scholarly journals Calendar Reform under Peter the Great: Absolutist Prerogatives, Plural Temporalities, and Christian Exceptionalism

Slavic Review ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-89
Author(s):  
Andreas Schönle

The calendar reforms of Peter the Great introduced on January 1, 1700 have produced a surprising amount of confusion and misunderstanding. This articles proposes firstly to clarify the aims and outcomes of these reforms, so far as the available sources allow. Secondly, through an examination of the New Year celebrations mandated by Peter's edicts, the article examines the legitimating arguments that have been deployed, including ideas about Russia's relation to western countries, about the position of the Orthodox Church in the polity, and about the prerogatives of the ruler in these matters. As a result of the changing arguments invoked by Peter and his entourage, the reforms introduced a regime of plural temporalities that has affected the course of Russia's development and the elaboration of its identities to this day. The reforms had little to do with heralding a secular, modern society. If initially they represented a failed pragmatic attempt to create a civil calendar aligned with Protestant countries, their justification, once it finally settled, harked back to long-standing theological ideas about the time of the Incarnation.

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 03029
Author(s):  
Tamara Lipich ◽  
Elena Maryasova ◽  
Ksenia Strakhova

Consideration and analysis of the image of a woman, its specific features of manifestation in various historical epochs of the formation of Russian statehood contributes to the full and adequate reproduction of the cultural panorama of public life in Russia. The article discusses the position of the Russian woman in a traditional normative society. The main factors that influence the development of a female personality in the period under review are analysed, the reasons contributing to the rejection of women from traditional behaviour and the attitude of society to such marginal manifestations of behaviour are highlighted. Authors pay special attention to influence of the Russian Orthodox Church as an integral part of society on development of the Russian woman as individual and on formation of stereotypes of female roles in family. This experience can be used for attempt of forecasting the development of the female personality in modern society.


1985 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. L. Freeze

The history of the Russian Orthodox Church, especially in the modern imperial period (1700–1917), has been a woefully neglected field of scholarly research. That neglect antedates the collapse of the ancien regime in 1917, for pre-revolutionary historiography on the Church was neither abundant nor sophisticated; rarely did it produce more than myopic diocesan histories, fatuous accounts of the local seminary, or hagiographic paeans devoted to some prominent clergyman. The reasons for this neglect of so fundamental an institution in ‘Holy Rus’ are many – restricted access to ecclesiastical archives, difficulties in publication because of vigilant censors, but above all the intelligentsia's indifference to an apparently moribund and state-controlled institution. Paradoxically enough, Catholic polemicists, Orthodox Slavophiles, anticlerical intellectuals and reform-minded clergy all concurred – from different motives, for different reasons – in believing that the Church had become a mere instrument of the secular state, and that this change derived from ‘revolutionary’ and ‘Westernizing’ reforms in the Church imposed by Peter the Great in the early eighteenth century.


Philotheos ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-130
Author(s):  
Milesa Stefanović-Banović ◽  

The Serbian Orthodox Church is considered by a number of Serbian citizens to be the “guardian” of tradition and cultural heritage. Issues related to church reforms are thus often particularly sensitive, and are perceived by some of the public as a danger to the preservation of cultur­al and religious identity. On the other hand, there are opinions in favor of reforms. In this context, the issue of church calendar reform is of special interest. Although it has been raised for more than a century, it is still as relevant as in the first attempts at the reform thereof. This paper explores the attitudes on online platforms in Serbia on this issue. Is the church calendar perceived as an integral part of the cultural heritage? What are the pros and cons of calendar reform? What would be the consequences of its potential change?


Author(s):  
Aleksandr R. Pavlushkov ◽  

Based on various sources, this article attempts to determine the scope and nature of the relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Secret Chancellery during the reforms of Peter I. The chronological framework of the period under study is limited to 1718–1725. It should be noted that the number of works on this topic is rather small. The article dwells on the various aspects and forms of the relationship between the penal body and the Church as a whole. The starting point is the case of Tsarevich Alexei, which exposed the dissatisfaction of the clergy with the reforms of Peter I and initiated the strengthening of punitive policies, involving the tools of the Church. According to the author, the established relationship between the Church and the Secret Chancellery cannot be called sporadic, since there had been a certain unity of mutual interests between the parties. It is emphasized that contradictions had been accumulating between them, related to the violation of the secrecy of confession, lack of legal regulation of official relations, and structural vagueness of the institutions of the Most Holy Synod that had contacts with the Secret Chancellery. Nevertheless, in practice there had been developed a certain procedure for coordinating various issues, which both sides refrained from violating. Further, the author analyses the case of Tsarevich Alexei and the role of the first chief procurators of the Most Holy Synod in the context of the development of the relationship between the Church and the Secret Chancellery. Further, the article indicates the reasons for not only mutual interest, but also the subsequent crisis in their relationship that occurred in 1725. The author concludes that the relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Secret Chancellery was in line with the policy of forming a police state.


Slavic Review ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory L. Freeze

It has long been an unchallenged assumption in Russian historiography—prerevolutionary, Soviet, western—that the Orthodox church was an instrument of the state. It is generally held that this subservience, if muted in medieval Muscovy, became overt in the early eighteenth century, when the church reforms of Peter the Great transformed the church into a state bureau and its clergy into ideological policemen. Contemporary accounts by foreigners, in particular, stressed the apparent servility of the church and its exploitation by the secular state. Secular elites in Russia held essentially the same view; even laymen whose sentiments put them close to the church felt defenseless before such foreign criticism. The intelligentsia, whether of liberal or radical persuasion, generally tended to dismiss the church and clergy as little more than ordained gendarmes, particularly in the prereform era. The church endeavored, to be sure, to rebut such criticism, especially after 1855, when a less stringent censorship, the proliferation of ecclesiastical journals, and heightened concern for social issues triggered a flurry of articles about the church and its social conscience. Once the storm over emancipation had subsided, the issue lost its immediate relevance and elicited only marginal, superficial studies for the duration of the ancien regime.


Author(s):  
Daria Yurievna Ermilova ◽  

The article traces the transformation of visualization of a person’s ethnicity through costumes – from traditional to modern. The object of the study is to understand the costume as an informational and sign structure. The topic of the study is the visualization of ethnicity through costumes from a historical perspective. The study aims to identify the specific characteristics of visualization of ethnicity in traditional and modern costumes. The study hypothesis is that, unlike traditional costumes that demonstrated regional and national affiliation, modern “Western” clothing has mostly lost these functions. Although in some regions costumes are still relevant as a “living” tradition, national clothing is disappearing from everyday life. Ethnic style using regional and national traditions as a source of stylization does not present an indicator of a person’s nationality. Nevertheless, some examples of modern clothing visualizing ethnicity can be found. The functional and semiotic approaches to the analysis of costumes serve as the basis of the study. Since the late Middle Ages, the development of urban dress in Western Europe has been determined by fashion rather than tradition. In Russia, the process of an urban costume losing the function of visualization of ethnicity began with the reforms of Peter the Great and for peasants’ costumes, this process did not start until the middle of the 20th century. At the beginning of the 21st century, traditional costumes were mostly worn by ethnic minorities as a symbol of national identity and self-affirmation. Referring to others’ traditions as a source of fashion innovations led to the emergence of ethnic style. Ethnic style is characterized by a superficial attitude towards the source. Ethnodesign, on the other hand, follows the principle of deep and thoughtful care about the tradition which gains relevance due to the rise of glocalization manifesting in the intensification of regional differences. Although the proponents of ethnodesign insist on the ability of design to integrate traditional ethnic symbols into modern culture, the question is about the ability of modern people to understand the meanings contained in traditional forms remains. The present article identifies the cases of a costume serving the function of visualization of ethnicity in modern society.


Author(s):  
Carol B. Stevens

The reign of Peter I of Russia (between the years 1682 and 1689 and continuing until 1725) and its impact on Russian development are among the most studied and most controversial topics in early modern Russian history. His reign is often portrayed as instrumental in dragging a “backward” Russia into the modern European world through profound cultural and military reform. Those years have also been castigated as the apotheosis of statism, years of progress through coercion that retained the fundamental principles of the traditional regime and strengthened the grip of serfdom (Anisimov 1993 and Kamenskii 1997, both cited under Question of Reform). After the seven-year regency of his half-sister, Peter claimed power in 1689 with his joint-tsar and brother. The reform of the Russian army and the creation of a navy were Peter’s dominant concerns. The army conquered the Ottoman Black Sea fort of Azov on a second try in 1696, with the help of a newly formed navy. Peter’s 1698 trip to Europe did not support continued war against the Porte, but led to the creation of an anti-Swedish coalition among Russia, Denmark, and Poland-Lithuania/Saxony. The lengthy Great Northern War against Sweden, 1700–1721, began disastrously in 1700 but concluded with military victory (most notably at Poltava in 1709) and with growing European acknowledgement of Russia’s importance. Even in the midst of war, Peter and his inner coterie launched reforms intended to systematize Russian national administrative and military life. Until after the 1711 Russian loss to the Ottomans, the rapidity of change, the turnover of personnel, and the overlap of new and old institutions often undermined the implementation and effectiveness of reform. Thereafter, reforms restructured the central and local government, often adapting Swedish models, introduced the infamous soul tax, developed state-sponsored manufacturing, and reformed the Orthodox Church. Meanwhile, as Romaniello 2019 (cited under Economy) emphasizes, Russian Eurasian trade remained important, particularly in international competition with the United Kingdom, throughout the 18th century; so did eastward expansion and exploration. But cultural norms for the elite changed as Peter insisted on the Europeanization of education, cultural forms, and gender roles. The onslaught of reform from above met resistance and rebellion. There was armed rebellion among the Bashkirs, led by Bulavin. At court, blatant disregard for established conceptions of elite collaboration with the Crown led many to support Peter’s son, Aleksei, as an alternative to his father. Political police and fiscal enforcers became entrenched, even as the maturing of a generation raised in service to a reformed state helped to balance the political system. From outside the machinery of state, such efforts entrenched serfdom and solidified a developing absolutism. They also transformed Russia culturally, socially, and politically, not always following in Europe’s footsteps, but fully “glorious” in the 18th-century sense; Peter became and remained a symbol of national achievement and power.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document