Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2022.415
D. Tsypkin, E. Simonova, M. Shibaev
The paper analyzes inventories of the late 15th–17th centuries from four major Russian monasteries: St Cyril’s of Belozersk, The Solovetsky monastery, Joseph-Volokolamsk monastery, and The Holy Trinity – St Sergius monastery. These inventories list the monasteries’ property for its safekeeping. The inventories of monastic libraries contain valuable information about the system of book keeping and the development of bibliography in Old Rus’. They also provide some clues for attribution of books, which can help in reconstructing the concepts of bookmaking technologies in Early Modern period. These technological notes in descriptions of books are organized according to the system created by the inventories compilers: the format, the binding, the artistic values, the type and technique of writing, the page’s composition, the writing material, the state of preservation. The paper shows that the major goal in creating these inventories was to single out the most important elements allowing to recognize the book. Yet the description of these elements was not uniform. The attention was mainly directed to external attribution of a book. From the second half of the 16th century the cursive writing and the so-called metnoe pismo (a sort of scrittura usuale) were already recognized as different from standard book writing and had to be distinguished and indicated in book inventories. The inventories reflected those characteristics of books that were important for the librarians and therefore shaped certain semantic structures in professional mentality of Old Russian bookmen. For modern scholars they can serve as markers that follow the process of the development of book technologies in Early Modern period.
{"title":"Technological Peculiarities of Old Russian Books as Reflected in Early Modern Inventories of Monastic Libraries","authors":"D. Tsypkin, E. Simonova, M. Shibaev","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2022.415","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.415","url":null,"abstract":"The paper analyzes inventories of the late 15th–17th centuries from four major Russian monasteries: St Cyril’s of Belozersk, The Solovetsky monastery, Joseph-Volokolamsk monastery, and The Holy Trinity – St Sergius monastery. These inventories list the monasteries’ property for its safekeeping. The inventories of monastic libraries contain valuable information about the system of book keeping and the development of bibliography in Old Rus’. They also provide some clues for attribution of books, which can help in reconstructing the concepts of bookmaking technologies in Early Modern period. These technological notes in descriptions of books are organized according to the system created by the inventories compilers: the format, the binding, the artistic values, the type and technique of writing, the page’s composition, the writing material, the state of preservation. The paper shows that the major goal in creating these inventories was to single out the most important elements allowing to recognize the book. Yet the description of these elements was not uniform. The attention was mainly directed to external attribution of a book. From the second half of the 16th century the cursive writing and the so-called metnoe pismo (a sort of scrittura usuale) were already recognized as different from standard book writing and had to be distinguished and indicated in book inventories. The inventories reflected those characteristics of books that were important for the librarians and therefore shaped certain semantic structures in professional mentality of Old Russian bookmen. For modern scholars they can serve as markers that follow the process of the development of book technologies in Early Modern period.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89468360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.120
V. V. Levchenko, Halyna Levchenko
The article examines the monograph by the Israeli historian M. Birman “P. Bitsilli (1879– 1953). Life and Work”, which offers “a consolidated review of life and work” by the Russian and Bulgarian scholar and humanist Peter Bitsilli. It is noted that the monograph was written in the genre of intellectual biography, conventional for historiography, when the personal life and creative activities of the investigated historical figure are closely intertwined with broad cultural and historical contexts of the era. The article emphasizes that in contrast to the biographies of people of the past widespread in the scholarly literature, this narrative centres around a historical person, whose name remained in oblivion for more than half a century after his death, both in academic sphere and in historical memory. Despite the fact that the book poses many questions about the daily life and intellectual activity of a scholar, it does not provide the answers on the basis of research methods. It is not grounded on a rich source base; similarly to many other modern studies, the book is lacking in the information related to the considerable surviving number of archival documents, the materials of which would give answers to many questions regarding the biography of P. Bitsilli. Despite some shortcomings, omissions in the presentation of the material in the book, many questions posed for the first time by the author have been addressed and arouse genuine interest. One of the characteristic features of the reviewed work is its bibliographic component.
{"title":"Historiographic Reflections in the Field of the Bitsilli Studies","authors":"V. V. Levchenko, Halyna Levchenko","doi":"10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.120","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.120","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the monograph by the Israeli historian M. Birman “P. Bitsilli (1879– 1953). Life and Work”, which offers “a consolidated review of life and work” by the Russian and Bulgarian scholar and humanist Peter Bitsilli. It is noted that the monograph was written in the genre of intellectual biography, conventional for historiography, when the personal life and creative activities of the investigated historical figure are closely intertwined with broad cultural and historical contexts of the era. The article emphasizes that in contrast to the biographies of people of the past widespread in the scholarly literature, this narrative centres around a historical person, whose name remained in oblivion for more than half a century after his death, both in academic sphere and in historical memory. Despite the fact that the book poses many questions about the daily life and intellectual activity of a scholar, it does not provide the answers on the basis of research methods. It is not grounded on a rich source base; similarly to many other modern studies, the book is lacking in the information related to the considerable surviving number of archival documents, the materials of which would give answers to many questions regarding the biography of P. Bitsilli. Despite some shortcomings, omissions in the presentation of the material in the book, many questions posed for the first time by the author have been addressed and arouse genuine interest. One of the characteristic features of the reviewed work is its bibliographic component.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72625813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2022.419
T. Andreeva
The review is devoted to the analysis of the book “Romantics, Reformers, Reactionaries. Russian Conservative Thought and Politics in the Reign of Alexander I” by the famous American historian Alexander Martin dedicated to the history of Russian conservatism in the first quarter of the 19th century. The author explores the process of formation of conservative ideology in politics, Russian social thought, culture, and also reveals its origins, defines features that are distinctive from the liberal doctrine. Against the broad background of the political and cultural life of Russia at that time, the complex relationship of various systems of conservative ideology is shown. It is demonstrated that the religious conservatism of such prominent defenders of Catholicism and Orthodoxy as Mestre and Sturdza, the clash of their opposite positions, disputes about the historical fate and civilizational purpose of Christianity, as well as the romantic nationalism of A. S. Shishkov and S. N. Glinka and the noble conservatism of N. M. Karamzin and F. V. Rostopchin reflected the search for new forms of anti-revolutionary conservative worldview. The position of Alexander Martin is especially noteworthy in relation to the significant contribution of conservative thinkers of Alexander's reign to the formation of state policy in the interests of Russia, the formation of the foundations of civil society, the development of national identity, Russian culture and language. The author comes to a reasonable conceptual conclusion that although the early conservatives did not develop a single ideology, they laid the foundation for various forms of Russian conservatism in the second quarter of the 19th – early 20th centuries.
{"title":"The Origins of Conservative Ideology in Russia","authors":"T. Andreeva","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2022.419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.419","url":null,"abstract":"The review is devoted to the analysis of the book “Romantics, Reformers, Reactionaries. Russian Conservative Thought and Politics in the Reign of Alexander I” by the famous American historian Alexander Martin dedicated to the history of Russian conservatism in the first quarter of the 19th century. The author explores the process of formation of conservative ideology in politics, Russian social thought, culture, and also reveals its origins, defines features that are distinctive from the liberal doctrine. Against the broad background of the political and cultural life of Russia at that time, the complex relationship of various systems of conservative ideology is shown. It is demonstrated that the religious conservatism of such prominent defenders of Catholicism and Orthodoxy as Mestre and Sturdza, the clash of their opposite positions, disputes about the historical fate and civilizational purpose of Christianity, as well as the romantic nationalism of A. S. Shishkov and S. N. Glinka and the noble conservatism of N. M. Karamzin and F. V. Rostopchin reflected the search for new forms of anti-revolutionary conservative worldview. The position of Alexander Martin is especially noteworthy in relation to the significant contribution of conservative thinkers of Alexander's reign to the formation of state policy in the interests of Russia, the formation of the foundations of civil society, the development of national identity, Russian culture and language. The author comes to a reasonable conceptual conclusion that although the early conservatives did not develop a single ideology, they laid the foundation for various forms of Russian conservatism in the second quarter of the 19th – early 20th centuries.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74531126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2022.403
Tilman Plath
On the basis of two treatises on the history of trade, the article considers the economic views of two scientists from different circles – German- and Russian-speaking scientific communities in St. Petersburg during the Enlightenment. It shows that although Chulkov and Friebe had no contact with each other, they held fairly similar views on the European concept of mercantilism. Both considered themselves to be great patriots of the Russian empire. As far as a detailed understanding of the term wealth, Chulkov was more inclined towards an almost religious framework, while Friebe clearly revolved around exclusively monetary issues. Both supported the independence of the local industry. According to the doctrine of mercantilism, both advocated trade, but Chulkov focused on domestic trade, while Friebe - on foreign trade. With regard to the impact of trade on the social dimension of society, Chulkov certainly backed the interests of Russian merchants, while for Friebe ethnicity was crucial. He depicted Baltic Germans performing especially brilliantly in trade in contrast to Jews portrayed in the darkest antisemitic manner. Accordingly, Chulkov considered the new Baltic provinces foreign, but Friebe, who himself lived there, regarded this territory as the key to modernization of Russia. In general, this article is an example of how the Russian science developed its own character against the background of the European phenomenon of enlightenment, with a special focus on economic thinking in late mercantilism.
{"title":"Wilhelm Friebe and Mikhail Chulkov on Russian Mercantilism","authors":"Tilman Plath","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2022.403","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.403","url":null,"abstract":"On the basis of two treatises on the history of trade, the article considers the economic views of two scientists from different circles – German- and Russian-speaking scientific communities in St. Petersburg during the Enlightenment. It shows that although Chulkov and Friebe had no contact with each other, they held fairly similar views on the European concept of mercantilism. Both considered themselves to be great patriots of the Russian empire. As far as a detailed understanding of the term wealth, Chulkov was more inclined towards an almost religious framework, while Friebe clearly revolved around exclusively monetary issues. Both supported the independence of the local industry. According to the doctrine of mercantilism, both advocated trade, but Chulkov focused on domestic trade, while Friebe - on foreign trade. With regard to the impact of trade on the social dimension of society, Chulkov certainly backed the interests of Russian merchants, while for Friebe ethnicity was crucial. He depicted Baltic Germans performing especially brilliantly in trade in contrast to Jews portrayed in the darkest antisemitic manner. Accordingly, Chulkov considered the new Baltic provinces foreign, but Friebe, who himself lived there, regarded this territory as the key to modernization of Russia. In general, this article is an example of how the Russian science developed its own character against the background of the European phenomenon of enlightenment, with a special focus on economic thinking in late mercantilism.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81363424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.213
Junko Fujisawa
This paper analyzes the negotiations within the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance during the final years of its existence, focusing on the Soviet reform proposals and M. S. Gorbachev’s vision of the “Common European Home” as well as on Eastern European reaction to them. In the second half of the 1980s, Gorbachev tried to found a “unified market” for the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance by introducing a market-oriented reform of the organization. However, this attempt did not materialize because of the East German and Romanian objections. After the collapse of Eastern European socialist regimes in 1989, the Soviet leadership urged the member-states to accelerate the reform of this international organization, hoping to achieve the pan-European economic integration through close cooperation between the totally reformed Council for Mutual Economic Assistance and the European Community. Although the Central European countries, namely Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland, aspired to join the EC individually, they agreed to participate in a successor organization of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance because the EC was not ready to accept them. Accordingly, by the beginning of 1991, all the member-states agreed to establish a consultative organization, which would be named the Organization for International Economic Cooperation). However, as the Soviet Union failed to sustain trade with the Central European countries, the three countries lost interest in the project. As a result, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance was disbanded without any successor organization. In other words, it did not collapse automatically after 1989 but came to an end as a result of various factors, such as rapidly declining trade between the member-states, Western disinterest in the cooperation with it, and the Central European policy changes.
{"title":"The End of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance","authors":"Junko Fujisawa","doi":"10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.213","url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyzes the negotiations within the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance during the final years of its existence, focusing on the Soviet reform proposals and M. S. Gorbachev’s vision of the “Common European Home” as well as on Eastern European reaction to them. In the second half of the 1980s, Gorbachev tried to found a “unified market” for the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance by introducing a market-oriented reform of the organization. However, this attempt did not materialize because of the East German and Romanian objections. After the collapse of Eastern European socialist regimes in 1989, the Soviet leadership urged the member-states to accelerate the reform of this international organization, hoping to achieve the pan-European economic integration through close cooperation between the totally reformed Council for Mutual Economic Assistance and the European Community. Although the Central European countries, namely Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland, aspired to join the EC individually, they agreed to participate in a successor organization of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance because the EC was not ready to accept them. Accordingly, by the beginning of 1991, all the member-states agreed to establish a consultative organization, which would be named the Organization for International Economic Cooperation). However, as the Soviet Union failed to sustain trade with the Central European countries, the three countries lost interest in the project. As a result, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance was disbanded without any successor organization. In other words, it did not collapse automatically after 1989 but came to an end as a result of various factors, such as rapidly declining trade between the member-states, Western disinterest in the cooperation with it, and the Central European policy changes.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87397022","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.209
Taťána Součková
Since the 1950s the Czech, Slovak, and Hungarian scholars have carried out research aimed at analysing the personal correspondence of Matthias Bel, a Hungarian polymath and one of the most significant intellectuals of the first half of the 18th century in the Habsburg monarchy. Analysis of Bel’s letters has revealed many interesting facts about Bel’s life as a Baroque scholar. It has also brought to light the sphere of his collaborations with various colleagues, both domestic and foreign ones. Amongst Bel’s contacts, there were also German scientists from the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences, most importantly, Gottlieb Siegfried Bayer and Christian Goldbach. With the recent emergence of the projects supporting the publication of the bilingual Latin-Slovak translations of Bel’s major work Notitia Hungariae novae historico geographica, historians have been seeking for to widen a range of its possible interpretations or to compare Bel’s opus magnum with similar works of his contemporaries. The study thus focuses on the analysis of a trace, which Bel’s communication left in the Russian historical milieu in the first half of the 18th century. On the basis of historical sources, and with corresponding relevant scholarship, a connection with Vasilii Nikitich Tatishchev’s work Istoriia rossiiskaia is outlined. With Bayer being in contact with both Bel and Tatishchev, a rather unexpected bridge was built between the Hungarian and Russian science in the era of the early Enlightenment. The aim of the study is to introduce new, and yet unpublished discoveries about the work of Matthias Bel and Vasilii Nikitich Tatishchev.
{"title":"Matthias Bel and the Russian Academic Milieu during the Enlightenment","authors":"Taťána Součková","doi":"10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.209","url":null,"abstract":"Since the 1950s the Czech, Slovak, and Hungarian scholars have carried out research aimed at analysing the personal correspondence of Matthias Bel, a Hungarian polymath and one of the most significant intellectuals of the first half of the 18th century in the Habsburg monarchy. Analysis of Bel’s letters has revealed many interesting facts about Bel’s life as a Baroque scholar. It has also brought to light the sphere of his collaborations with various colleagues, both domestic and foreign ones. Amongst Bel’s contacts, there were also German scientists from the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences, most importantly, Gottlieb Siegfried Bayer and Christian Goldbach. With the recent emergence of the projects supporting the publication of the bilingual Latin-Slovak translations of Bel’s major work Notitia Hungariae novae historico geographica, historians have been seeking for to widen a range of its possible interpretations or to compare Bel’s opus magnum with similar works of his contemporaries. The study thus focuses on the analysis of a trace, which Bel’s communication left in the Russian historical milieu in the first half of the 18th century. On the basis of historical sources, and with corresponding relevant scholarship, a connection with Vasilii Nikitich Tatishchev’s work Istoriia rossiiskaia is outlined. With Bayer being in contact with both Bel and Tatishchev, a rather unexpected bridge was built between the Hungarian and Russian science in the era of the early Enlightenment. The aim of the study is to introduce new, and yet unpublished discoveries about the work of Matthias Bel and Vasilii Nikitich Tatishchev.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87432310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2022.413
V. Pitulko
The Zhokhov site, investigated in 1989–1990 and 2000–2005, is located at 76°N in a remote part of the East Siberian Arctic. Excavations yielded tens of thousands of artifacts and faunal remains including the oldest anthropological remains known in the high arctic regions up to date. The culture-bearing deposits appear to represent the backfill of ice wedge casts formed after the site was abandoned when the island area became isolated due to the development of the post-glacial marine transgression. A large sample of radiocarbon ages obtained on various materials (n = 102) provides a chronology for the site, which was occupied 8300–7800 14С years ago. There were multiple occupation episodes, but it is not possible to estimate their duration with precision (within less than 50–100 years). The most intense human activity occurred within the interval 8050–7900 radiocarbon years BP, or ca. 9000 calBP but overall human occupation of the site spans roughly 2000 years. This is the oldest known archaeological site in the high-latitude Arctic. The identification and analysis of habitation episodes at the Zhokhov site has important implications for the study of Palaeolithic sites. The radiocarbon chronology indicates that repeated / cyclic human habitation at the same place is possible for up to 2000 years and possibly longer. Repeated or cyclic human occupation in the Zhokhov island area was possible due to locally available food and material resources. Thus, the radiocarbon dates provide more than chronomentric or chronological data; they are a source of information source about human ecology and its role in the evolution of culture.
{"title":"Geoarchaeology, Age and Chronology of the Zhokhov Site","authors":"V. Pitulko","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2022.413","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.413","url":null,"abstract":"The Zhokhov site, investigated in 1989–1990 and 2000–2005, is located at 76°N in a remote part of the East Siberian Arctic. Excavations yielded tens of thousands of artifacts and faunal remains including the oldest anthropological remains known in the high arctic regions up to date. The culture-bearing deposits appear to represent the backfill of ice wedge casts formed after the site was abandoned when the island area became isolated due to the development of the post-glacial marine transgression. A large sample of radiocarbon ages obtained on various materials (n = 102) provides a chronology for the site, which was occupied 8300–7800 14С years ago. There were multiple occupation episodes, but it is not possible to estimate their duration with precision (within less than 50–100 years). The most intense human activity occurred within the interval 8050–7900 radiocarbon years BP, or ca. 9000 calBP but overall human occupation of the site spans roughly 2000 years. This is the oldest known archaeological site in the high-latitude Arctic. The identification and analysis of habitation episodes at the Zhokhov site has important implications for the study of Palaeolithic sites. The radiocarbon chronology indicates that repeated / cyclic human habitation at the same place is possible for up to 2000 years and possibly longer. Repeated or cyclic human occupation in the Zhokhov island area was possible due to locally available food and material resources. Thus, the radiocarbon dates provide more than chronomentric or chronological data; they are a source of information source about human ecology and its role in the evolution of culture.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82718813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2022.301
A. Korzinin
The article is a comprehensive study of the composition of the court of the Grand Duchess of Lithuania Elena Ivanovna, daughter of the Grand Duke of Moscow Ivan III and Sophia Paleologina. The author comes to the conclusion that initially Ivan III tried to surround his daughter with Moscow noblemen and Russian servants in a foreign land However, by September 1495, almost the entire retinue of Elena was sent to Moscow on the orders of Alexander Kazimirovich, her husband. The court of the Grand Duchess was re-formed on the model of the court of the Grand Duchess of Lithuania and the Queens of Poland. All key positions in it (court-master, chancellor, сook, carver) were occupied by Lithuanian Catholic noblemen. The female court of Elena Ivanovna was headed by the court-master who supervised ladies-in-waiting (all of them were of Lithuanian origin and, probably, Catholics, with the exception of one lady of the Orthodox faith who came with the princess from Moscow). Only by 1511, the Orthodox princess became the court-master. Few Orthodox service people who arrived in Lithuania from Russia held administrative positions in the princess’s domain. In 1509, after the rebellion of Prince M. L. Glinskii and his departure to Moscow, a number of key figures (I. S. Sapega, M. Iundilovich) left the court of the Grand Duchess. The remaining courtiers (Mitia Ivanovich, Kgetovt Kalinikovich, and others), although formally in her service, in fact followed the instructions of the Lithuanian lords and were loyal to king Sigismund the Old.
本文综合研究了莫斯科大公伊凡三世的女儿立陶宛大公伊莲娜·伊万诺夫娜和索菲亚·帕莱洛吉娜的宫廷构成。作者得出的结论是，最初伊凡三世试图在异国他乡用莫斯科贵族和俄罗斯仆人包围他的女儿。然而，到1495年9月，埃琳娜的几乎所有随从都被她的丈夫亚历山大·卡齐米罗维奇(Alexander Kazimirovich)派往莫斯科。大公夫人的宫廷以立陶宛大公夫人和波兰女王的宫廷为蓝本进行了改组。它的所有关键职位(宫廷大臣、大法官、牧师、雕刻师)都由立陶宛天主教贵族占据。埃琳娜·伊万诺夫娜的女宫廷由监督宫女的宫长领导(所有宫女都是立陶宛裔，可能是天主教徒，除了一位随公主从莫斯科来的东正教女士)。直到1511年，东正教公主才成为宫廷主人。从俄罗斯来到立陶宛的东正教服务人员很少在公主领地担任行政职务。1509年，在王子m·l·格林斯基(M. L. gllinskii)的叛乱和他前往莫斯科之后，一些关键人物(I. S. Sapega, M. Iundilovich)离开了大公夫人的宫廷。其余的朝臣(米蒂亚·伊万诺维奇、克格托夫特·卡里尼科维奇等)虽然形式上为她服务，但实际上服从立陶宛领主的指示，忠于老国王西吉斯蒙德。
{"title":"The Court of the Grand Duchess of Lithuania and Queen of Poland Elena Ivanovna","authors":"A. Korzinin","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2022.301","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.301","url":null,"abstract":"The article is a comprehensive study of the composition of the court of the Grand Duchess of Lithuania Elena Ivanovna, daughter of the Grand Duke of Moscow Ivan III and Sophia Paleologina. The author comes to the conclusion that initially Ivan III tried to surround his daughter with Moscow noblemen and Russian servants in a foreign land However, by September 1495, almost the entire retinue of Elena was sent to Moscow on the orders of Alexander Kazimirovich, her husband. The court of the Grand Duchess was re-formed on the model of the court of the Grand Duchess of Lithuania and the Queens of Poland. All key positions in it (court-master, chancellor, сook, carver) were occupied by Lithuanian Catholic noblemen. The female court of Elena Ivanovna was headed by the court-master who supervised ladies-in-waiting (all of them were of Lithuanian origin and, probably, Catholics, with the exception of one lady of the Orthodox faith who came with the princess from Moscow). Only by 1511, the Orthodox princess became the court-master. Few Orthodox service people who arrived in Lithuania from Russia held administrative positions in the princess’s domain. In 1509, after the rebellion of Prince M. L. Glinskii and his departure to Moscow, a number of key figures (I. S. Sapega, M. Iundilovich) left the court of the Grand Duchess. The remaining courtiers (Mitia Ivanovich, Kgetovt Kalinikovich, and others), although formally in her service, in fact followed the instructions of the Lithuanian lords and were loyal to king Sigismund the Old.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86466298","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2022.314
A. Kudryavtsev
Derbent has gone down in history as an outstanding monument of world fortification erected in the 5th–7th centuries AD to protect against the invasions of nomads of Eurasia. Extensivearchaeological research of Derbent, under the guidance of the author, revealed completely new stages of the city’s existence, and Derbent emerged not only as the main military and political stronghold of the world powers of the medieval East in the Caucasus but also as the largest economic and religious center of the region, where Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, and Judaism penetrated and developed early. Derbent acquired a special significance in the history of the Christian world of the Caucasus during the reign of the Sasanian kings Yezdegerd II (439–457) and Peroz (459–484), ardent opponents of Christianity, when the struggle of the peoples of the Caucasus with the “teaching of magicians” severely aggravated. The Derbent fortifications began to play an important role in the anti-Iranian uprisings of the Caucasian rulers who relied on the nomads and mountaineers of the North Caucasus in their fight against the Sasanians. It was in the 60s of the 5th centuries, as our excavations have shown, that a cruciform temple was erected in the citadel of Derbent, which was transformed at the beginning of the 17th century into a reservoir. The most recent geophysical research, conducted in 2020, using georadar and laser scanning and photogrammetry confirmed the data obtained during the excavations about the religious purpose of the cross-domed structure in the citadel and its identification with the Christian temple of the 5th century, one of the oldest in Russia.
{"title":"Ancient Derbent in the History of the Early Christian World","authors":"A. Kudryavtsev","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2022.314","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.314","url":null,"abstract":"Derbent has gone down in history as an outstanding monument of world fortification erected in the 5th–7th centuries AD to protect against the invasions of nomads of Eurasia. Extensivearchaeological research of Derbent, under the guidance of the author, revealed completely new stages of the city’s existence, and Derbent emerged not only as the main military and political stronghold of the world powers of the medieval East in the Caucasus but also as the largest economic and religious center of the region, where Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, and Judaism penetrated and developed early. Derbent acquired a special significance in the history of the Christian world of the Caucasus during the reign of the Sasanian kings Yezdegerd II (439–457) and Peroz (459–484), ardent opponents of Christianity, when the struggle of the peoples of the Caucasus with the “teaching of magicians” severely aggravated. The Derbent fortifications began to play an important role in the anti-Iranian uprisings of the Caucasian rulers who relied on the nomads and mountaineers of the North Caucasus in their fight against the Sasanians. It was in the 60s of the 5th centuries, as our excavations have shown, that a cruciform temple was erected in the citadel of Derbent, which was transformed at the beginning of the 17th century into a reservoir. The most recent geophysical research, conducted in 2020, using georadar and laser scanning and photogrammetry confirmed the data obtained during the excavations about the religious purpose of the cross-domed structure in the citadel and its identification with the Christian temple of the 5th century, one of the oldest in Russia.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76040264","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.115
S. Krikh
The author of the article, using the method of backward chronology, highlights characteristic features of the narrative about Assyria from the beginning of the 21st century until the middle of the 20th century, and points out that I. M. Dyakonoff, who used to be the leading Assyriologist, gradually had delegated to his pupils almost all of the aspects of Assyrian history, retaining the history of Sumer within his major research scope. On the basis of archival documents, the author shows that the Assyrian narrative of I. M. Dyakonoff had been generally shaped even before the war, during his work on the chapters for the multi-volume “World History”. His Assyrian narrative was formed under the influence of the “Cambridge History of Antiquity” and V. V. Struve’s lectures: in the first case, this was evident in the presentation of a large amount of material; in the second case — in the desire to search for non-obvious explanations of the essence of historical processes. Moreover, I. M. Diakonoff did not share V. V. Struve’s views on the Assyrian history and attempted to present his position. The author concludes that the shift of I. M. Diakonoff’s interests from Assyrian history to mainly the history of Sumer was inevitable and was very unlikely to have been caused by the desire to supersede academician V. V. Struve in his status of the classic of Soviet scholarship. Two main factors influenced this transition: first, the features of Soviet historical scholarship, which presupposed a search for in-depth explanations almost exclusively in the socio-economic field, and secondly, the specificity of Assyrian sources, which contained scanty information about socio-economic processes.
本文作者运用回溯年表的方法，突出了21世纪初至20世纪中叶关于亚述的叙事特征，并指出，曾经的亚述学权威Dyakonoff逐渐将亚述历史的几乎所有方面都委托给了他的学生，而将苏美尔的历史保留在他的主要研究范围内。在档案文件的基础上，作者表明，甚至在战争之前，在他为多卷本的“世界历史”的章节工作期间，亚述叙事就大致形成了。他的亚述叙事是在《剑桥古代史》和v·v·斯特鲁夫讲座的影响下形成的:第一种情况，这在大量材料的呈现上是显而易见的;在第二种情况下，在寻找历史过程本质的非明显解释的愿望中。此外，Diakonoff不同意V. V. Struve对亚述历史的看法，并试图表明他的立场。作者的结论是，Diakonoff的兴趣从亚述历史转向主要研究苏美尔历史是不可避免的，不太可能是由于想要取代V. V. Struve院士在苏联学术经典中的地位而引起的。有两个主要因素影响了这一转变:第一，苏联历史学术的特点，它要求几乎完全在社会经济领域寻找深入的解释;第二，亚述文献的特殊性，其中包含的关于社会经济过程的信息很少。
{"title":"The Formation and Significance of Assyrian Narrative for the Soviet Historiography of Antiquity","authors":"S. Krikh","doi":"10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2022.115","url":null,"abstract":"The author of the article, using the method of backward chronology, highlights characteristic features of the narrative about Assyria from the beginning of the 21st century until the middle of the 20th century, and points out that I. M. Dyakonoff, who used to be the leading Assyriologist, gradually had delegated to his pupils almost all of the aspects of Assyrian history, retaining the history of Sumer within his major research scope. On the basis of archival documents, the author shows that the Assyrian narrative of I. M. Dyakonoff had been generally shaped even before the war, during his work on the chapters for the multi-volume “World History”. His Assyrian narrative was formed under the influence of the “Cambridge History of Antiquity” and V. V. Struve’s lectures: in the first case, this was evident in the presentation of a large amount of material; in the second case — in the desire to search for non-obvious explanations of the essence of historical processes. Moreover, I. M. Diakonoff did not share V. V. Struve’s views on the Assyrian history and attempted to present his position. The author concludes that the shift of I. M. Diakonoff’s interests from Assyrian history to mainly the history of Sumer was inevitable and was very unlikely to have been caused by the desire to supersede academician V. V. Struve in his status of the classic of Soviet scholarship. Two main factors influenced this transition: first, the features of Soviet historical scholarship, which presupposed a search for in-depth explanations almost exclusively in the socio-economic field, and secondly, the specificity of Assyrian sources, which contained scanty information about socio-economic processes.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79177193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","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：