This review considers the concept of the Rurikid polity of the tenth century proposed by Aleksei S. Shchavelev, Senior Researcher at the Center for Eastern Europe in the Ancient and Medieval World, Department of the History of Byzantium and Eastern Europe, Institute of General History, Russian Academy of Sciences. Also, the reviewer examines its chronology and spatial structure, the genealogy of the early Rurikids, and the dynamics of their territorial power. The concept of “polity” replaces the previous notions of “Ancient Russia”, “Kievan Rus’”, and “Ancient Russian State” irrelevant for pre-Christian Times. The basis for the reconstruction of the Rurikid polity in the tenth century was not so much The Primary Chronicle whose chronology is being criticized more and more harshly, as The Tactica by Byzantine Emperor Leo VI the Wise (866–912), the treatise De Administrando Imperio by Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (905–959), letters from Hasdai ibn Shaprut (905–975), advisor to the Caliph of Cordoba, etc. This polity emerged following stochastic fluctuations in ethno-social, event, and personal history.
{"title":"Rhosia and the Circum-Russian Politosphere of the 10th Century","authors":"Alexander Emanov","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.836","url":null,"abstract":"This review considers the concept of the Rurikid polity of the tenth century proposed by Aleksei S. Shchavelev, Senior Researcher at the Center for Eastern Europe in the Ancient and Medieval World, Department of the History of Byzantium and Eastern Europe, Institute of General History, Russian Academy of Sciences. Also, the reviewer examines its chronology and spatial structure, the genealogy of the early Rurikids, and the dynamics of their territorial power. The concept of “polity” replaces the previous notions of “Ancient Russia”, “Kievan Rus’”, and “Ancient Russian State” irrelevant for pre-Christian Times. The basis for the reconstruction of the Rurikid polity in the tenth century was not so much The Primary Chronicle whose chronology is being criticized more and more harshly, as The Tactica by Byzantine Emperor Leo VI the Wise (866–912), the treatise De Administrando Imperio by Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (905–959), letters from Hasdai ibn Shaprut (905–975), advisor to the Caliph of Cordoba, etc. This polity emerged following stochastic fluctuations in ethno-social, event, and personal history.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines the history of the emergence of official Russian-Japanese relations in the late eighteenth century. The work focuses on unique archival materials from the SARC, RSA of the Navy, MD RSL, RSAAA, etc. The article refers to collections of documents, works by V. N. Berkha and E. A. Bolkhovitinov, and modern authors. The author analyses the first contacts between Russia and Japan, which became the prerequisites for the 1792–1793 expedition of Adam Laxman to Japan. Also, he studies the role of Dembei, San’emon, Sōza, and Gonza, the first Japanese nationals who visited Russia, in the development of Russian-Japanese relations and the study of Japanese culture and the Japanese language in Russia. In light of the struggle for colonies in the North Pacific in the late eighteenth century, the article also considers a peaceful but quick way of establishing relations, characteristic of Russia at that time, opposed to Japan’s desire to ritualise and slow down this process. The optimism, widely spread in the late eighteenth century in the establishment of trade and diplomatic relations, was fuelled, on the one hand, by numerous petitions from merchants with a request to establish trade with Japan and, on the other hand, by the desire of the state to win the struggle for spheres of influence in the North Pacific, in which Great Britain actively participated in the 1790s. Despite the success of Adam Laxman’s expedition, this approach to establishing international relations between countries was not to be preserved, and by the middle of the nineteenth century, it was replaced by a military-coercive one.
本文考察了18世纪后期俄日官方关系出现的历史。工作重点是来自SARC，海军RSA, MD RSL, RSAAA等独特的档案材料。这篇文章引用了文献汇编、V. N. Berkha和E. A. Bolkhovitinov以及现代作家的作品。作者分析了俄日之间的第一次接触，这成为1792-1793年亚当·拉克斯曼远征日本的先决条件。此外，他还研究了第一批访问俄罗斯的日本人登贝、圣埃蒙、Sōza和冈扎在俄日关系发展以及日本文化和俄语研究中的作用。鉴于18世纪后期在北太平洋争夺殖民地的斗争，本文还考虑了一种和平但快速的建立关系的方式，这是当时俄罗斯的特点，反对日本仪式化和减缓这一进程的愿望。这种乐观情绪在18世纪晚期贸易和外交关系的建立中广泛传播，一方面是由于商人要求与日本建立贸易关系的大量请愿，另一方面是由于国家希望赢得北太平洋势力范围的斗争，英国在18世纪90年代积极参与了这场斗争。尽管亚当·拉克斯曼(Adam Laxman)的远征取得了成功，但这种建立国家间国际关系的方式并没有被保留下来，到19世纪中叶，它被军事强制所取代。
{"title":"Adam Laxman’s Expedition in the Colonial Conflict in the North Pacific","authors":"Alexander Petrov","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.820","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.820","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the history of the emergence of official Russian-Japanese relations in the late eighteenth century. The work focuses on unique archival materials from the SARC, RSA of the Navy, MD RSL, RSAAA, etc. The article refers to collections of documents, works by V. N. Berkha and E. A. Bolkhovitinov, and modern authors. The author analyses the first contacts between Russia and Japan, which became the prerequisites for the 1792–1793 expedition of Adam Laxman to Japan. Also, he studies the role of Dembei, San’emon, Sōza, and Gonza, the first Japanese nationals who visited Russia, in the development of Russian-Japanese relations and the study of Japanese culture and the Japanese language in Russia. In light of the struggle for colonies in the North Pacific in the late eighteenth century, the article also considers a peaceful but quick way of establishing relations, characteristic of Russia at that time, opposed to Japan’s desire to ritualise and slow down this process. The optimism, widely spread in the late eighteenth century in the establishment of trade and diplomatic relations, was fuelled, on the one hand, by numerous petitions from merchants with a request to establish trade with Japan and, on the other hand, by the desire of the state to win the struggle for spheres of influence in the North Pacific, in which Great Britain actively participated in the 1790s. Despite the success of Adam Laxman’s expedition, this approach to establishing international relations between countries was not to be preserved, and by the middle of the nineteenth century, it was replaced by a military-coercive one.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"418 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article studies the history behind the construction of a navigable canal meant to connect the Volga and the Don through their tributaries, the Kamyshinka and the Ilovlya, in 1697–1698. The authors aim to clarify the history of the first project of Peter the Great to modernise the country’s transport infrastructure and analyse it in the context of the events of the initial stage of the Petrine era. The study refers to maps and plans of the area, materials of office work – documents that both have been previously published and are introduced into scholarly circulation for the first time and come from the funds of the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts, as well as the results of archaeological exploration carried out at the Selimov Val cultural heritage site in the village of Petrov Val in Kamyshin district of Volgograd Region. The study demonstrates that the period of 1697–1698 saw the construction of a structure meant to perform both fortification and hydraulic functions in the interfluve of the Kamyshinka and the Ilovlya. B. A. Golitsyn and E. I. Ukraintsоv controlled the construction, while Prince A. F. Shakhovsky directly supervised it. The project was authored by engineer J. Bröckell, and Peter I attached great importance to it, repeatedly discussing it with European statesmen and scientists during the Great Embassy. Pososhniye lyudi (people in sokha-based military service) were recruited in the settlements and districts of the Volga cities and did the construction work on the Kamyshinka. Logging was carried out along the River Sura in Alatorsky and Yadrinsky uyezds. By the end of 1697, a fortification was built where the Kamyshinka and the Ilovlya were closest to each other, the remains of the fortification perfectly preserved to this day. However, it turned out impossible to build a navigable canal. Having received news of the departure of J. Bröckell, the author of the first project, from the country in the winter of 1698, Peter I and other members of the Great Embassy began to look for and invite “sluice masters”, i. e. specialists in the construction of navigable canals. Thus, the first unsuccessful attempt to connect the Volga and the Don was why the tsar paid close attention to the theoretical and practical issues of building navigable canals as a significant area of science and technology.
{"title":"The Construction of the First Volga-Don Canal of Peter the Great","authors":"Yakov Kiyashko, Alexander Kleitman","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.819","url":null,"abstract":"This article studies the history behind the construction of a navigable canal meant to connect the Volga and the Don through their tributaries, the Kamyshinka and the Ilovlya, in 1697–1698. The authors aim to clarify the history of the first project of Peter the Great to modernise the country’s transport infrastructure and analyse it in the context of the events of the initial stage of the Petrine era. The study refers to maps and plans of the area, materials of office work – documents that both have been previously published and are introduced into scholarly circulation for the first time and come from the funds of the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts, as well as the results of archaeological exploration carried out at the Selimov Val cultural heritage site in the village of Petrov Val in Kamyshin district of Volgograd Region. The study demonstrates that the period of 1697–1698 saw the construction of a structure meant to perform both fortification and hydraulic functions in the interfluve of the Kamyshinka and the Ilovlya. B. A. Golitsyn and E. I. Ukraintsоv controlled the construction, while Prince A. F. Shakhovsky directly supervised it. The project was authored by engineer J. Bröckell, and Peter I attached great importance to it, repeatedly discussing it with European statesmen and scientists during the Great Embassy. Pososhniye lyudi (people in sokha-based military service) were recruited in the settlements and districts of the Volga cities and did the construction work on the Kamyshinka. Logging was carried out along the River Sura in Alatorsky and Yadrinsky uyezds. By the end of 1697, a fortification was built where the Kamyshinka and the Ilovlya were closest to each other, the remains of the fortification perfectly preserved to this day. However, it turned out impossible to build a navigable canal. Having received news of the departure of J. Bröckell, the author of the first project, from the country in the winter of 1698, Peter I and other members of the Great Embassy began to look for and invite “sluice masters”, i. e. specialists in the construction of navigable canals. Thus, the first unsuccessful attempt to connect the Volga and the Don was why the tsar paid close attention to the theoretical and practical issues of building navigable canals as a significant area of science and technology.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The letter of King John III of Sweden to King Charles IX of France from October 13, 1568, covers several subjects of the history of Baltic wars in the second half of the sixteenth century. What is most noticeable among them is the reasons why John III’s brother King Eric XIV was overthrown in September 1568, the plot against John of Finland to hand over Catherine Jagiellon, his wife and sister of Sigismund II Augustus, the Polish king, and grand duke of Lithuania, to the Russian czar Ivan the Terrible, as well as the period when the Northern Seven Years’ War ended. After his accession to the throne, John III faced several problems, which he had to solve. Firstly, the second son of Gustav I of Sweden had to legitimise his ascension in the eyes of the European monarchs, then break the international isolation of the Swedish kingdom and protect himself from internal and external conspiracies. His main goal was to free the imprisoned Eric XIV. The solution to these problems depended directly on stabilising Sweden’s foreign policy position, achievable through reconciliation with a hostile coalition of Denmark, Lübeck, and Poland and building an alliance with the French royal court, which offered mediation to end the hostilities. In the text of the published letter, the Swedish king appeals to the feelings of the French monarch, trying to show the “baseness” and “wickedness” of his elder brother’s policy, but also assures him of sincere friendship, proving the long-standing allied nature of the Swedish-French relations. All this makes the letter of John III to Charles IX a valuable historical source, whose value is fully revealed in the context of Swedish-French, Russian-Swedish and Russian-French relations in the sixteenth century. Published for the first time, it comes from the collection of P. P. Dubrovsky (13, No. 9), Russian National Library (St Petersburg). The article publishes the text of the letter in Latin as well as a translation into Russian.
{"title":"A Letter from John III of Sweden to King Charles IX of France: A New Source for the History of the Baltic Wars","authors":"Sergey Ryabov","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.825","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.825","url":null,"abstract":"The letter of King John III of Sweden to King Charles IX of France from October 13, 1568, covers several subjects of the history of Baltic wars in the second half of the sixteenth century. What is most noticeable among them is the reasons why John III’s brother King Eric XIV was overthrown in September 1568, the plot against John of Finland to hand over Catherine Jagiellon, his wife and sister of Sigismund II Augustus, the Polish king, and grand duke of Lithuania, to the Russian czar Ivan the Terrible, as well as the period when the Northern Seven Years’ War ended. After his accession to the throne, John III faced several problems, which he had to solve. Firstly, the second son of Gustav I of Sweden had to legitimise his ascension in the eyes of the European monarchs, then break the international isolation of the Swedish kingdom and protect himself from internal and external conspiracies. His main goal was to free the imprisoned Eric XIV. The solution to these problems depended directly on stabilising Sweden’s foreign policy position, achievable through reconciliation with a hostile coalition of Denmark, Lübeck, and Poland and building an alliance with the French royal court, which offered mediation to end the hostilities. In the text of the published letter, the Swedish king appeals to the feelings of the French monarch, trying to show the “baseness” and “wickedness” of his elder brother’s policy, but also assures him of sincere friendship, proving the long-standing allied nature of the Swedish-French relations. All this makes the letter of John III to Charles IX a valuable historical source, whose value is fully revealed in the context of Swedish-French, Russian-Swedish and Russian-French relations in the sixteenth century. Published for the first time, it comes from the collection of P. P. Dubrovsky (13, No. 9), Russian National Library (St Petersburg). The article publishes the text of the letter in Latin as well as a translation into Russian.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the most mysterious reports from the Life of Alexander Nevsky about the visit to the Rus’ prince of the Pope Innocent IV’s envoys, Cardinals Gald and Gemont, most likely has a real basis. Several characteristic details testify to this. In particular, the total number of Cardinals noted in the Life, who were with the Pope (twelve), corresponds to the actual number of Cardinals appointed by Innocent IV. The visit of the pope’s representatives to Alexander was to take place in the second half of 1252 or at the beginning of 1253, when the powers of Archbishop Albert Suerbeer as papal legate in Rus’ were temporarily terminated. During their trip, the papal envoys visited two of the strongest Rus’ Princes at once – Alexander Nevsky and Daniil Galitsky. Papal emissaries at this time could be the Bishop of Verona, Jacopo da Breganze, and the Bishop of Kammin, Hermann von Gleichen. In the Galician-Volhynian Chronicle they were attributed according to their belonging to episcopal sees (Bishops Beren’sky and Kamenets’ky), and in the Life of Alexander Nevsky – according to their relationship with the Cardinals who led their mission. These could be Guglielmo Fieschi, who was then in charge of allied negotiations with the Byzantine Church, as well as Hugo de Saint-Cher, who acted as legatus a latere in Central-Eastern Europe.
《亚历山大·涅夫斯基传》(Life of Alexander Nevsky)中最神秘的一篇报道是关于教皇英诺森四世(Innocent IV)的特使、红衣主教戈德(Gald)和吉蒙特(Gemont)拜访罗斯王子的，这篇报道很可能是有真实依据的。几个特征细节证明了这一点。特别是，《生活》中记载的与教皇在一起的红衣主教的总数(12人)与英诺森四世任命的红衣主教的实际人数相对应。教皇的代表访问亚历山大的时间是1252年下半年或1253年初，当时大主教阿尔伯特·苏尔贝尔作为罗斯的教皇特使的权力暂时终止。在这次旅行中，教皇使节同时拜访了两位最强大的罗斯王子——亚历山大·涅夫斯基和丹尼尔·加利茨基。此时的教皇使者可能是维罗纳主教雅各布·达·布雷甘泽和卡明主教赫尔曼·冯·格莱臣。在加利西亚-沃勒希尼亚编年史中，他们的归属是根据他们属于主教(主教贝伦斯基和卡梅涅茨基)，在亚历山大·涅夫斯基的生活中，根据他们与领导他们使命的红衣主教的关系。这些人可能是古列尔莫·菲耶斯基，他当时负责与拜占庭教会的联盟谈判，还有雨果·德·圣谢，他在中欧和东欧担任临时使节。
{"title":"Emissaries of Pope Innocent IV to Alexander Nevsky: Riddles of Biographical Histor","authors":"Alexander Maiorov, Irina Rudenkova","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.827","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.827","url":null,"abstract":"One of the most mysterious reports from the Life of Alexander Nevsky about the visit to the Rus’ prince of the Pope Innocent IV’s envoys, Cardinals Gald and Gemont, most likely has a real basis. Several characteristic details testify to this. In particular, the total number of Cardinals noted in the Life, who were with the Pope (twelve), corresponds to the actual number of Cardinals appointed by Innocent IV. The visit of the pope’s representatives to Alexander was to take place in the second half of 1252 or at the beginning of 1253, when the powers of Archbishop Albert Suerbeer as papal legate in Rus’ were temporarily terminated. During their trip, the papal envoys visited two of the strongest Rus’ Princes at once – Alexander Nevsky and Daniil Galitsky. Papal emissaries at this time could be the Bishop of Verona, Jacopo da Breganze, and the Bishop of Kammin, Hermann von Gleichen. In the Galician-Volhynian Chronicle they were attributed according to their belonging to episcopal sees (Bishops Beren’sky and Kamenets’ky), and in the Life of Alexander Nevsky – according to their relationship with the Cardinals who led their mission. These could be Guglielmo Fieschi, who was then in charge of allied negotiations with the Byzantine Church, as well as Hugo de Saint-Cher, who acted as legatus a latere in Central-Eastern Europe.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines the territorial transformations carried out in Vyatka Region in the 1780s–1810s. As is known, before the last quarter of the eighteenth century, the system of administrative-territorial division of the country was based on the historically established system of uyezds. However, in 1775–1802, two major reforms were carried out, which rebuilt the administrative-territorial division following qualitatively new principles – approximate equality of the population of provinces and uyezds and transport accessibility of administrative centres for the population. These changes largely determined the outlines of the social structure of the Russian Empire over the next century, and changes in the management system and social structure naturally attract researchers’ attention today. With the help of a detailed reconstruction (based on maps of the time, both printed, from national atlases of 1792 and 1800, and handprinted, from the collections of several archives) and comparison of the boundaries of provinces in the middle of the eighteenth century, in 1792, in 1792, 1800 and 1805–1806, the author reveals the redistribution of territories between urban centres. It transpires that the system of territorial relations in this region during the reform of Catherine II changed more decisively than in the central regions of the country, and the new borders were initially drawn without a survey of the situation on the ground, in some cases – in the form of straight lines on the map. The correction of inconveniences caused by such a manner of reform was delayed and was completed already during the administrative reforms of Paul I, which, unlike most regions, were not cancelled there in the first decade of the nineteenth century.
{"title":"Methods of the “New Division of the Empire”: The Reforms of Administrative Division in Vyatka Rеgion from Catherine the Great to Paul I","authors":"Dmitry Khitrov","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.823","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.823","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the territorial transformations carried out in Vyatka Region in the 1780s–1810s. As is known, before the last quarter of the eighteenth century, the system of administrative-territorial division of the country was based on the historically established system of uyezds. However, in 1775–1802, two major reforms were carried out, which rebuilt the administrative-territorial division following qualitatively new principles – approximate equality of the population of provinces and uyezds and transport accessibility of administrative centres for the population. These changes largely determined the outlines of the social structure of the Russian Empire over the next century, and changes in the management system and social structure naturally attract researchers’ attention today. With the help of a detailed reconstruction (based on maps of the time, both printed, from national atlases of 1792 and 1800, and handprinted, from the collections of several archives) and comparison of the boundaries of provinces in the middle of the eighteenth century, in 1792, in 1792, 1800 and 1805–1806, the author reveals the redistribution of territories between urban centres. It transpires that the system of territorial relations in this region during the reform of Catherine II changed more decisively than in the central regions of the country, and the new borders were initially drawn without a survey of the situation on the ground, in some cases – in the form of straight lines on the map. The correction of inconveniences caused by such a manner of reform was delayed and was completed already during the administrative reforms of Paul I, which, unlike most regions, were not cancelled there in the first decade of the nineteenth century.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865365","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay concludes the study whose first part (published in the previous number of QR) provided background information about the cargo lists of Dutch ships from the East Indies, examined the translations made from lists published in 1628 and 1646, and explored the evidence about a Russian interest in Dutch naval affairs in the mid‑1660s. The focus of this part is the lading lists of 1667 and 1671 and the complex contextualization of those translations which may help to explain why and for whom they may have been of particular interest in Moscow. Evidence supports an argument that their translation may have been of personal interest to Andrei Vinius, given what we know about his involvement with the project to build Russia’s first European-style warship and his writings on maritime affairs and geography. The translations also could have been particularly relevant for Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich, who was actively supporting Russia’s eastern trade, and whose Privy Chancery contained other texts related to events in Asia and the European searches for new routes to the Indies. One such text, based on a Dutch source, probably was produced by Vinius. The article concludes that the circumstances explaining the translations of the several Dutch lading lists during the seventeenth century changed over time. To explain their interest in Moscow requires a broad consideration of their history and the specific contexts in which the translations were done.
{"title":"The Kuranty in Context: Dutch Lading Lists and Their Russian Translations. Part 2","authors":"Daniel C. Waugh","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.829","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.829","url":null,"abstract":"This essay concludes the study whose first part (published in the previous number of QR) provided background information about the cargo lists of Dutch ships from the East Indies, examined the translations made from lists published in 1628 and 1646, and explored the evidence about a Russian interest in Dutch naval affairs in the mid‑1660s. The focus of this part is the lading lists of 1667 and 1671 and the complex contextualization of those translations which may help to explain why and for whom they may have been of particular interest in Moscow. Evidence supports an argument that their translation may have been of personal interest to Andrei Vinius, given what we know about his involvement with the project to build Russia’s first European-style warship and his writings on maritime affairs and geography. The translations also could have been particularly relevant for Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich, who was actively supporting Russia’s eastern trade, and whose Privy Chancery contained other texts related to events in Asia and the European searches for new routes to the Indies. One such text, based on a Dutch source, probably was produced by Vinius. The article concludes that the circumstances explaining the translations of the several Dutch lading lists during the seventeenth century changed over time. To explain their interest in Moscow requires a broad consideration of their history and the specific contexts in which the translations were done.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A handwritten book Collection of Military Letters is kept in the funds of the Russian National Library. It is a collection containing copies of messages about the military operations of parts of the Russian Army in 1702–1710. The study of the manuscript makes it possible to establish that the collection comes from the office of Boyar T. N. Streshnev and belonged to Clerk I. P. Topilsky. On the first pages of the collection, there is a previously unknown letter with a message about the assault and capture of the fortress of Nöteborg. An analysis of the letter demonstrates that its author was P. P. Shafirov, secretary of the Ambassadorial Prikaz. He was sent to Nöteborg to negotiate the conditions for surrendering the fortress. The letter contains information about the events of the assault, the course of negotiations, an assessment of the damage to the fortifications, and reports on the losses of the Russian side. Shafirov’s letter, written the day after the assault, is much longer than the known letters of Peter I but is not a work of the editors who created the official text of the report much later. The introduction of a new source about the assault and capture of Nöteborg adds to the knowledge about one of the significant events of the initial stage of the Northern War.
{"title":"About an Unknown Letter “from the Newly Conquered City of Areshek”","authors":"Alexey Alekseev","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.826","url":null,"abstract":"A handwritten book Collection of Military Letters is kept in the funds of the Russian National Library. It is a collection containing copies of messages about the military operations of parts of the Russian Army in 1702–1710. The study of the manuscript makes it possible to establish that the collection comes from the office of Boyar T. N. Streshnev and belonged to Clerk I. P. Topilsky. On the first pages of the collection, there is a previously unknown letter with a message about the assault and capture of the fortress of Nöteborg. An analysis of the letter demonstrates that its author was P. P. Shafirov, secretary of the Ambassadorial Prikaz. He was sent to Nöteborg to negotiate the conditions for surrendering the fortress. The letter contains information about the events of the assault, the course of negotiations, an assessment of the damage to the fortifications, and reports on the losses of the Russian side. Shafirov’s letter, written the day after the assault, is much longer than the known letters of Peter I but is not a work of the editors who created the official text of the report much later. The introduction of a new source about the assault and capture of Nöteborg adds to the knowledge about one of the significant events of the initial stage of the Northern War.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article analyses the decree issued by Empress Elizaveta Petrovna on April 16, 1743, the first in the Russian Empire and targeting the Herrnhut Brethren Community. It has been mentioned in historiography but quoted from secondary sources and interpreted as a decree directed against the missionaries, even though J. Eckardt (1876) and, recently, O. Teigeler (2006) put it in the context of the history of the Herrnhut communities in Livonia. The author analyses the content and implementation of the decree of 1743 in the context of the development of the Herrnhut communities in Livonia, including the island of Ösel, in the 1720s–1730s. The documents of the investigative case against the Herrnhut communities preserved in the fund of the Secret Chancellery (RGADA) and partly copied in the investigation dossier compiled by the College of Justice for Livonia, Estland, and Finland and kept in the fund of the College of Foreign Affairs in AVPRI, reveal that by 1743, the St Petersburg authorities did not consider the sermon of the Herrnhut to threaten them or Orthodoxy, nor did they have any idea of the doctrine itself. First, the decree ordered that Countess von Zinzendorf be caught, as the purpose of her stay in St Petersburg in 1743 was unclear. Further, the decree of 1743 was not intended against the few missionaries settled in St Petersburg who were striving to reach Asia through the Russian Empire. The correspondence between Chancellor A. P. Bestuzhev-Rumin and I. A. Cherkasov, Cabinet Minister of Empress Elizaveta Petrovna, reveals that the action taken on the community in 1743 was largely prompted by the foreign policy circumstances. The main threat to the central government was the commissions set up a year earlier by local noble elected bodies, i. e. the Landtags and the Ober-Consistory, to investigate the activities of the Herrnhut communities in Livonia. The activities of the Baltic nobility carried out independently of the imperial centre aroused the gravest suspicions because its specific rights and privileges, though confirmed by the Peace of Nystadt, were kept vague for the St Petersburg authorities by the 1740s. The local nobility, dramatically involved in the activities of the Herrnhut communities in the 1720s–1740s, found themselves in a difficult position, torn between their adherence to the doctrine and the need to remain loyal to the St Petersburg authorities, fulfilling the requirements of the personal decree of 1743.
{"title":"“A Territory of Threat”: The Banning of the Herrnhut Communities in Livonia and Local Society in 1743","authors":"Maya Lavrinovich","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.3.822","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.3.822","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the decree issued by Empress Elizaveta Petrovna on April 16, 1743, the first in the Russian Empire and targeting the Herrnhut Brethren Community. It has been mentioned in historiography but quoted from secondary sources and interpreted as a decree directed against the missionaries, even though J. Eckardt (1876) and, recently, O. Teigeler (2006) put it in the context of the history of the Herrnhut communities in Livonia. The author analyses the content and implementation of the decree of 1743 in the context of the development of the Herrnhut communities in Livonia, including the island of Ösel, in the 1720s–1730s. The documents of the investigative case against the Herrnhut communities preserved in the fund of the Secret Chancellery (RGADA) and partly copied in the investigation dossier compiled by the College of Justice for Livonia, Estland, and Finland and kept in the fund of the College of Foreign Affairs in AVPRI, reveal that by 1743, the St Petersburg authorities did not consider the sermon of the Herrnhut to threaten them or Orthodoxy, nor did they have any idea of the doctrine itself. First, the decree ordered that Countess von Zinzendorf be caught, as the purpose of her stay in St Petersburg in 1743 was unclear. Further, the decree of 1743 was not intended against the few missionaries settled in St Petersburg who were striving to reach Asia through the Russian Empire. The correspondence between Chancellor A. P. Bestuzhev-Rumin and I. A. Cherkasov, Cabinet Minister of Empress Elizaveta Petrovna, reveals that the action taken on the community in 1743 was largely prompted by the foreign policy circumstances. The main threat to the central government was the commissions set up a year earlier by local noble elected bodies, i. e. the Landtags and the Ober-Consistory, to investigate the activities of the Herrnhut communities in Livonia. The activities of the Baltic nobility carried out independently of the imperial centre aroused the gravest suspicions because its specific rights and privileges, though confirmed by the Peace of Nystadt, were kept vague for the St Petersburg authorities by the 1740s. The local nobility, dramatically involved in the activities of the Herrnhut communities in the 1720s–1740s, found themselves in a difficult position, torn between their adherence to the doctrine and the need to remain loyal to the St Petersburg authorities, fulfilling the requirements of the personal decree of 1743.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135865822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：