Central and Regional Muslim Spiritual Administrations in Crimea and Bashkiria (1920s–1930s): A Network Theory Analysis

This article addresses current issues of religious policy, national autonomy, confessional self-government, and the role of Muslim leaders and muftiates. The history of religious institutions during the Soviet period represents a complex interplay of political, social, and cultural processes. The focus of the article is on the interaction between the Central Spiritual Administration of Muslims (TsDUM) and the only regional national muftiates of the 1920s–1930s – those of Bashkiria and Crimea. Through the example of these structures, the authorities' tendencies to regulate the management system of Muslim organizations are clearly traced. The study of national muftiates in Crimea and Bashkiria is of particular importance, as they not only performed religious functions but were also connected to national movements, serving as platforms for the consolidation of Bashkir and Crimean Tatar elites. Their aspiration for autonomy faced a dual confrontation: on one side, unification attempts by TsDUM, and on the other, administrative pressure from the Soviet state. The evolution of Muslim spiritual structures under Soviet policy is presented within the framework of Network Theory, which allows for modeling connections between various "actors" and analyzing their resilience, centrality, and influence (power). Graph construction, visualization, and metric calculations were performed using Gephi v. 0.10.1 with its built-in algorithms. The novelty of the research is expressed in: a) the application of Network Theory to the analysis of state-religious relations; b) a comparative analysis of muftiates in an interregional context; c) conducting historical research through the lens of spiritual leaders. The network approach revealed that the autonomy of the muftiates was based on local support, which made them particularly vulnerable to the repressions of the 1930s. Network analysis of the interaction between national and centralized religious structures under Soviet policy not only reveals the specifics of the functioning of muftiates in Crimea and Bashkiria but also offers a new methodological tool for studying Soviet history. The modern fragmentation of Muslim spiritual administrations in the Russian Federation partially replicates the centralization-regionalization conflict of the 1920s–1930s, underscoring the value of studying this historical experience.