Send message to Author

Abstract

This paper examines the Kazakh steppe as a zone of mobility between the Russian Empire and Central Asian states, especially Khoqand, from the onset of indirect Russian rule in the 1820s to the conquest of Tashkent in 1865. The steppe appeared to offer legally restricted individuals, such as deserters, escaped convicts, runaway serfs, and enslaved people, a rare chance to evade state control and renegotiate their circumstances. Although both Russia and Khoqand sought to limit movement within their ascriptive societies, neither could effectively police the vast, sparsely populated steppe, enabling those with local knowledge to shift between jurisdictions. Kazakhs themselves proved most adept at exploiting weak state control and ambiguous borders to negotiate improvements in their political and juridical standing. Mobility increased after Russia’s 1853 conquest of Ak Masjid, which brought imperial and oasis-state frontiers closer together. Yet runaways often fled both sides, indicating the limited prospects in either settled society. At the same time, designations of “slave” and “escapee” were elusive, as some escapees claimed to be victims of kidnapping while many former slaves preferred to remain within Kazakh households even after being granted their freedom.

Send message to Author

Abstract

Migration processes in Karakalpakstan in the 20th century: comparative-historical analysis.

Migration processes respond to the political and economic changes occurring in the country as a whole and in the republic in particular. Our research on the history of Karakalpakstan confirms this.

1. The tragedy of collectivization manifested itself in the unprecedented violence against the vast majority of peasant farmers. This resulted in migration to other regions. From the Khodjeyli district alone, 500 peasant farms migrated to other republics by 1931. From the Kipchak district alone, approximately 500 middle-class and 180 poor peasant farms migrated to Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan in February-March 1931, and 460 farms from the Chimbay district. In the Tamdy district, 2,530 of 4,518 farms remained, and 1,988 farms with 50,000 head of livestock migrated outside of Karakalpakstan. Overall, Karakalpakstan lost over 55% of its productive livestock during the initial period of collectivization.

2. The next event in Karakalpakstan's history that impacted the demographic situation was the famine in Kazakhstan in the early 1930s. In total, 7,000 Kazakh nomadic households in Karakalpakstan at this time expressed a desire to settle in Karakalpakstan.

3. Another significant historical event that impacted demographics was the deportation of Koreans from the Far Eastern region. Archival data has established the exact number of Korean settlers who arrived in Karakalpakstan: approximately 1,600 Korean families, or approximately 7,500 people.

4. The impact of World War II on the demographic situation in Karakalpakstan is obvious. In this area, Karakalpak historiography still needs to conduct thorough and fundamental research.

5. The 1960s and 1970s were a time of "great" construction projects and the development of virgin lands, which led to the Aral Sea disaster. The consequences of this environmental disaster still impact migration patterns in Karakalpakstan.

Send message to Author

Abstract

This paper examines Turkestan as a crucial but understudied space of wartime displacement, imperial governance, and coerced mobility during and after the First World War. Focusing on the years 1914–1922, it explores how refugees and prisoners of war were incorporated into the administrative, economic, and social landscape of Russian Turkestan. While existing scholarship on the First World War has often privileged the European fronts and the western borderlands of the Russian Empire, this study shifts attention to Central Eurasia as a frontier where imperial power, labor extraction, humanitarian action, and social control intersected in distinctive ways.

The paper asks three main questions. First, how did imperial and local authorities classify, manage, and redistribute refugees and POWs across Turkestan? Second, what role did these displaced populations play in the regional wartime economy, especially in relation to labor demands and state needs? Third, how did the collapse of empire and the revolutionary transformations after 1917 reshape the status and experience of these groups? Drawing on archival materials, administrative records, committee reports, and contemporary periodicals, the paper argues that Turkestan was not merely a distant place of confinement or transit, but an active arena in which war reshaped relations between state institutions, local society, and mobile populations.

By placing POWs and refugees into the same analytical frame, this study reveals how categories of displacement were politically produced and unevenly governed. It also demonstrates that the history of wartime Central Eurasia cannot be understood only through military or colonial narratives, but must also be approached through the history of humanitarian structures, labor regimes, and the movement of people across imperial space. In doing so, the paper contributes to broader discussions on space, sovereignty, and the social consequences of war in Central Eurasia.

Send message to Author

Abstract

During the late Soviet period, Kazakhstan experienced significant outmigration from rural areas. Between 1970 and 1989, the rural population increased from 6.47 to 7.06 million people. But it happened due to the high birth rate, the net migration outflow from rural areas between 1966 and 1988 was 2.55 million people. In 1970-1980, the migration outflow of the rural population in Kazakhstan per 1,000 persons was among the highest in the Soviet Union: approximately 1.5 times higher than the average for the Union republics, though 3-4 times lower than in other Central Asian republics. I argue that this trend resulted from several factors: reduced investment in agriculture after the initial development of the Virgin Lands, the growth of urbanization and the increasing demand for labor in cities, favorable migration opportunities to the RSFSR, mostly to Siberia and the Far North in RSFSR and the lower standard of living in rural areas compared to urban settlements. Ethnic composition also played a significant role. Due to the intensive development of the Virgin Lands, the Slavic population (Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians) constituted 41 percent of the rural population according to the 1959 census. Between 1970 and 1989, the Slavic population declined by approximately 450,000 people despite their positive natural growth. Many people returned to their home republics after the Virgin Lands campaign or moved to cities within predominantly the Kazakh SSR, RSFSR, and less often UkrSSR and BSSR, as they adapted more easily to Russian-speaking urban environments. At the same time, the Kazakh population also left rural areas at higher rates than the titular ethnic groups in other Central Asian republics. This study is based on published Soviet statistical materials as well as archival documents from the Central State Archive of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian State Archive of Economics.