During the Eastern Crisis of the 1870s, the British political elites followed with particular attention the Panslavic ideas expressed in Russia and often perceived them as a threat of the Russian Empire’s expansion into the Balkan Peninsula. However, at the very beginning of the Eastern Crisis, the British Parliament’s attitude to the Russian Panslavism was neutral or even positive and it had a considerable impact on British-Russian relations. Britain’s perception of Russian Panslavism during this short but signifi cant period has not been researched yet. This article uses the materials of parliamentary debates to trace the transformation of images of Russian Panslavism in the British political discourse in 1876 and to analyze the mechanisms of their construction. The author identifi es three models of interpretation of Russia’s “Slavic interests”, first, as “Slavic sympathies” of the Russian population, second, as Russia’s “territorial ambitions”, and third, as “Russian intrigues”, which allegedly instigated Slav uprisings against the Ottoman Empire. In the summer of 1876, the interpretation of Panslavism as sincere sympathies of Russian society for its Slavic brothers received the greatest weight in the British political discourse. This interpretation contributed to the formation of a more positive image of Russia and even a temporary change in the pro-Turkish policy of the British government. However, by the late 1876, British politicians increasingly began to suspect the Russian government of “subversive Panslavism”. The formation of images of Russian Panslavism in the political discourse of Great Britain was infl uenced not only the traditional patterns of British foreign policy, but also by the internal political struggle that escalated during the “Bulgarian agitation”. Panslavism was also interpreted ambiguously due to the lack of information, so politicians oft en based their judgments on stereotypes about Russia, the Ottoman Empire and the Balkan peoples. Finally, parliamentarians’ views were also aff ected by a rethinking of their own British identity. British politicians revisited issues of relevance to Britain’s own attitudes to the sovereignty of empires, the uprisings of colonized peoples, moral responsibility and Britain’s international mission