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+

FREE Shipping

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+

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+

RRP: £16.99
Price: £8.495
£8.495 FREE Shipping

In stock

We accept the following payment methods


Hopkirk, Peter (2001). Setting the East Ablaze: On Secret Service in Bolshevik Asia. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-280212-5. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 21 June 2022. In this work, the author relates the story of a time best described by Captain Arthur Connolly, of the East India Company before he was beheaded in Bokhara for spying in 1842, as " The Great Game". Following the Indian Rebellion of 1857, the East India Company's remaining powers were transferred to the British Crown [61] in the person of Queen Victoria (who in 1876 was proclaimed Empress of India). As a state, the British Raj functioned as the guardian of a system of connected markets maintained by military power, business legislation and monetary management. [62] The Government of India Act 1858 saw the India Office of the British government assume the administration of British India through a Viceroy appointed by the Crown. The introduction is aimed at 'Reconsidering Anglo-Russian relations in Asia' (pp. 1–22) by moving through the post-Cold War need to study ‘the Great Game’ (pp. 1–2), various definitions and understandings of the phrase within the history of its study in both Western and Russian traditions (pp. 2-13), the author's purpose and aims (pp. 3 and 13), debates over ‘the chronological frame of the Great Game’ (pp. 13–18), a working definition of ‘the geographical frames’ (pp. 18–19), and a description of the research project and the sources consulted, along with other miscellaneous clarifications concerning monetary units, calendars, etc. (pp. 19–22). The quintessence of all this has been distilled in the introductory overview above.

a b c d e Deutschmann, Moritz (2013). " "All Rulers are Brothers": Russian Relations with the Iranian Monarchy in the Nineteenth Century". Iranian Studies. 46 (3): 401–413. doi: 10.1080/00210862.2012.759334. ISSN 0021-0862. JSTOR 24482848. S2CID 143785614. Archived from the original on 19 May 2022 . Retrieved 19 May 2022. But this is not all. Sergeev’s Great Game narrative is simply incomplete without mention of Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani (1838–97), a Persian Shia Muslim who was to become the preeminent figurehead of the pan-Islamic movement. Al-Afghani, after completing his theological training in Iran, was journeying in India when the Sepoy Uprising took place. His witnessing of that event led him to launch into a career traveling all around the Middle East, with excursions into Central Asia, promoting the pan-Islamic cause. (7) The Shia Persian Afghani would eventually be courted by the Sunni Ottoman Sultan Abdulhamid II (1876–1908), who himself made significant contributions to Pan-Islamism at time when ‘a conscious Pan-Islamic tendency [was] becoming evident in the Porte’s policy’. (8) This coincided with, one, the Balkan crisis of 1875–6 in which ‘Ottoman counter measures in Bulgaria created a strong anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim feeling, especially in Britain’, and two, the ensuing Russo-Turkish War (1877–8), which hardened Indian Muslim attitudes against the Russians to the point that ‘the Government of India was showered with numerous petitions condemning Russian action and demanding British support for the Ottomans’. (9) But ‘Britain, still under the influence of Gladstone’s [anti-Ottoman] campaign, chose to remain neutral after the Russian assurance that they would not threaten British interests by occupying Istanbul and the Straits’. (10) Thus, both Britain and Russia, as Christian powers, became the objects of Pan-Islamic scorn across much of the Middle East, Central Asia, and India during the 1870 and 1880s in particular. This is essential, but overlooked material in such a study. 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]

Wahlberg, E. (2011). Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games. Clarity Press. ISBN 978-0983353935. 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: 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. Ali Masjid and the British Camp, 1878". 5 November 1878. Archived from the original on 29 February 2020 . Retrieved 29 February 2020.

Quoted in Ira Klein, "English Free Traders and Indian Tariffs, 1874—96," Modern Asian Studies (1971). 5(3), 251–271, note 13. Robert Middleton, Huw Thomas, and Markus Hauser. Tajikistan and the High Pamirs, Odyssey Books, p. 476Still more, Sergeev’s choice to use the adjective ‘punitive’ (in the text cited above) carries a clear, intended sense of ‘just, deserved punishment’ for aggressive violations against the innocent, assaulted Russian victims. (37) Meanwhile, the Kazakh scholar Akseleu Seidimbek insists, from the perspective of the colonized, that for his people it accomplished not justice, but instead only ‘cast the hell of colonization into their consciousness’. (38) Another Kazakh scholar, Abdizhapar Abdakimuhli, agrees, calling it nothing but ‘oppressive over-lordship’. (39) Jelavich, Barbara (1974). St. Petersburg and Moscow: Tsarist and Soviet foreign policy, 1814–1974. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. pp.200–201. ISBN 0-253-35050-6. OCLC 796911. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 4 September 2021. Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim also acted as a tsarist agent during the Great Game, leading an expedition through Tibet, Xinjiang, and Gansu on the way to Beijing. [76] [77] The Russian General Staff wanted on-the-ground intelligence about reforms and activities by the Qing dynasty, as well as the military feasibility of invading Western China: a possible move in their struggle with Britain for control of inner Asia. [76] In a report to the Russian General Staff, Mannerheim also argued in favor of a Russian invasion of Xinjiang. [77] Disguised as an ethnographic collector, Mannerheim joined the French archeologist Paul Pelliot's expedition at Samarkand in modern Uzbekistan. They started from the terminus of the Trans-Caspian Railway in Andijan in July 1906, but Mannerheim quarreled with Pelliot, so he made the greater part of the expedition on his own. [76] Mannerheim met the 13th Dalai Lama of Tibet and acted as an envoy of Russia. [78] Persia [ edit ] Iran and Turkestan in 1835 Campbell, Heather A. (3 July 2021). "Great Game Thinking: The British Foreign Office and Revolutionary Russia". Revolutionary Russia. 34 (2): 239–258. doi: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1978638. ISSN 0954-6545. S2CID 242884810. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 6 June 2022.

Barthorp, Michael (2002) [1982]. Afghan Wars and the North-West Frontier 1839–1947. London: Cassell. pp.66–67. ISBN 978-0-304-36294-3. Sarila, Narendra Singh (2005). The Shadow of the Great Game: The Untold Story of India's Partition (1sted.). London: Constable. pp.8–9. ISBN 978147212822-5. 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] Scott, David (2008). China and the international system, 1840–1949: power, presence, and perceptions in a century of humiliation. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. p.107. ISBN 978-1-4356-9559-7. OCLC 299175689. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 24 October 2021. Britain considered that... 'It was necessary to cultivate China as a counterbalance to the Russian threat to British India'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.

Items that are not available in store will take 3-5 working days (excluding weekends and bank holidays) to be delivered to your nominated store. On November 19, 1905 a convocation was organized by "The Union for Autonomy" in which 83 representatives participated from Azerbaizhan, Armenia, Georgia, Poland, Latvia, Ukraine, the Kazakhs, the Tatars and others from among the ethnonationally oppressed nations. In the gathering, … the resolution was put forth that … every ethnonational people should receive autonomy in which they run their own affairs. (21) Himalayan Frontiers of India: Historical, Geo-Political and Strategic Perspectives edited by K. Warikoo. Routledge, Abingdon, 2009. p14 Though the Great Game was marked by distrust, diplomatic intrigue, and regional wars, it never erupted into a full-scale war directly between Russian and British colonial forces. [1] However, the two nations battled in the Crimean War from 1853 to 1856, which affected the Great Game. [2] [3] The Russian and British Empires also cooperated numerous times during the Great Game, including many treaties and the Afghan Boundary Commission. a b c Meyer, Karl E. (2009). Tournament of Shadows: the Great Game and the Race for Empire in Central Asia. Shareen Blair Brysac. New York: Basic Books. pp.235–236, 239. ISBN 978-0-7867-3678-2. OCLC 817868028. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 6 September 2021.A good deal more could, likewise, have been said regarding the development and impact of the pan-Islamic and broader pan-Asian movements upon the dynamics of Russo-British and other ‘great power’ relations. In describing how ‘[t]here emerged for the first time a perspective on the coalescence of Asian states under Russia’s patronage to renounce a British civilizing mission’ among ‘some native princelings’ of India following the Sepoy Uprising of 1857-58 (pp. 73–4), Sergeev offers fair, but limited coverage. He has, for starters, overlooked the fact that ‘[d]uring the [Sepoy] Mutiny, the British took full advantage of the help they had given to the Ottomans during the Crimean War’ by ‘not only obtain[ing] permission from the Porte for the passage of their troops to India through Egypt and Suez, but also secur[ing] a proclamation from the Sultan, as Caliph, advising the Indian Muslims not to fight against them’, with the proclamation then ‘circulated and read in the mosques of India’. While Indian Muslims certainly retained a measure of bitterness toward the British, the Ottoman Sultan’s proclamation ‘had a remarkable influence over them’, so much so that ‘”in this way the debt that Turkey owed to Great Britain for British support in the Crimean war was paid in full”’. (5) Indeed, with the Sepoy incident leading to the official end of the Mughal Dynasty and, thus, the dethroning of Muslim power in India, Indian Muslims were, more and more, driven to look toward the Ottoman Sultan as the sole Caliph of the Muslim world, as well as the Meccan ulema who were also under Ottoman rule, so that in due course debates over ‘jihad’ against the British as ‘infidels’ were deemed unnecessary and even un-Islamic by the remaining Muslim leadership in India. (6) Chapter one: the prologue of the Great Game' (pp. 23–64) opens with coverage of 'Russian and British motives in their advances into Asia' (pp. 24–35), arguing that though economic and Christian civilizing aims are present, it was predominantly geostrategic motives grounded in 'the quest for natural, or “scientific”, frontiers above all' which shaped both Russian and British foreign policy in Asia in the initial stages of the Game (pp. 23, 63). Following from this are the 'Profiles of the Game’s players' (pp. 35–49) ‘who', the author tells us, 'fell into three main categories’: ‘monarchs and high-standing bureaucrats’, ‘military and diplomatic agents in the state’s service’, and ‘explorers, journalists, and other freelancers, who often acted at their own risk’ (p. 23). Asian nationals played their role as well, employed within the ranks of each empire 'as surveyors, scouts, and secret informants' (p. 49). These included, among others, not only (those posing as) Muslim merchants, but even Siberian and Mongolian Buddhist monks on sacred pilgrimage to Tibet (pp. 250–9, 270–1). Chapter one closes with the provocative suggestion that the primary role of the Asian nations within the Great Game's prologue (and throughout) was that of 'decadent Oriental states' being incorporated 'into the global system of relations’ forged by 'the great powers' (p. 23; see critique below). Lieut.-General Sir James Outram's Persian Campaign in 1857. Outram, Lieut. General Sir James. 1860. London: Smith, Elder and Co. p=iii a b Korbel, Josef (1966). Danger in Kashmir. Princeton, New Jersey. p.277. ISBN 978-1-4008-7523-8. OCLC 927444240. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 9 August 2021. {{ cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher ( link) a b c d e f Andreev, A. I. (2003). Soviet Russia and Tibet: the debacle of secret diplomacy, 1918-1930s. Leiden: Brill. pp.13–15, 18–20. ISBN 90-04-12952-9. OCLC 51330174. Archived from the original on 24 January 2023 . Retrieved 1 September 2021.

  • Fruugo ID: 258392218-563234582
  • EAN: 764486781913
  • Sold by: Fruugo

Delivery & Returns


Address: UK
All products: Visit Fruugo Shop