in the local dialects. The review was published in the Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshcheniia 38 (1843): 1–30. 36. Wilkinson, Maps and Politics (see note 14), 35. 37. Earlier in 1839, Šafárik had made his first attempt to produce a map of the Slavs: Ethnografická Mappa ke Slowanským Starožitnostem, based on the material presented in the Slovanské starožitnosti (1837). Hůrský, ‘Vznik a poslání’ (see note 13), 224–28. 38. Keppen, ‘Der Litauische Volksstamm’ (see note 17): 25–26; Keppen, Ob etnograficheskoi karte (see note 28), 25. The research of the Russian ethnic group had only begun in the early 1850s, and no results had been available at the time when the maps were made. As regards the Ukrainians and Belarusians, their official ethnic and statistical investigations were carried out much later: the Ukrainians mainly in the 1860s and 1870s, during ethnographical and statistical expeditions led by Pavel P. Chubinskii (1839–1884), and the Belarusians only in the late nineteenth–early twentieth century during Efim F. Karskii's (1860–1931) expeditions. Petronis, Constructing Lithuania (see note 3), 139–45; 164–72. 39. In around 1830 Keppen began researching the Caucasus region as a separate project. Some of his findings were published in Petr Keppen, Krymskii sbornik, o drevnostiakh iuzhnogo berega Kryma i gor Tavricheskikh (St Petersburg, 1837). Later he also published another general study on the history of main non-Russian ethnic groups in the Russian Empire: Petr Keppen, Khronologicheskii ukazatel’ materialov dlia istorii inorodtsev Evropeiskoi Rossii (St Petersburg, 1861). 40. Petr Keppen, ‘O proiskhozhdenii, iazyke i literature Litovskikh narodov, so vkliucheniem kratkago obozreniia Litovskoi istorii do XVI veka’, Materialy dlia istorii prosveshcheniia v Rossii 3 (St Petersburg, 1827): 151–253. Later it was translated into German as Ueber den Ursprung, die Sprache und Literatur der Litauischen (oder Lettischen) Völkerschaften (Mitau, 1829), and Polish as O początkach, języku i literaturze narodów Litewskich, przez Piotra Keppena (Vilna, 1829). 41. Keppen, Ob etnograficheskoi karte (see note 28), 14–15. It is not clear whether this information was incorporated in the 1851 map. Lithuanians in the Kingdom of Poland lived mainly in the northern part of the province of Augustów. 42. Thus, when in 1875 Aleksandr Rittikh published a new ethnographic map of European Russia, he was able to use some of Keppen's data: Aleksandr F. Rittikh, Etnograficheskaia karta Evropeiskoi Rossii, sostavlena po porucheniiu Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva (St Petersburg, 1875). This was probably the first map to differentiate Ukrainians (malorossy) from Belarusians and Great Russians (velikorossy). 43. An exception was the map inserted into Anton Ks. Korevо, Vilenskaia guberniia. Materialy dlia geografii i statistiki Rossii sobrannye ofitserami general'nago shtaba (St Petersburg, 1861). 44. Nathaniel Knight, ‘Science, empire, and nationality: ethnography in the Russian Geographical Society, 1845–1855’, in Imperial Russia: New Histories for the Empire, ed. Jane Burbank and David L. Ransel (Bloomington and Indianapolis, Indiana University Press, 1998), 108–41; Steven J. Seegel, ‘Beauplan's prism: represented contact zones and nineteenth-century mapping practices in Ukraine’, in Rebounding Identities: the Politics of Identity in Russia and Ukraine, ed. Dominique Arel and Blair A. Ruble (Baltimore, Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2006), 151–80; Steven J. Seegel, ‘Blueprinting Modernity: Nation-State Cartography and Intellectual Ordering in Russia's European Empire, Ukraine, and Former Poland-Lithuania, 1795–1917’ (doctoral thesis, Brown University, 2006). 45. Pompei Nikolaevich Batiushkov (1810–1892) was a general and publicist. He was a younger brother of the Russian poet Konstantin Batiushkov. From 1850 he served for some time as Vice-Governor of Kovno province and later headed the Vil'na Educational District. 46. Aleksandr F. Rittikh (1831–1911 or after), was born into the Baltic German nobility. He studied at the Nikolaevskaia Engineer Academy and later at the Military Academy of the General Staff. He was a member of the IRGS, the Imperial Free Economic Society, and many others. In 1894 he resigned from the military in order to dedicate his time to scholarly research. The date and place of his death are uncertain. 47. Rittikh and Batiushkov, [Introduction], Atlas narodonaseleniia (see note 26), 1; Mikhail O. Koialovich, ‘Mnenie deistv. chl. M. O. Koialovicha o trudakh Rittikha’, Zapsiki Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva 1 (1864), appendix 3: 93; Pompei N. Batiushkov, Belorussiia i Litva: istoricheskie sud'by Severo-Zapadnogo kraia (St Petersburg, 1890), xv–xxi. 48. R—, ‘Atlas narodonaseleniia zapadno-russkogo kraia po veroispovedaniiam’, Zapsiki Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva 1 (1864), appendix ‘Bibliografiia i kritika’: 1–26. 49. Korevо, Vilenskaia guberniia (see note 43). 50. Roderich (Georg Ferdinand Robert) von Erckert (Rodrig Fiodorovich Erkert), who also described himself as Oerkert, or d'Erckert (1821–1900), was born in Prussia. Until about 1850 he served in the Prussian army; he then moved to Russia to serve in the Moscow regiment. As a military cartographer he received an education in geodesy and engineering. In the early 1860s, he was deployed in the North Western provinces. Around 1880 he was stationed in the Caucasus. After retiring, Erckert left Russia for Berlin where he died in 1900. Aleksandr N. Pypin, Istoriia Russkoi etnografii (St. Petersburg, 1892), 4: 102, n.1; Deutsche Biographische Enzyklopädie, 2nd ed. (Munich and Leipzig, K. G. Saur Verlag, 2006), 3: 284. 51. Erckert, Atlas ethnographique, and Erkert, Etnograficheskii atlas (see note 27). 52. Rodrig F. Erkert, Vzgliad na istoriiu i etnografiiu zapadnykh gubernii Rossii (St Petersburg, 1864), 1. 53. Ibid., 3 54. Ibid., 3–4. 55. Some reviewers of Erckert's atlas stated that the most sacred interest at that time was order, progress and liberty, and that Polish intrigues hindered this process in Russia. Th. de M. [Th. de Morville de Rouvrois?] and Obricht, La restauration de la Pologne appréciée au point de vue de la science historique et ethnographique. Examen de la question adressé aux journaux L'Opinion Nationale, Le Siècle, La Patrie et les Débats par MM. Th. de M. et Obricht (Paris, 1864), 30–31. 56. ‘Zugleich sind die Zahlen für die Preussischen und Russischen Provinzen als Maxima in Bezug auf die Polen anzusehen, so dass ihren übertriebenen Ansprüchen dadurch entgegengetreten wird’ [At the same time the numbers of Poles in Prussian and Russian provinces should be regarded as the maximum, so that in this way their exaggerated [territorial] claims may be combatted]: August Petermann, in Petermann's Geographische Mittheilungen (Gotha, 1863): 400, 464). 57. ‘The President's address’, Journal of the Anthropological Society of London 3 (1865): cix–cx. 58. Petronis, Constructing Lithuania (see note 3), 222–69.