scholarly journals A form of creating historical consciousness: The Russian academy and Varangian question

2015 ◽  
pp. 471-486
Author(s):  
Djordje Djuric
Keyword(s):  
18Th Century ◽  
Historical Consciousness ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Russian People ◽  
Peter The Great ◽  
Russian State ◽  
The Social ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Ideological Attitudes

The establishment of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg gave a great impetus to the development of historiography in Russia, and likewise to the development of other sciences. The idea of establishing the Academy of Sciences in Russia came from Peter the Great. Because there did not exist a system of higher education or a university in Russia at that time, scientists who were to become the first members of the Academy, had to be brought in from abroad. The enlightened ruler did not regret spending effort and money for this purpose. Large sums of money were assigned to the purchase of books and to the salaries and awards of the future members of the Academy. The Academy started its activities in December 1725, and during the first few decades it was led by scientists from abroad, mainly from German countries. That was also the case with the Humanities Section, which, among other things, supposed to deal with Russian history. The bases for work at the Russian Academy in St. Petersburg in the following decades were set by: Gottlieb Siegfried Bayer, Gerhard Friedrich M?ller and August Ludwig von Schl?zer. On the bases of the Russian historical material that they collected, primarily Nestorov letopis (Nestor?s chronicle) that describes the events of the 9th century, they came to far-reaching conclusions about the origin of the Russian people and the establishment of the Russian state and its institutions. This way was opened the so called Varangian question and formulated Norman theory of the origin of the Russians. In the first half of the 18th century, Russian historian Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev, academician Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov and other Russian scientists opposed to these theories. During the 19th century, these theories were accepted, with certain modifications, by the most distinguished Russian bourgeois historians Karamzin, Soloviev, Pagodin and others. The Bolsheviks mostly rejected these theories or they were simplified and reduced to the social segment that the Russian people were oppressed, and that the majority the oppressor elite was of foreign origin. As is the case with the interpretations of many historical events and processes, the conclusions related to the Varangian question and Norman theory were widely influenced by the time in which the author wrote, and by his political and ideological attitudes. That was perhaps more pronounced in this case, because it was the question of the origin and ethnogenesis of the Russian people and the establishment of the Russian state and its institutions.

Russian Meteorological Investigations in China in the 19th Century

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiana Feklova
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Far East ◽  
Scientific Network ◽  
Historical Archive ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Meteorological Observatory ◽  
History Of ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century

The history of the Russian Magneto-Meteorological Observatory (RMMO) in Beijing has not been extensively researched. Sources for this information are Russian (the Russian State Historical Archive, Saint Petersburg Branch of the Archive of the Academy of Sciences, Russian National Library) and Chinese (the First Historical Archive of Beijing, the Library of the Shanghai Zikavey Observatory) archives. These archival materials can be scientifically and methodologically analyzed. At the beginning of the 18th century, the Russian Orthodox Mission (ROM) was founded in the territory of Beijing. Existing until 1955, the ROM performed an important role in the development of Russian–Chinese relations. Russian scientists could only work in Beijing through the ROM due to China’s policy of fierce self-isolation. The ROM became the center of Chinese academic studies and the first training school for Russian sinologists. From its very beginning, it was considered not only a church or diplomatic mission but a research center in close cooperation with the Russian Academy of Sciences. In this context, the RMMO made important weather investigations in China and the Far East in the 19th century. The RMMO, as well as its branch stations in China and Mongolia, part of a scientific network, represented an important link between Europe and Asia and was probably the largest geographical scientific network in the world at that time.

ON THE FIRST ARTICLE FROM THE RUSSIAN HISTORY OF MATHEMATICS

2020 ◽  
pp. 86-106
Author(s):  
Galina I. Sinkevich ◽  
◽  
Olga V. Solov'eva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
18Th Century ◽  
History Of Mathematics ◽  
Popular Science ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Russian Culture ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Russian State ◽  
History Of ◽  
History Of Sciences ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

The article is a publication of the first Russian printed work on the Russian history of mathematics. It is dedicated to the ancient Russian numeral systems and was published anonymously in 1787 in the “New monthly works” of St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. The author tells about the Old Russian numeral system, Russian calendar and commercial account. In the popular science editions of the 18th century Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences there were many publications on the history of sciences, arts, crafts, the history of discoveries and inventions in other countries. At the same time, there was a clear lack of publications on the history of Russian culture. Russian scientists were dissatisfied with the interpretation of Russian history presented by the historiographer of the Russian state, an academician G. F. Müller, as well as with descriptions of Russia and its history by other foreign authors. In the Catherine’s time, many articles appeared, sometimes anonymous, defending the originality and ancientry of Russian culture. To analyze the data on the authorship of the work, the popular scientific editions of Academy in the 18th century and are described, information about their authors is presented, hypotheses are expressed, and the terminology of the article and the names mentioned in it are commented.

scholarly journals The Epoch of Peter I in the Historical Consciousness of the Decembrists

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-81
Author(s):  
Tatyana V. Andreeva
Keyword(s):  
18Th Century ◽  
State Building ◽  
Historical Consciousness ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Professional Background ◽  
Catching Up ◽  
New Type ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Russian Identity

The article analyses the attitude to the Petrine era shared by the members of the secret political societies in the first quarter of the 19th century. The study focuses on the assessments of the personality of Peter I, his reform activities and its aftermath for Russian history that were stated by the participants of the Decembrist revolt. Although only some of the Decembrists had a professional background as historians, the comprehension of grandiose state transformations in the first quarter of the 18th century was significantly important for the majority of the plotters. The author shows that various assessments of the Decembrists Petrine era were determined by the combination in their historical consciousness of westernism and ideas of Russian identity. Decembrists, as people of their epoch, had different views on Peter I: from idealization to censure. Their ambiguous attitude to the reforms of Peter I was based on the Petrine compromise concept of state-building according to Western models with their adaptation to Russian conditions, which led to the “catching-up model” of Russia’s development, its secondary nature in relation to Western civilization. Realizing the interconnection between the establishment of an autocratic state system and the creation of a new social structure, the Decembrists, especially the authors of historical and political books and treatises, reacted negatively to the formation in Peter’s time of a new type of statehood – a “regular state” – with its comprehensive control, suppression of individual liberty and legal consolidation of serfdom.

scholarly journals Documents on Freemasonry from the Archive of Archimandrite Photius (Spassky)

2020 ◽  
pp. 676-691
Author(s):  
Yuri E. Kondakov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Movement ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Historical Archive ◽  
Russian State ◽  
The Social ◽  
Inner Circle ◽  
The 19Th Century

The article introduces into scientific use an analytical note on Freemasonry addressed to Alexander I. In Europe in the 18th – 19th centuries, there was extensive anti-Masonic literature. In Russia, such works were rare. Reputedly, the greatest Russian extirpator of Freemasonry was Archimandrite Photius (Spassky). The ban of Masonic lodges in 1822 is attributed to his influence on Alexander I. Photius was one of the leaders of the social movement of the Russian Orthodox opposition. Among other objects of its criticism were the Masonic lodges. However, a consolidated anti-Masonic action failed to materialize. Now it has been made possible to explain the opposition’s restraint in its attitude to Freemasonry. Four volumes of documents belonging to archimandrite Photius have been found in the Russian State Historical Archive. These are the materials from 1817-1832. The collection includes personal documents of Photius, messages and letters of Metropolitan Seraphim (Glagolevsky), A.A. Arakcheev, A.S. Shishkov, Metropolitan Filaret (Drozdov). Many of these documents were handed over to Emperor Alexander I and influenced his change of heart in the politics. An anonymous note on Freemasonry from the Photius collection is included in the article in its entirety as a rare example of an anti-Masonic message to the Emperor. The note gives a retrospective of the Masonic movement in Russia. It describes what influence the masons of the 18th century had on Freemasonry of the 19th century. Most mentioned Masonic leaders belonged to the “Rosicrucian” system of Freemasonry (Order of the Golden and Pink Cross). The author of the note assured the emperor that there were Rosicrucians in his inner circle. He named Senator I.V. Lopukhin, publisher and translator A.F. Labzin, R.A. Koshelev, and the tsar’s friend, Minister A.N. Golitsyn. Photius’s documents show that criticism of Freemasonry was not the focus of the Russian Orthodox opposition activities. Among the opposition there were people who shared the idea of a worldwide Masonic conspiracy: S.I. Smirnov, M.L. Magnitsky. In Archimandrite In the Photius’s documents references to Freemasonry are very rare. At the time of the opposition’s action in 1824, the issue of Freemasonry was no longer relevant, since Freemasonry was subjected to a government ban in 1822.

Reforms by Peter the Great as a Model for Japan in the Writings of the Late Edo Period

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (10) ◽  
pp. 82-91
Author(s):  
Vasilii V. Shchepkin
Keyword(s):  
18Th Century ◽  
Great Influence ◽  
Edo Period ◽  
Leadership Qualities ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Personal Involvement ◽  
Peter The Great ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
National Ideology ◽  
The 19Th Century

The first knowledge about Peter the Great seems to penetrate into Japan during the lifetime of this Russian emperor, as early as the beginning of the 18th century. However, it was only after first attempts of Siberian merchants to start trade relations with Japan’s northernmost domain of Matsumae when Japanese intellectuals began to study Russia and its history. By the end of the century, the image of Peter the Great as an outstanding ruler had formed in Japan, with his main achievement being the expansion of the country’s territory, after which European Russia suddenly shared a border with northern Japan. Katsuragawa Hoshu, a court physician and the author of one of the first descriptions of Russia, might be the first Japanese who implied Peter the Great’s activities as a model for Japan, pointing out his politics in spreading the foreign trade. Japanese intellectuals of the first half of the 19th century continued to use Peter the Great’s reforms as a possible model for Japan. Watanabe Kazan (1793–1841) in his “Note about the Situation in Foreign Countries” used the Russian emperor as evidence of a leader’s role in winning nature-based and geographical obstacles in a country’s development. Aizawa Seishisai (1782–1863) and later Sakuma Shozan (1811–1864) pointed out Peter’s leadership qualities and personal involvement in reforms. Based on the study of Peter’s activities, Aizawa managed to create the program of Japan’s reforming known as the “New thesis” (“Shinron”, 1825), while Sakuma promoted the necessity of Western learning, especially the development of navy and artillery. This allows to assume a great influence of the study of Peter the Great and Russian history in formulating the ideas of a “rich country and strong army” that became a cornerstone of national ideology in Meiji Japan.

Ivan Lepyokhin’s Expedition to the Middle Volga

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. K. Salmin
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Military History ◽  
Team Working ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Middle Volga ◽  
State Archives ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
First Time

the 18th-century expeditions from the Academy of Sciences aimed at colonizing new territories, especially eastern, exploring their landscapes, natural resources, and inhabitants. The article focuses on the team working in the Cheremshan basin. The description of findings is arranged in five sections, following Lepyokhin’s classification: landscape, population, clothing, occupations, and rituals. For the first time, a complete, updated, and verified list of settlements visited by the expedition members is provided. The role of the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences Director, Count Vladimir Orlov, in the organization of the expedition is described. The author disproves the opinion regarding the authorship of the anonymous article “Brief News About Simbirsk Vicegerency” published in the “Mesyatsoslov” journal in 1786. The persons to whom the article was attributed include Lepyokhin, Maslenitsky, and Ozeretskovsky, but the textological analysis of the article and of the manuscript at the Russian State Archives of Military History suggests that this is a collective digest of manuscripts by Milkovich and Maslenitsky.

scholarly journals Preliminary Findings about the “Okulich” Collection of Chinese Popular Prints (MAE No. 3676) in the Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (The Kunstkamera)

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 67-88
Author(s):  
Tatiana I. Vinogradova ◽  
Ekaterina A. Zavidovskaia
Keyword(s):  
Large Family ◽  
Traditional Culture ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Artistic Value ◽  
Chinese Traditional Culture ◽  
Peter The Great ◽  
Woodblock Prints ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century

There are several collections of Chinese popular woodblock prints nianhua in the fund of the Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, Russian Academy of Sciences (the Kunstkamera) acquired from different collectors. The paper addresses the so-called Okulich collection (MAE No. 3676) consisting of 250 original titles, most of which possess undoubted artistic value. According to the dated sheets, the prints were produced in the last years of the 19th century, and no later than 1904. We only know that, in 1928, a man named Okulich donated these prints to the Kunstkamera. Two groups of paintings from this collection are discussed in more detail: a series of prints that represent illustrations for the main Chinese textbook The Thousand Character Essay (Qian zi wen), and those named xiaojiaochang nianhua printed in Shanghai in the early 20th century. Their scrutiny allows us to conclude that the collector was both serious and skillful in selecting sheets for this collection: apart from being fluent in Chinese, he was a connoisseur of Chinese traditional culture and lived in China for a long time. We discovered a large family with surname Okulich who lived in China in the first half of the last century, and contacted a member of this family, but she was unable to help us with identifying the potential collector.

scholarly journals Tribute to Bagrat G. Seyranyan, Our Dear Friend, Colleague, and Teacher!

2021 ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Vasily A. Kuznetsov
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Political Development ◽  
Arab World ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
90Th Birthday ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
Oriental Studies ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century

On April 23, 2021, an outstanding Russian Arabist, Doctor of History, Principal Fellow of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences Bagrat Garegionovich Seyranyan celebrated his 90th birthday. His works on the recent history of Egypt and Yemen and the general problems of the socio-political development of the Arab countries in the 20th century have long become classic. Many of them were translated into Arabic and received well-deserved recognition abroad, and such books as “Egypt in the Struggle for Independence, 1945–1952” (Moscow, 1970) and “Evolution of the Social Structure of the Countries of the Arab East. Land Aristocracy in the 19th Century – the 60s of the 20th Century” (Moscow, 1991) entered the golden fund of world academy. The contribution of Bagrat Seyranyan to the training of new generations of orientalists is colossal. Under his leadership there were prepared more than 40 Ph.D. theses, he participated in authoring of numerous textbooks and teaching materials on the history of the Arab world. In this paper friends, colleagues and students address the hero of the day with words of recognition and gratitude.

scholarly journals “... And Their Mosques From Churches of God to Build in Distant Places”: to Qquestion of Formation of Interethnic and Interfaith Borders in Western Siberia in 18th Century

2021 ◽  
pp. 512-536
Author(s):  
Z. A. Tychinskikh ◽  
S. R. Muratova
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
Western Siberia ◽  
Social Space ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
The State ◽  
Interfaith Relations ◽  
The Social ◽  
Subjective Factor ◽  
Holistic Perception ◽  
Ideological Attitudes

The process of building ethno-religious boundaries in the 18th century in the social space of Western Siberia is considered on the example of the provincial center — Tobolsk. The relevance of the study is due to the transformation of ethno-confessionalism from a cultural phenomenon into an instrument that can be used for political purposes in modern Russia. One of the methodological research tools is the method of analysis of the “new local history”, which allows you to create a holistic perception of the study of the social life of the past “at a local object”. The main stages of the state ethno-confessional policy in the 18th century are highlighted. The facts of the forced Christianization of Muslims are clarified. The authors draw attention to the role of the personal (subjective) factor in the processes under study. On the example of the activities of Metropolitan Sylvester Glovatsky and the governor F. I. Soimonov, the vector of the development of interfaith relations is considered, which often depends on the foresight and ideological attitudes of local authorities. Particular attention is paid to government decrees reflecting the position of the state in the ethno-religious sphere. The features are revealed and the main stages of the process of Christianization of Siberian Muslims during the 18th century are highlighted. The process of formation of interfaith boundaries in the multiethnic Siberian region is analyzed. The historiography of the topic under study is presented. 

The History and Culture of Galician Rus’ as Viewed by Galician-Russian Enlighteners and National Activists in the 20th Century

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 ◽  
pp. 349-358
Author(s):  
Kirill V. Shevchenko
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Russian Culture ◽  
Organic Part ◽  
Russian People ◽  
The First World War ◽  
Russian Literary ◽  
Russian Intelligentsia ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
First World

The article analyzes the views of the leading Galician-Russian socio-public and cultural activists of the 19th century on the history and culture of Galician Rus. Most Galician-Russian intelligentsia of the 19th century shared the idea of Galician Rusyns being an inseparable and organic part of the triune Russian people consisting of Great Russians, Little Russians and White Russians. Galician Rusyns were considered by Galician-Russian intelligentsia as a kinship branch of Little Russian people. Galician-Russian cultural figures stressed the primordial tradition of cultural and historical unity of all Russian lands as well as the important role of Galicia in common Russian history. Thus, they considered the native of Galicia Metropolitan Peter to be one of the major figures in mutual Russian history as he supported the policy of Moscow Prince Ivan Kalita and played the crucial role in turning Moscow into the church capital of Russian lands in early 14thcentury. Moreover, the Galicians and Little Russians by birth played very important role in developing Russian culture, education and public thought in the period of the 17th –19th centuries. Traditional orientation of Galician-Russian intelligentsia on Russian culture and Russian literary language in the 19th century was strongly opposed by the representatives of the Ukrainian movement, which supported the idea of Galician Rusyns being a part of the Ukrainians, not belonging to Russian nationality. Due to political reasons, Ukrainian movement was widely supported by Austrian and Polish authorities, who used the First World War as a suitable pretext for mass repressions against the representatives of Galician-Russian movement in Galician region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document