Yves Franquien. Russian Diplomats and Diplomatic Geography. Who Represented Russia’s
Interests in San Francisco and Where the Imperial Russian Consulate and Its Successor Were
Located, 1852–1924 // Petersburg Historical Journal, no. 4, 2025, pp. 235–252.

DOI: 10.51255/2311–603X_2025_4_235

Absract:

This study of the history of the service of Russian diplomats in San Francisco from 1852 to 1924
is based on American and Russian periodical, literary and archival materials, as well as on the author’s personal local history research. Of interest is that prior to arriving in San Francisco many of them had experience in serving in Eastern Asian countries, rather than in European ones and in conducting business in North America. It is noteworthy that during the period from 1886 to 1900 the Russian consuls married US citizens. It is shown that the Russian consuls represented with honor the interests of the Russian Empire and were held in high regard in American society. Biographies, periods of service and residence addresses in San Francisco are provided for consuls and vice-consuls Stewart, Kostromitinoff, Klinkofstrom, Niebaum, Weletsky, Rosen, Olarovsky, Artsimovitch, Kozakevitch, Rogestvensky, Wywodzeff, and Romanovsky. Also provided in this
article are photographs of four of them, published for the first time.

Key words: Russian diplomats in the U.S.A., Russian consulate in San Francisco, Russo-American
relations, Russian in the U.S.A., Russian points of interest in San Francisco.

Author:

Franquien, Yves — vice-president, Museum of Russian Culture, Russian Center, San Francisco (San Francisco, USA).
E-mail: yvesf@yandex.com

References:

Istomin, A. A., Gibson, J. R. California through Russian Eyes, 1806–1848. Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 2013. 492 p.

Khisamutdinov, A. A. Russkii San-Francisko. Moscow, Veche publ., 2010. 364 p.

Kirichenko, E. B. Rossiiskii diplomaticheskii predstavitel’ v Khakodate A. E. Olarovskii (1870–1874 gg.) [Russian Diplomatic Representative in Hakodate A. E. Olarovsky (1870–1874). In Russ.]. In Novyi istoricheskii vestnik. 2012. No. 32 (2). URL: https://nivestnik.su/2012_2/09.shtml (accessed: 07.01.2025).

Lensen, G. A. Russian Diplomatic and Consular Officials in East Asia. Tokyo, Sophia University, [1968]. 294 p.

Similar Posts

| |

PHJ № 3 (47) 2025 — P. G. Rogozny. THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR: THE TRANSFORMATION OF RELIGIOUS PERCEPTION AND THE USE OF WAR BY THE BOLSHEVIKS IN ANTI-CLERICAL PROPAGANDA AFTER THE REVOLUTION

The Russian Orthodox Church provided unwavering support to the Russian Empire, which subsequently entered the war that would subsequently be designated the First World War. It is noteworthy that the Church regarded the war as a patriotic undertaking, among other considerations. However, the initial surge of patriotism was soon superseded by the onset of a challenging period of trench warfare. Upon assuming power in 1917, the Bolsheviks regarded the Church as an ideological adversary. A primary tenet of the left-wing parties’ anti-clerical propaganda asserted that the Church endorsed the “bloody imperialist war”. The ecclesiastical institution in question was accused of violating fundamental Christian tenets and commandments. This propaganda had a significant impact on the peasant masses, who predominantly adhered to religious beliefs. The endeavours of the Church and the religious community to respond to the Bolsheviks and left-wing parties in general, through the use of counter-propaganda, have largely been unsuccessful.

|

PHJ № 4 (48) 2025 — K. A. Boldovskii. THE RECONSTRUCTION OF LENINGRAD DURING THE YEARS OF THE SIEGE — THE PRACTICE OF LABOR MOBILIZATIONS

The author conducts an analysis of the process of labour mobilisations of the Leningrad population during the Siege, with a view to restoring urban infrastructure and the economy. The population was engaged in activities contributing to the urban economy, thereby playing a pivotal role in ensuring the uninterrupted functioning of the Leningrad life support system during the Siege. The city’s leadership initiated the organisation of labour mobilisations at the onset of the war. The bureau of the City Party Committee, the Leningrad City Executive Committee and the Military Council of the Leningrad Front constituted the primary mobilisation management bodies. The resolution of the Leningrad City Executive Committee, adopted on June 27, 1941, defined the main categories of citizens who could be called up for labour mobilisation. The length of working hours and responsibility for evading labor mobilization were also determined. The administration of enterprises and institutions mobilised working residents of the city, while the management of educational institutions mobilised students. Household administrations at the place of residence mobilised non-working residents. During the initial phase of the war, extending until the spring of 1942, the majority of mobilised individuals were engaged in construction activities, including the erection of defensive structures, the execution of loading and unloading operations, the construction of bomb shelters, the remediation of the consequences of artillery shelling and bombing, the harvesting of firewood, and other associated tasks. In the initial period, there was a paucity of a clearly defined plan for mobilising the working population. By the onset of spring 1942, a functional management system for labour mobilisations had been formulated. This enabled the project to be expanded on a wide scale in 1942–1943.The most extensive measures involving the mobilisation of labour were implemented in the spring of 1942 (for the purpose of cleaning the city) and in the winter of 1942–1943 (for the purpose of clearing snow from the city and railway communications). Commencing in the autumn of 1943, the municipal administration established the primary objective of its operations as the organisation of work on the construction project. For its implementation, both mass labor mobilizations and mobilizations of certain categories of workers were widely used.

PHJ № 2 (46) 2025 — A. K. Kirillov. TAX PETITIONER AS PART OF THE TAX OPTIMIZATION CULTURE IN THE LATE IMPERIAL RUSSIA

The article under consideration pertains to the study of a relatively obscure phenomenon in the annals of Russian history — namely, tax offices. By the onset of the 20th century, these institutions had evolved into a pivotal component of the tax calculation technology within the advanced segment of the Russian tax system. A significant aspect of their function pertained to the consideration of objections raised by entrepreneurs with regard to the amount of additional business tax levied upon them. The study draws upon a collection of objections lodged by taxpayers of the 2nd Tomsk office in 1907. The research methods employed encompass graphology, textology and hermeneutics. By comparing the design of the objections, typical expressions and the logic of substantiating taxpayers’ demands, identifying differences between similar documents and analysing corrections in the texts, the author discovers three series of objections, in each of which all documents (from two to eight in number) were undoubtedly composed by the same person. The author’s analysis is further enriched by a comparison of the handwritings in which the objections themselves, the signatures under them and the notes to them were written. This analysis demonstrates two key findings. Firstly, the objections were not composed by the taxpayers themselves, but by professional consultants. Secondly, at least two consultants had assistants who were directly involved in the preparation of the documents. In one particular instance, the name of the consultant was also identified. This finding suggests a discernible tendency among provincial entrepreneurs in late imperial Russia to entrust the reduction of their tax payments to professionals engaged in legal services.

| |

PHJ № 3 (47) 2025 — S. G. Serebryakova. JAPANESE PRISONERS OF WAR IN THE RUSSIAN CAPTIVITY DURING THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR (1904–1905)

The Russo-Japanese War has been attracting the attention of researchers studying the military, political, economic and diplomatic aspects of the war for more than a century. However, social issues are less often addressed by scientists. The problems of the Japanese in Russian captivity at that time became the object of research only recently. The main purpose of the article is to reveal the specifics of the organization of captivity, taking into account the specifics of Japanese prisoners of war. A brief historiographical overview of the study of the problem of Japanese prisoners of war in Russia is given, and the general conditions of detention of Japanese prisoners of war are outlined. The main issues considered in the work are the norms of international humanitarian law and the status of prisoners of war during the Russo-Japanese War, as well as the real conditions of detention of Japanese prisoners of war in Russia. The problems of organizing captivity with the involvement of new historical sources are outlined. The complaints of Japanese prisoners of war are analyzed, the reasons for these complaints are presented by the Japanese, and the reaction of the Russian administration. The conclusions are drawn that the Russian Empire sought to comply with the norms of international law but could not always do so largely for objective reasons. Russian archival documents and information from Japanese historiography were used to write the article.

PHJ № 2 (46) 2025 — R. S. Astashkin. ORGANIZATION OF THE TRANSIT TRADE OF THE ARMENIAN COMPANY IN THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE 17TH CENTURY (ON THE QUESTION OF PERSIA’S POSITION)

In 1667, the Armenian family firms based in New Julfa (Persia) were granted trade privileges in Moscow, which included the right to export oriental goods to Europe via the Russian Empire. The subject of this study is the question of the participation of the Persian Safavid state in this trade project. This inquiry is situated within the broader context of the “Russian transit” phenomenon, which is associated with the Russian Empire’s role in the European expansion towards the East. The factual material on the subject of publication was analysed by using the problem-chronological and comparative methods. The trade agreements that regulated the status of the Armenian Company were also studied. In preparing the article, the scientific works of historians, both domestic and foreign, including those with a specialism in the field of historical Iranian studies, were used. The analysis culminated in the formulation of a conclusion regarding the distinctive hybrid character of the accords established between the Russian authorities and the Persian Armenians. The study established that official Persia was not a full participant in these relationships and did not have a significant impact on their development. The hypothesis that the Safavids were uninterested in transferring the export of Persian raw silk to the northern (Russian) direction during the period under review is also put forward. The scientific results obtained can be used to further study the specifics of the Russian-Persian relations in the early modern history and the position of Russia at that time in the international trade system.

|

PHJ № 4 (48) 2025 — V. A. Livtsov. FOR THEM, THE WAR DID NOT END IN 1945. BOOK REVIEW: KOVALEV B. N. “THE THAW” AND HITLER’S HEIRS: FROM THE HISTORY OF THE SEARCH AND PUNISHMENT OF NAZI COLLABORATORS IN NORTHWESTERN RUSSIA IN THE LATE 50S — THE FIRST HALF OF THE 60S OF THE 20TH CENTURY. MOSCOW: ISTORICHESKAYA PAMYAT, 2025. 224 P.

“The Thaw” brought liberation not only to innocent victims. Real criminals, guilty of the death of many thousands of civilians, partisans and soldiers of the Red Army, were also released. Who is to blame for it? Many war criminals found refuge in the West — both in West Germany and in the countries allied with the USSR in the anti-Hitler coalition. How could it happen? Former collaborators of the Nazis, Vlasovites and punishers were often able to successfully hide their past. They were respected as honored veterans of the Great Patriotic War. Why did it happen? The Soviet state security agencies spent decades searching for them. What did they do to ensure that justice prevailed? Answers to these questions can be found in the new book by St. Petersburg historian Boris Kovalev.