Talk:Alexander Andreyevich Baranov

Manager, but also Governor
Various sources I've read refer to Baranov as Governor of Russian America, not just as a manager for the Russian-American Company. I'll be back with sources, but one for sure about that is in Andrei Grinev's book, linked at Talk:Oblast. Definitely also in British-side sources like BCGNIS and Alexander Begg's writings on the Alaska boundary dispute.Skookum1 (talk) 21:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I realize I'm responding to an old post, but I was just reading about this topic. According to this essay, Baranov was a "chief manager" of the Russian-American Company, or, as the linked essay puts it, glavnyi pravitel, in effect governor. The same essay says the RAC was modeled directly upon Britain's Hudson's Bay Company and East India Company--meant to be a business venture and a semi-formal state institution for extending imperial influence and control. So, if the RAC can be compared to the HBC, Baranov's job was similar to George Simpson (perhaps John McLoughlin would be a closer equivalent), and Russian America was akin to the Columbia District or maybe Rupert's Land--part of the empire but not under full and direct administration, not a "Crown colony", to use the British term. Perhaps the Russian term Guberniya is generally equivalent to Crown colony. On the other hand, the managers of the RAC after Baranov were appointed by the Russian government, while the managers of the HBC, like Simpson, were not appointed by the British government, as far as I know. But the general similarity between the RAC and HBC seems about right. Pfly (talk) 07:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Good research, thanks for sharing it.---Look2See1 (talk) 07:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I remember asking about this on WP:Russia or WP:Russian history (now merged into the former). It was definitely not a Governate, though Russian America was considered an integral part of the Empire (i.e. not a colony); SFAIK the Russian America Company did not have title, however, as was the case with the HBC's control over Rupert's Land (but not over the Columbia District or New Caledonia and other areas it did have a a trading monopoly in, e.g. what's now the Yukon).  So while the RAC was modelled on the HBC, its land tenure was different; and Simpson's official title, I believe, was Governor, but in the sense of governor of the company (maybe he was even on the Board of Governors?).  As I understand it, the Empire had title, the Company the right - the obligation - to manage affairs in the territory assigned.  Sorry can't recall teh sources, I'll see at some point if I can find the discussion on WP:Russia....Skookum1 (talk) 13:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Point of view
The language in this article seems biased in favor of the Russian-American Company's point of view. The paragraph referencing the Russian missionaries should include a link to Saint Herman of Alaska and perhaps include material from his point of view. Additionally, the "advocation of educational opportunities" may be seen as positive from one point of view, but some Alaska Natives see this as an attack on their culture.

Source: Bates, Clifton & Oleksa, Michael J.; Conflicting Landscapes: American Schooling/Alaska Natives, Anchorage, Alaska, The Kuskokwim Corporation, 2008, ISBN 978-1-57833-396-7.

Eskimoeric (talk) 02:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)