IDEAL | The Great Game of Britain: The classic race game along Britain's historic railway networks | Classic Board Games | For 2-6 Players | Ages 7+

Product Information

interpretations of the Great Game Toggle Historiographical interpretations of the Great Game subsection

In The Great Game, 1856–1907: Russo-British Relations in Central and East Asia, Evgeny Sergeev –Professor of History and Head of the Center for the Study of 20th-Century Socio-Political and Economic Problems within the Institute of World History at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow – makes a substantial, indeed impressive and welcome, if at times eclipsed and provocative, contribution to the historical study of the ‘Great Game’ played out on the ‘chess-board’ of Asia by Russia and Britain amidst a host of other supportive as well as not-so-supportive actors in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The work situates itself primarily within the fields of diplomatic history and the history of international relations, with contributions to the fields of military and strategic, (comparative) colonial and post-colonial, transnational, world and global historical, as well as Middle Eastern, Central Asian, South Asian, and East Asian studies, among others. That Sergeev generally shares this opinion is reflected in his derogatory representation of Kenessary Kasimov as nothing but a ‘self-proclaimed “sultan”’ who heads up nothing more than one of the ‘[n]umerous gangs of mounted bandits’ who ‘raided the frontier area’. To the contrary, Kenessary was the grandson of the great Kazakh khan Ablai (1711–81) and, therefore, rightful heir to the Kazakh khanship. He was clearly affirmed and embraced by a large portion of the Kazakh population as the last khan to rule the Kazakh khanate before a Russian provincial governing system was instituted on the Kazakh Steppe. (33) The Kazakh historian Zh. Kasimbaev, in his article on ‘The ethnonational independence movement of the Kazakh people led by Kenesari Kasimuhli’, makes clear that Kenessary, when conducting his campaign, Salyer, Matt (29 October 2019). "Going All in on the Great Game? The Curious and Problematic Choice of Kiplingesque Inspiration in US Military Doctrine". Modern War Institute . Retrieved 31 January 2023. Taming the Imperial Imagination:Colonial Knowledge, International Relations, and the Anglo-Afghan Encounter, 1808–1878 By Martin J. Bayly. Cambridge University Press 2016. p258 Himalayan Frontiers of India: Historical, Geo-Political and Strategic Perspectives edited by K. Warikoo. Routledge, Abingdon, 2009. p14In 1908, the Persian Constitutional Revolution sought to establish a Western-oriented, democratic civil society in Iran, with an elected Majilis, a relatively free press and other reforms. Seeking to resolve financial problems of the Qajar dynasty such as heavy debts to Imperial Russia and Britain, the Majilis recruited the American financial expert, Morgan Schuster, who later wrote the book The Strangling of Persia condemning Britain and Russia. [12] Tournament of Shadows: The Great Game and the Race for Empire in Central Asia". Foreign Affairs. 28 January 2009. ISSN 0015-7120. Archived from the original on 1 September 2021 . Retrieved 1 September 2021. Sneh Manajan wrote that the Russian military advances in Central Asia were advocated and executed only by irresponsible Russians or enthusiastic governors of the frontier provinces. [156] Robert Middleton suggested that The Great Game was all a figment of the over-excited imaginations of a few jingoist politicians, military officers and journalists on both sides. [98] The use of the term The Great Game to describe Anglo-Russian rivalry in Central Asia became common only after the Second World War. It was rarely used before that period. [157] Malcolm Yapp proposed that some Britons had used the term "The Great Game" in the late 19th century to describe several different things in relation to its interests in Asia, but the primary concern of British authorities in India was the control of the indigenous population and not preventing a Russian invasion. [158] Russia and Britain in Persia: Imperial Ambitions in Qajar Iran By Firuz Kazemzadeh. Yale University Press, 1968. p33 Granted, much like the Cherokee leader Elias Boudinout in the context of ‘Indian Removal’ in the U.S. in 1828 (45), Shokan Ualihanuhli (aka Chokan Valikhanov), a Kazakh serving in the Tsarist military in the 1850–1860s, called his own people ‘a wild and barbarous race, demoralized by Islamism, and reduced almost to idiocy by [the] political and religious despotism of their native rulers’ (pp. 32–3). But Sergeev omits the fact that near the end of his life Ualihanuhli ‘grew disillusioned with the methods that the Russian administration used in establishing its authority in Turkestan and resigned from state service’. (46)

Lieut.-General Sir James Outram's Persian Campaign in 1857. Outram, Lieut. General Sir James. 1860. London: Smith, Elder and Co. p=iii Rezun, Miron (1981). The Soviet Union and Iran: Soviet policy in Iran from the beginnings of the Pahlavi Dynasty until the Soviet invasion in 1941. Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff International. pp.6–11. ISBN 90-286-2621-2. OCLC 7925812. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 24 October 2021.Johnson, K. Paul (1 January 1994). The Masters Revealed: Madame Blavatsky and the Myth of the Great White Lodge. SUNY Press. pp.XVIII, 244. ISBN 978-0-7914-2063-8. The subject of study should not, therefore, be simplified to its strictly political or economic aspects (pp. 8-9), viewed primarily ‘through the prism of either military planning or espionage’ (p. 10), or ‘reduced to expeditions of explorers or intelligence operations’ (p. 344), as it has been in most Cold War and even more recent post-Cold War works (cf. also the influence of Kipling’s interpretation, p. 6). Feminist approaches which portray it as a ‘network of men’s clubs that reinforced the spatial and social barriers separating the sexes’ (p. 10) are, likewise, insufficient. It is, instead, a complex narrative which needs to be re-constructed according to three, possibly four, ‘interrelated dimensions': 1- ‘the competition for goods and capital investments in the preindustrial Asian markets’; 2- a competition between two distinct ‘models of early globalization’, namely the two main empires of Russia and Great Britain which both aimed to integrate ‘non-European decadent societies’ into their domains of rule socially, politically, and economically; 3- ‘as a complex, multilevel decision-making and decision-implementing activity directed by their ruling elites’; and 4- as a vital era in the history of Russo-British relations across Eurasia which ‘precipitated their consequent rapprochement and military alliance in World War I’ (pp. 5, 13). BANERJEE, ANINDITA (2011). "Liberation Theosophy: Discovering India and Orienting Russia between Velimir Khlebnikov and Helena Blavatsky". PMLA. 126 (3): 610–624. doi: 10.1632/pmla.2011.126.3.610. ISSN 0030-8129. JSTOR 41414133. S2CID 153982002. Archived from the original on 27 April 2022 . Retrieved 27 April 2022.

The Great Game Of Britain is a brilliant and fun way to learn about the different tourist destinations of Britain and where they are located on a map! And as a result, it’s a clever way to support your kid’s geographical understanding of British towns. a b c Afary, Janet (1996). The Iranian Constitutional Revolution, 1906–1911: Grassroots Democracy, Social Democracy, & the Origins of Feminism. Columbia University Press. pp.330–338. ISBN 978-0-231-10351-0. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 22 May 2022.In 1557, Bokhara and Khiva sent ambassadors to Ivan IV seeking permission to trade in Russia. Russia had an interest in establishing a trade route from Moscow to India. From then until the mid-19th century, Russian ambassadors to the region spent much of their time trying to free Russians who had been taken as slaves by the khanates. [34] Russia would later expand across Siberia to the Far East, where it reached the Pacific port that would become known as Vladivostok by 1859. This eastward expansion was of no concern to the British Foreign Office because this area did not lie across any British trade routes or destinations, and therefore was of no interest to Britain. [35] Similarly to the British Empire, the Russian Empire saw themselves as a "civilizing power" expanding a purely humanitarian mission among the Turcomans into what they perceived a "semi-barbarous" region, reflecting the ideology of the time. [30] [3] Early explorations and accounts [ edit ] Afghan foot soldiers in British regiment "The Rangers", 1841 East India Company [ edit ] In 1843, Britain annexed the Sind. After Ranjit Singh died, a new government was declared, but the Khalsa (Army) started to take control of the government. Thus, the main government declared war on Britain to get rid of the Khalsa. The First Anglo-Sikh War was fought between the Sikh Empire and the East India Company in 1845–1846, resulting in the partial subjugation of the Sikh kingdom. The Second Anglo-Sikh War was fought in 1848–1849, resulting in subjugation of the remainder of the Sikh Empire, and the annexation of the Punjab Province and what subsequently became the North-West Frontier Province. a b "Second Afghan War". www.nam.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 2 November 2021 . Retrieved 15 December 2022. Clements, Jonathan (11 December 2012). Mannerheim: President, Soldier, Spy. Haus Publishing. ISBN 978-1-908323-18-7.

Nikolaidou, Dimitra (15 September 2016). "Why the Soviets Sponsored a Doomed Expedition to a Hollow Earth Kingdom". Atlas Obscura. Archived from the original on 20 August 2021 . Retrieved 1 September 2021. Further information: Second Anglo-Afghan War Elephant and Mule Battery, Second Anglo-Afghan War Khyber Pass with Ali Masjid fort - lithograph by James Rattray (1848) Various authors connect British-Russian competition in Iran to the Great Game as well. [79] [12] [80] This competition continued until the Anglo-Russian Entente in 1907 after which the British and Russian Empires largely moved together in their overtures for imperial influence in the region until the Bolshevik Revolution. [12] set before himself the [clear] intention of restoring the territorial solidarity and independence...of the Kazakh nation. Before commencing any armed revolt he sent letters on numerous occasions to the rulers of the Russian empire setting forth the required demands. (34)

Overview of the Great Game

American historian David Fromkin argues that by the mid-19th century the British had developed at least nine reasons to expect a major war with Russia unless Russian expansion in Asia could be stopped: