18 10 510 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Estates Description An account of the resource From the 1830s onward Crimea was a favored venue for prominent displays of wealth by powerful members of the ruling elite generally associated with the gulf-side imperial capital far away to the north. Rather than recreate the architecture of St. Petersburg on the Black Sea, many of those well-connected and well-to-do landowners made a conscious effort to accentuate the foreignness – perhaps even the exotic nature – of Crimea in the architecture of their estates and palaces. For some, the distinctiveness of the landscape was rooted in its Greek legacy. Russians and foreigners alike, inspired by the classical revival in architecture sweeping across Europe, pointed excitedly to the tangible residue of this legacy which suddenly placed Tavrida on the intellectual and cultural map of western civilization. Grecian elements therefore dominated many early nineteenth-century buildings. Other landowners – particularly the most wealthy and well-connected – played up the more exotic “Asiatic” legacy of Tavrida in their domestic landscapes. These nobles found it not just aesthetically pleasing but also empowering to incorporate elements of the local architectural tradition and natural landscape. In this they were no different than imperial elites elsewhere. In Russia, private residences were of particular importance to the articulation of the imperial presence in the borderland precisely because they were anything but private. Country houses and palaces were essentially public spaces, meant to attract the gaze of peers and peasants alike. The dignitaries, travelers and other visitors who penned detailed descriptions of Alupka, Gaspra, and Gurzuf inscribed these structures into the symbolic landscape of the province, but even on their own, the usad’by served as daily reminders of the reality of imperial authority to those who inhabited neighboring villages and worked in estate orchards and vineyards. Of course, not all landowners were wealthy enough to build palaces or manor houses that could accommodate such lavish public spectacles. The majority of those who did command that level of wealth were not provincial nobles, but members of the ruling elite who owned estates but neither registered in the Tavrida noble register nor otherwise participated in daily life in the province. The bulk of Tavrida’s registered nobles were not part of the ruling elite, nor were they distinguished for their wealth. In 1789 Governor Zhegulin pointed out to Potemkin that many of the (non-Tatar) officials in Tavrida were quite small-time Little Russian nobles or Polish szlachta who owned between five and thirty-five serfs. The low population density of the province together with the freedom of the native population from serfdom prevented landowners from accumulating wealth in the form of souls until well into the nineteenth century. However, most nobles (96% of non-Tatars and 88% of mirzas) in 1815 for example did own land from which they presumably drew sufficient income to maintain an honorable lifestyle. Of the 225 nobles registered between 1830 and 1853 for whom I have property data, 65% owned either arable or pasture land, and another 12% owned land in the form of orchards, gardens or vineyards. The remaining 23% owned houses and/or household servants and peasants, but did not mention landholding in their entries. Among ennobled mirzas, 96% owned land of some kind. Interestingly enough, they enjoyed average holdings three times larger than those of others, and a number of mirzas accumulated (or maintained) considerable annual incomes.<hr /> Elite residence Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Foros Description An account of the resource Prince Kirill Aleksandrovich Naryshkin, another of Vorontsov’s cousins and a member of the State Council, built the now famous estate at Foros. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gardens Description An account of the resource This collection describes 43 garden sites considered to be the property of the Russian state in the 1790s. The gardens described here contain 821 individually documented parcels. Together they covered 351 acres along the prime southern coast and river valleys, and contained nearly 20,000 trees (19,193, to be precise).  17 species are documented in the reports: plum (слив), hazelnut (фундук), walnut (волошские орехи), pear (груш), European pear (дулина), rowan (рябин), apple (яблон), cherry (черешен), cherry (вишне), aiva (айва), mulberry (щелковиц), olive (маслин), fig (инжер), date (фурма), medlar (мушмоль), peach (персик), and almond (миндал). The collection is based on a set of reports "<a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/items/show/939" target="_blank">on the composition of the lands and gardens of Tavrida Province held as quitrent properties</a>" (freehold properties in return for which lessees paid a land tax) compiled between 1791 and 1794. <hr /> Garden location Ethnicity of owner Tatar Arrangement gardens: 1, parcels: 1 Area 120 square sazhens (0.14 acres) Trees 10 Species present plum, apple, cherry, European pear, mulberry, fig Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Foros Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/items/show/939" target="_blank">Report on state-owned fruit gardens and vineyards along the Belbek, Kacha, and Alma rivers</a> apple cherry European pear fig gardens: state-owned mulberry plum southern coast Tatar property https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/beautifulspaces/original/20317c0f060786b2aa5a2244a87c7f45.png ac66c516985206f3c882082256f1bb32 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Data Description An account of the resource Care to look under the hood? Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context data Spatial Data Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Fortifications Description An account of the resource Fortifications ranged in and immediately surrounding Tavrida; the newest province of the Russian Empire at the time Wildbrecht's map was published in 1792. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource A. Wildbrecht (original cartographer) Kelly O'Neill (feature extraction) Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Map of Tavrida Province Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1792 Neatline Display Neatline Exhibit 8 Neatline Record 93 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Estates Description An account of the resource From the 1830s onward Crimea was a favored venue for prominent displays of wealth by powerful members of the ruling elite generally associated with the gulf-side imperial capital far away to the north. Rather than recreate the architecture of St. Petersburg on the Black Sea, many of those well-connected and well-to-do landowners made a conscious effort to accentuate the foreignness – perhaps even the exotic nature – of Crimea in the architecture of their estates and palaces. For some, the distinctiveness of the landscape was rooted in its Greek legacy. Russians and foreigners alike, inspired by the classical revival in architecture sweeping across Europe, pointed excitedly to the tangible residue of this legacy which suddenly placed Tavrida on the intellectual and cultural map of western civilization. Grecian elements therefore dominated many early nineteenth-century buildings. Other landowners – particularly the most wealthy and well-connected – played up the more exotic “Asiatic” legacy of Tavrida in their domestic landscapes. These nobles found it not just aesthetically pleasing but also empowering to incorporate elements of the local architectural tradition and natural landscape. In this they were no different than imperial elites elsewhere. In Russia, private residences were of particular importance to the articulation of the imperial presence in the borderland precisely because they were anything but private. Country houses and palaces were essentially public spaces, meant to attract the gaze of peers and peasants alike. The dignitaries, travelers and other visitors who penned detailed descriptions of Alupka, Gaspra, and Gurzuf inscribed these structures into the symbolic landscape of the province, but even on their own, the usad’by served as daily reminders of the reality of imperial authority to those who inhabited neighboring villages and worked in estate orchards and vineyards. Of course, not all landowners were wealthy enough to build palaces or manor houses that could accommodate such lavish public spectacles. The majority of those who did command that level of wealth were not provincial nobles, but members of the ruling elite who owned estates but neither registered in the Tavrida noble register nor otherwise participated in daily life in the province. The bulk of Tavrida’s registered nobles were not part of the ruling elite, nor were they distinguished for their wealth. In 1789 Governor Zhegulin pointed out to Potemkin that many of the (non-Tatar) officials in Tavrida were quite small-time Little Russian nobles or Polish szlachta who owned between five and thirty-five serfs. The low population density of the province together with the freedom of the native population from serfdom prevented landowners from accumulating wealth in the form of souls until well into the nineteenth century. However, most nobles (96% of non-Tatars and 88% of mirzas) in 1815 for example did own land from which they presumably drew sufficient income to maintain an honorable lifestyle. Of the 225 nobles registered between 1830 and 1853 for whom I have property data, 65% owned either arable or pasture land, and another 12% owned land in the form of orchards, gardens or vineyards. The remaining 23% owned houses and/or household servants and peasants, but did not mention landholding in their entries. Among ennobled mirzas, 96% owned land of some kind. Interestingly enough, they enjoyed average holdings three times larger than those of others, and a number of mirzas accumulated (or maintained) considerable annual incomes.<hr /> Elite residence Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gaspra Description An account of the resource Gaspra had been an ancient Greek settlement and a Tatar village. Prince A. N. Golitsyn built the palace between 1831 and 1836 in the neo-Gothic style favored by Vorontsov. https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/beautifulspaces/original/fb4f47f8ed585407023776bb57d27310.png cf0328e0fdd4c7d71135341c8b43dc4f Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Portrait of Antiquity Description An account of the resource Crimea was (and still is) uniquely studded with fallen slabs, old foundations, ancient walls, gravestones, and mounds of earth that have grown incrementally over the years to cover the bones of past lives. On my first visit to Sevastopol a friend explained that every good rain dislodged chards of pottery, the occasional coin, and other sundry treasures. And sure enough, when we went trekking in the mountains above Laspi later that week - keeping a sharp eye out for wild boar - I found three small bits of pottery, the edges worn smooth but the greens and blues of their surfaces still vivid. My friend chuckled and dismissed them as insignificant - the pieces dated to the fourteenth or maybe fifteenth century, after all - but I savored the extraordinary feeling of that small weight in my palm, sun-warm and heavy with historical memory. In 1837 the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg published a remarkable study On the Antiquities of the Southern Coast of Crimea and the Tavridan Mountains. The book's author, Peter Keppen, spent 5 years living in Crimea while serving as assistant to the chief of silk production (shelkovodstvo). During that time he traveled almost obsessively, collecting material for his geographical and archaeological projects. In the dedication (addressed, of course, to Tsar Nicholas I), Keppen describes Crimea as "the most charming of all the countries prospering" under Romanov rule. His book lovingly documents the location, history, and status of inscribed stones, marble columns, churches, and tombstones, but the bulk of material details defensive towers and walls. Keppen saw Crimea - in antiquity - as a territory divided between a savage, predatory north and a luxuriously beautiful south hemmed in by the Tauride (or Tavridan) mountains on one side and the Black Sea on the other. The fortified line that separated one from the other was, to him, one of the two organizing features of Crimean space (or of its antique space anyway). The second feature was sedimentation. Keppen was acutely aware of the way in which the passage of time imprinted itself on the landscape. At one point he describes finding the remains of an ancient fortification with thick walls of "wild stone" on the heights of Ayudag. "And is it surprising?" Keppen asks. "One must remember that this place has not been inhabited since 1475. And since then the spring sun has warmed the mountain tops and new growth has sprung from the depths of the earth no fewer than 360 times. 360 times over autumn storms have torn the leaves from trees and ripped the grasses, each year creating a new layer to cover any traces of human existence!"(170) Keppen would tell you that to see Crimea, one had to dig.  This collection contains all of the sites (though not all of the individual stones!) discussed in On the Antiquities of the Southern Coast. It includes 4 mausoleums, 9 Greek churches, and 58 fortifications. Each and every one was a ruin even before Keppen laid eyes on it.  Related gallery: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/19" target="_self">Uvarov's Antiquities</a> Related narrations: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/37" target="_self">Among the Ruins</a> & <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/40" target="_self">A Monumental Inscription </a>Related source map: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/item/898" target="_blank">Keppen's Antiquities</a><hr /> Antiquity Building or item from the past. In most contexts, an antiquity belongs to the ancient, classical, or possibly medieval period. In Crimea and in the Russian south more broadly, archaeologists and collectors used the term to describe the material legacy of the ancient Greeks, Byzantines, Genoese, Karaims, Ottomans, and Crimean Tatars who inhabited the region prior to Russian conquest. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gaspra Isar Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Petr Keppen Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Petr Keppen, O drevnostiakh IUzhnago Berega Kryma i Gor Tavricheskikh (Sankt Peterburg, 1837) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1837 Description An account of the resource Northwest of the cape of Ay Todor. This fortification is "the work of nature": a glade 40 feet by 8 feet almost completely enclosed by walls of rock.(194) Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource The Stanford Library copy of Keppen's work was digitized by Google Books. fortification ruin Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Portrait of Antiquity Description An account of the resource Crimea was (and still is) uniquely studded with fallen slabs, old foundations, ancient walls, gravestones, and mounds of earth that have grown incrementally over the years to cover the bones of past lives. On my first visit to Sevastopol a friend explained that every good rain dislodged chards of pottery, the occasional coin, and other sundry treasures. And sure enough, when we went trekking in the mountains above Laspi later that week - keeping a sharp eye out for wild boar - I found three small bits of pottery, the edges worn smooth but the greens and blues of their surfaces still vivid. My friend chuckled and dismissed them as insignificant - the pieces dated to the fourteenth or maybe fifteenth century, after all - but I savored the extraordinary feeling of that small weight in my palm, sun-warm and heavy with historical memory. In 1837 the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg published a remarkable study On the Antiquities of the Southern Coast of Crimea and the Tavridan Mountains. The book's author, Peter Keppen, spent 5 years living in Crimea while serving as assistant to the chief of silk production (shelkovodstvo). During that time he traveled almost obsessively, collecting material for his geographical and archaeological projects. In the dedication (addressed, of course, to Tsar Nicholas I), Keppen describes Crimea as "the most charming of all the countries prospering" under Romanov rule. His book lovingly documents the location, history, and status of inscribed stones, marble columns, churches, and tombstones, but the bulk of material details defensive towers and walls. Keppen saw Crimea - in antiquity - as a territory divided between a savage, predatory north and a luxuriously beautiful south hemmed in by the Tauride (or Tavridan) mountains on one side and the Black Sea on the other. The fortified line that separated one from the other was, to him, one of the two organizing features of Crimean space (or of its antique space anyway). The second feature was sedimentation. Keppen was acutely aware of the way in which the passage of time imprinted itself on the landscape. At one point he describes finding the remains of an ancient fortification with thick walls of "wild stone" on the heights of Ayudag. "And is it surprising?" Keppen asks. "One must remember that this place has not been inhabited since 1475. And since then the spring sun has warmed the mountain tops and new growth has sprung from the depths of the earth no fewer than 360 times. 360 times over autumn storms have torn the leaves from trees and ripped the grasses, each year creating a new layer to cover any traces of human existence!"(170) Keppen would tell you that to see Crimea, one had to dig.  This collection contains all of the sites (though not all of the individual stones!) discussed in On the Antiquities of the Southern Coast. It includes 4 mausoleums, 9 Greek churches, and 58 fortifications. Each and every one was a ruin even before Keppen laid eyes on it.  Related gallery: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/19" target="_self">Uvarov's Antiquities</a> Related narrations: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/37" target="_self">Among the Ruins</a> & <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/40" target="_self">A Monumental Inscription </a>Related source map: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/item/898" target="_blank">Keppen's Antiquities</a><hr /> Antiquity Building or item from the past. In most contexts, an antiquity belongs to the ancient, classical, or possibly medieval period. In Crimea and in the Russian south more broadly, archaeologists and collectors used the term to describe the material legacy of the ancient Greeks, Byzantines, Genoese, Karaims, Ottomans, and Crimean Tatars who inhabited the region prior to Russian conquest. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gelin-Kaya Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Petr Keppen Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Petr Keppen, O drevnostiakh IUzhnago Berega Kryma i Gor Tavricheskikh (Sankt Peterburg, 1837) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1837 Description An account of the resource Above Kiziltash, on the coastal side, Keppen located the walls indicating the fortification strategically placed here, with sightlines extending to Ayudag, Gurzuf, Gurbte-dere Bogaz (whence the main road into the mountains, via Kuush, begins). A perfect signalling post. The walls here were 2.5 arshinas thick.(173) Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource The Stanford Library copy of Keppen's work was digitized by Google Books. fortification ruin Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gardens Description An account of the resource This collection describes 43 garden sites considered to be the property of the Russian state in the 1790s. The gardens described here contain 821 individually documented parcels. Together they covered 351 acres along the prime southern coast and river valleys, and contained nearly 20,000 trees (19,193, to be precise).  17 species are documented in the reports: plum (слив), hazelnut (фундук), walnut (волошские орехи), pear (груш), European pear (дулина), rowan (рябин), apple (яблон), cherry (черешен), cherry (вишне), aiva (айва), mulberry (щелковиц), olive (маслин), fig (инжер), date (фурма), medlar (мушмоль), peach (персик), and almond (миндал). The collection is based on a set of reports "<a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/items/show/939" target="_blank">on the composition of the lands and gardens of Tavrida Province held as quitrent properties</a>" (freehold properties in return for which lessees paid a land tax) compiled between 1791 and 1794. <hr /> Garden location Ethnicity of owner Greek Arrangement gardens: 4, parcels: 4 Area not recorded Trees not recorded Species present not recorded Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Golumbei Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/items/show/939" target="_blank">Report on state-owned fruit gardens and vineyards along the Belbek, Kacha, and Alma rivers</a> Neatline Display Neatline Exhibit 39 Neatline Record 228 gardens: state-owned Greek property Kacha River https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/beautifulspaces/original/366151f456860d5f8a6fa452b734987a.png 501774254275c1f34d0f0c81c6b3c8ad https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/beautifulspaces/original/6b440dff76b2159a0f60302b6af27689.png 5304849b8ec6b408ec988601e3d44479 https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/beautifulspaces/original/f8e1e02179cf422e886fd67c9a42a01e.png 632004cf4e947a3f88f8ea9e4ebca8fc Antiquity Building or item from the past. In most contexts, an antiquity belongs to the ancient, classical, or possibly medieval period. In Crimea and in the Russian south more broadly, archaeologists and collectors used the term to describe the material legacy of the ancient Greeks, Byzantines, Genoese, Karaims, Ottomans, and Crimean Tatars who inhabited the region prior to Russian conquest. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greek church at Demirdzhi Description An account of the resource The only two-story Greek church found by Petr Keppen and documented in his "On the antiquities of southern Crimea". Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Petr Keppen, O drevnostiakh IUzhnago Berega Kryma i Gor Tavricheskikh (Sankt Peterburg, 1837): 17-19. [<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=-PAKAAAAIAAJ&lpg=PA51&ots=5dsqBqEsOO&dq=%D0%BE%20%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8F%D1%85%20%D1%8E%D0%B6%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BE%20%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%B0&pg=PA18#v=twopage&q&f=true" target="_blank">go to the page</a>] Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Stanford Library copy of Keppen's work was digitized by Google Books. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1837 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant POINT(3823373.46149 5574955.09992) Greek church Greek legacy ruin Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Portrait of Antiquity Description An account of the resource Crimea was (and still is) uniquely studded with fallen slabs, old foundations, ancient walls, gravestones, and mounds of earth that have grown incrementally over the years to cover the bones of past lives. On my first visit to Sevastopol a friend explained that every good rain dislodged chards of pottery, the occasional coin, and other sundry treasures. And sure enough, when we went trekking in the mountains above Laspi later that week - keeping a sharp eye out for wild boar - I found three small bits of pottery, the edges worn smooth but the greens and blues of their surfaces still vivid. My friend chuckled and dismissed them as insignificant - the pieces dated to the fourteenth or maybe fifteenth century, after all - but I savored the extraordinary feeling of that small weight in my palm, sun-warm and heavy with historical memory. In 1837 the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg published a remarkable study On the Antiquities of the Southern Coast of Crimea and the Tavridan Mountains. The book's author, Peter Keppen, spent 5 years living in Crimea while serving as assistant to the chief of silk production (shelkovodstvo). During that time he traveled almost obsessively, collecting material for his geographical and archaeological projects. In the dedication (addressed, of course, to Tsar Nicholas I), Keppen describes Crimea as "the most charming of all the countries prospering" under Romanov rule. His book lovingly documents the location, history, and status of inscribed stones, marble columns, churches, and tombstones, but the bulk of material details defensive towers and walls. Keppen saw Crimea - in antiquity - as a territory divided between a savage, predatory north and a luxuriously beautiful south hemmed in by the Tauride (or Tavridan) mountains on one side and the Black Sea on the other. The fortified line that separated one from the other was, to him, one of the two organizing features of Crimean space (or of its antique space anyway). The second feature was sedimentation. Keppen was acutely aware of the way in which the passage of time imprinted itself on the landscape. At one point he describes finding the remains of an ancient fortification with thick walls of "wild stone" on the heights of Ayudag. "And is it surprising?" Keppen asks. "One must remember that this place has not been inhabited since 1475. And since then the spring sun has warmed the mountain tops and new growth has sprung from the depths of the earth no fewer than 360 times. 360 times over autumn storms have torn the leaves from trees and ripped the grasses, each year creating a new layer to cover any traces of human existence!"(170) Keppen would tell you that to see Crimea, one had to dig.  This collection contains all of the sites (though not all of the individual stones!) discussed in On the Antiquities of the Southern Coast. It includes 4 mausoleums, 9 Greek churches, and 58 fortifications. Each and every one was a ruin even before Keppen laid eyes on it.  Related gallery: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/19" target="_self">Uvarov's Antiquities</a> Related narrations: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/37" target="_self">Among the Ruins</a> & <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/collections/show/40" target="_self">A Monumental Inscription </a>Related source map: <a href="http://dighist.fas.harvard.edu/projects/beautifulspaces/item/898" target="_blank">Keppen's Antiquities</a><hr /> Antiquity Building or item from the past. In most contexts, an antiquity belongs to the ancient, classical, or possibly medieval period. In Crimea and in the Russian south more broadly, archaeologists and collectors used the term to describe the material legacy of the ancient Greeks, Byzantines, Genoese, Karaims, Ottomans, and Crimean Tatars who inhabited the region prior to Russian conquest. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gurliuk Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Petr Keppen Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Petr Keppen, O drevnostiakh IUzhnago Berega Kryma i Gor Tavricheskikh (Sankt Peterburg, 1837) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1837 Description An account of the resource In the area of the Greek village of Enisala, along the post road, the remains of a wall are still visible. Locals from the village of Chavke claim that the wall was built by someone named Aksan-Temir Bagatyr.(143-144) Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource The Stanford Library copy of Keppen's work was digitized by Google Books. fortification ruin Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Abandoned Villages Description An account of the resource At the moment, this collection presents the contents of a list of sites abandoned in 1778 by various elements of the Christian population of the Crimean Khanate. Between July and September 1778, a grand total of 31,098 people (half the Christian population of the khanate) deserted Crimea and moved to Russian territory on the shores of the Sea of Azov. Empress Catherine II and a handful of powerful men on the ground clearly engineered this relocation, which has been described as everything from an episode of deportation to one of voluntary migration.  Catherine II's government spent 130,000 rubles in the process, but the results were priceless. The loss of thousands of Greeks, Georgians, and Armenians dealt a heavy blow to the khanate's economy (they tended lucrative gardens and orchards, cultivated vineyards, and dominated maritime trade through the Black Sea and beyond). Sahin Girey Khan's position was weakened beyond repair (already perceived as a lackey of the empress, his inability to halt the migration made clear Russia's lack of concern for the khan's ability to rule). An anxious Ottoman government deployed a fleet to Aktiar (the future site of Sevastopol) in August, only to be repulsed. Negotiations for a new peace settlement between St. Petersburg and the Porte got underway soon thereafter. The resulting Treaty of Ainali-Kavak secured the independent status of the khanate and required the removal of all Russian troops. This was no favor to the khan however. His position was tenuous at best; without the support of the empress's troops, he had precious little support. It wasn't long before the political situation in Crimea deteriorated, necessitating the return of Prince Potemkin and, by April 1783, the annexation of the khanate to Russia. <hr /> Abandoned place Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gurz[] Description An account of the resource 1 Catholic and 82 Greeks abandoned this area in 1778. Catholic settlement Greek settlement