Katharina Kucher analyzes the history of childhood in Russia over a period of 170 years, providing both extensive overviews and compelling case studies. By examining a variety of sources from the archives, discourses and debates, her impressive study explores the formation of a national anthropology of childhood, the dynamics of change, and transnational interconnections. Memoirs and fictionalized autobiographies are shown to either perpetuate (Lev Tolstoi, Sergei Aksakov) or challenge (Vera Figner, Elizaveta Vodovozova, Nikolai Vrangel΄) the myth of an idyllic childhood. These are read alongside pedagogical treatises, specialist journals, private and official educational instructions, and legal regulations. Three of the six chapters focus on the nineteenth century, with specific attention on the early 1800s, the era of the reforms (1860–1880), and the “modern times” towards the end of the tsarist empire. Despite its significance, this century has not yet been systematically researched. Kucher predominantly investigates the elite discourse of the aristocracy, but she also discusses social stratification and (counter)reforms during the latter half of the century. Intercultural transfer inevitably elicits two opposing perspectives: one that brings into focus a process of opening as a means of internalization, and the other that supports distinction, ultimately resulting in the stylization of Russian nationality.

Kucher's diachronic study draws on recent approaches from Childhood Studies and Visual History. Of particular importance are the portraits and photographs that are discussed in detail at the beginning of each chapter in terms of their pictorial conventions and the notions of childhood they convey. Regrettably, but through no fault of the author, the quality of the illustrations must be addressed here. The images are obscured by a greyish varnish, giving the misleading impression of a monochromatic palette. The dull coloring is particularly noticeable in the photographs and artworks of Aleksei Venetsianov, lauded for their golden luminosity.

Following the theoretical introduction, the second chapter provides an overview of the history of childhood in the eighteenth century, including a detailed analysis of noteworthy publications in children's literature as well as Catherine II's educational instructions and the establishment of the Smolnyi Institute for girls, modelled on Saint-Cyr. The milestone in Russian children's literature was the weekly magazine Children's Readings for the Heart and Mind (1785–89). Initially published by Nikolai Novikov, Russia's first professional “homme de lettres,” it consisted almost entirely of translations of German philanthropic almanacs and gave rise not only to children's literary journals but also to original children's literature in Russia. Some of the research in this chapter is, however, outdated: Nikolai Chekhov (Materialy po istorii russkoi detskoi literatury, 1750–1855 [Moscow, 1927]) estimated the number of original works for children in the second half of the eighteenth century to be 227 titles; this figure has more recently been revised and is now assumed to comprise more than 800 (Inna Antipova, “Kartina mira v obrazovatel΄nykh tekstakh XVIII veka dlia detei,” Detskii sbornik. Stat΄i po detskoi literature i antropologii detstva [Moscow, 2003], 147–156; Inna Sergienko, “Svodnyi spisok russkikh knig dlia detei i iunoshestva, napisannykh nemetskimi avtorami ili perevedennykh s nemetskogo iazyka (1750–1800),” in Dialog kultur. Russko-nemetskie kontakty v detskoi literature XVIII-XX vv. [St. Petersburg, 2020], 534–71).

The 580-page pedagogical diary penned by the French private tutor Adolphe Pascault (known as Pako in Russian) is a unique document that Kucher meticulously evaluates for the first time. For over six years, Pako documented and reflected on the progress of his aristocratic charge. The unpublished autograph systematically skirts the triad of Physique, Morale, Intellectuel/Instruction and provides essential insights into the European-influenced, multilingual and multicultural educational practices of the 1820s. Pako reveals intimate details of the boy's everyday life, such as ailments, gifts, or nightmares. Kucher is also interested in the extensive instructions written by Count Dmitrii Sheremetev, known as “Europe's richest privateer,” for his son Sergei's tutors. These guidelines from the 1850s, seemingly obsessed with regulating every aspect of childhood from educational content to bathwater temperature and walking routes, vividly illustrate the fundamental significance of the family as an institution of transcultural socialization. They mirror the arch-conservative, authoritarian, and patriotic-military model of education which prevailed amongst the high nobility during the reign of the reactionary Nicholas I.

In the final section, Kucher examines not only the changing values of genteel, transcultural childhood, but also the specific discourses of pedagogy and juvenile justice. The progress and missed opportunities of enforced modernization in the Russian empire in the last decades of the century were most evident in the living conditions of underprivileged children, who often found themselves under the wheels of urbanization and industrialization. The continuing professionalization of pedagogy, the popularization of scientific discourse, and educational campaigns led to the emergence of predominantly liberal, but short-lived, periodicals. Kucher analyzes a number of magazines that provoked controversy or censorial intervention, such as Zhurnal dlia vospitaniia (1867–75), Uchitel΄ (1861–70), Guvernantka (1862), and Iasnaia Poliana (1862). Initially, Kucher relies on the bibliographical survey compiled by the librarian Nikolai Ablov in 1937, which reveals a lack of recent data on the topic.

By focusing on biculturalism, Kucher provides an overview of the history of children in Russia, shedding light on the nobility, culture and society of the tsarist empire through the prism of childhood. Furthermore, she contributes to the “Europe-Russia complex,” a crucial aspect of Russian historiography. Kucher's valuable study offers numerous stimuli for further research, especially on the imperial dimension of childhood in a multi-ethnic state.