@article{Rabin2021,
  author    = {Rabin, Shari},
  title     = {Mobile Jews and Porous Borders},
  series = {PaRDeS : Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies in Germany},
  journal   = {PaRDeS : Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies in Germany},
  number    = {27},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-520-0},
  issn      = {1614-6492},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-53282},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-532822},
  pages     = {25 -- 38},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {This article explores the multi-directional geographic trajectories and ties of Jews who came to the United States in the 19th century, working to complicate simplistic understandings of "German" Jewish immigration. It focuses on the case study of Henry Cohn, an ordinary Russian-born Jew whose journeys took him to Prussia, New York, Savannah, and California. Once in the United States he returned to Europe twice, the second time permanently, although a grandson ended up in California, where he worked to ensure the preservation of Cohn's records. This story highlights how Jews navigated and transgressed national boundaries in the 19th century and the limitations of the historical narratives that have been constructed from their experiences.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Fruhstorfer2021,
  author    = {Fruhstorfer, Anna},
  title     = {Constitutional revolutions under autocracy},
  series = {Constitutional studies},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Constitutional studies},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {University of Wisconsin Press},
  address   = {Madison},
  issn      = {2474-9427},
  pages     = {33 -- 47},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Gary Jacobsohn and Yaniv Roznai's (2020) book Constitutional Revolution offers a sophisticated conceptual framework with a fascinating description of empirical occurrences of substantive revolutions in the practice and understanding of constitutionalism in Germany, India, Hungary, and Israel. While the conceptualization in the book and its empirical illustration clearly draw from regime transformations or substantive changes within democratic regimes, we know little about the extent to which substantive constitutional reforms are possible and meaningful in autocratic regimes. As their concept of constitutional revolution is ambiguous and requires a substantive engagement with an individual case at hand, we cannot sim- ply expect concept equivalence when expanding its use beyond a transitory or democratic context. Hence, in this contribution I ask, What constitutes a constitutional revolution in an autocratic regime? To shed light on this question, I rely on the expectation that we do not find important differences in the substance of autocratic constitutions compared to democratic constitutions. Autocratic elites, also, under- stand the possibilities of constitutional change and respond to them as they offer regime stability and simply more power, but that is not a revolution. Therefore, I argue that the substantive meaning of an amendment must be a departure from the inherent logic of the constitution, especially outside the standard procedures for autocratic ruling. Thus, in this paper I discuss the theoretical implications of a constitutional revolution under autocracy without a regime transition and provide empirical evidence from various constitutional amendments and de facto reforms in Russia. I show that a constitutional revolution is not always the most important or most discussed constitutional change—at least, not in an autocratic context. This discussion has important implications for understanding constitutionalism and autocratic stability and the largely overlooked relationship between substance and process in nondemocratic settings.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{CoudenysWarditz2021,
  author    = {Coudenys, Wim and Warditz, Vladislava},
  title     = {Is translation child's play?},
  series = {Die Welt der Slaven : internationale Halbjahresschrift f{\"u}r Slavistik},
  volume    = {66},
  journal   = {Die Welt der Slaven : internationale Halbjahresschrift f{\"u}r Slavistik},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Harrassowitz},
  address   = {Wiesbaden},
  issn      = {0043-2520},
  doi       = {10.13173/ws.66.1.46},
  pages     = {46 -- 69},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {1765 and 1767 saw the publication of the German, respectively the English translation of Lomonosov's Kratkij rossijskij letopisec s rodosloviem (1760). For the very first time the European reading public could find out how Russians saw their own history. These translations testified to Russia's ascent both as an empire and as a part of European learned society, and were made by youths who wanted to further their own career and were neither professional translators nor historians. In this article, we argue that the translations of Lomonosov's Kratkij rossijskij letopisec should not be studied as an isolated act of cultural transfer but as an episode in a longer history of circulation of knowledge. We demonstrate the complexity of this circulation by reassessing the 'quality' of these translations and positioning them in that longer history of circulation of knowledge by analysing the distribution of historical concepts (Begriffe) in Lomonosov's original and its translations.},
  language  = {en}
}