The Battle of Poltava in Russian Historical Memory Author(S): Alexander Kamenskii Source: Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Vol

The President and Fellows of Harvard College

The Battle of Poltava in Russian Historical Memory Author(s): Alexander Kamenskii Source: Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Vol. 31, No. 1/4, POLTAVA 1709: THE BATTLE AND THE MYTH (2009-2010), pp. 195-204 Published by: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41756503 . Accessed: 19/04/2013 04:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute and The President and Fellows of Harvard College are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Harvard Ukrainian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Battle of Poltava in Russian Historical Memory

Alexander Kamenskii

In 1995the Russian official calendar was expandedby the addition of sixteennew commemorative days called "Days of Russian Military Glory" (Dni voinskoislavy Rossii). One of them,10 July,was supposed to commemorate PeterTs victoryover the Swedesat the Battleof Poltavain 1709.1For about a decade afterits introduction hardly anyone remembered this date, nor was it evenmentioned in themedia. But with the approach of the 300th anniversary ofthe battleand the escalationof tensionsbetween Russia and Ukraine,the Battleof Poltava became an increasinglypopular issue, with political analysts and publicistswielding it as a tool in theirfight against sundry opponents. As forprofessional historians, only a handfulof themtook partin the debates aroundthe questionof whetherMazepa was reallya traitoror a Ukrainian nationalhero. But Russian historians specializing in the Petrine era, eighteenth- centuryRussia, or militaryhistory in generalseized the opportunity to writeat leasta dozenlengthy works with the word "Poltava" in thetitle, and publishers were more thanwilling to printthem. Several volumes of collectedpapers appeared,some of thembased on conferencesorganized by various institu- tions,which some participantsfrom abroad attended.2 Some ofthese authors devoted entire chapters in theirbooks to thememory ofthe Battle of Poltava. One mayquestion why there was anyneed to do this, inasmuchas all the fussthat arose in 2009 in connectionwith the Poltava anniversaryand thenumerous publications were ample proof that the memory of the battlewas stillvery much alive and importantto the Russianpeople. Thisscholarly overkill may be explainedby the fact that the study of historical memoryis a verypopular topic among Russian historians today, and thatthe authorsof all those books on Poltavawere simplycaught up in thistrend. However,these works describe mostly official celebrations of the Poltava anni- versariesand othercommemorative activities of the politicalelite. Although theseevents certainly go a longway to showingthat the memoryof Poltava has been keptalive for the last threecenturies, they do not explainwhether theyare evidenceof the Russian people's collective memory. The Battleof Poltava is one of those unique historicalevents that have

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 196 KAMENSKII neverbeen a pointof controversyamong historians. Though interpretations ofthis event and its impactmay differ, no one doubtsthat it was a victoryof the Russianarmy over the Swedishforces, as well as a turningpoint in both Russianand Europeanhistory. What's more, even if one wereto arguethat the set ofhistorical events comprising the traditional scheme of Russianhistory, whichwas constructedfor the most part by the end ofthe eighteenth century, cementedby Nikolai Karamzin in theearly nineteenth, and reproducedin the SovietUnion, is somewhatartificial and has littleto do with"real" history, it wouldstill be difficultto provethat the Battle of Poltava should not be included in thecanon. At thesame time,it is instructiveto examinewhat happened to thememory of this event. Whenwe readPeter's letters written on theeve ofthe battle and immediately afterwards,it seemsas thoughhe had notfully absorbed what had happened. He was fullof joy, yet the crushing defeat of the Swedes was unexpectedand too rapidand too easyto be true.Two weeks later Peter ordered a churchto be erectedon thesite of the battle, as wellas a pyramidbearing his portrait,and a paintingdepicting the battle, complete with explanatory plaques.3 Building a churchwas thetraditional Russian way of marking important sites, while a pyramidwith pictures and explanationswas somethingmore innovative and surelyborrowed from the West,if not classicalRome.4 Still, it is verylikely thata morecomprehensive understanding of the significanceof thevictory, and particularlyits politicalimportance, came to Peteralmost a monthlater and, as oftenhappens with rulers, he foundhimself requiring the assistance ofan intellectual,namely Feofan Prokopových, a native of Ukraine. On 22 July Russiantroops marched into Kyiv and duringa solemnservice held in the main cathedralin thetsar's presence Prokopových read his famous panegyric Slovo pokhvaVnoe, which contains all the imagesand assessments-in fact,all the elementsof the Poltava myth- that are traditionallydusted off whenever the Battleof Poltava is mentioned. The SlovopokhvaVnoe is a lengthywork (seventeen printed pages in the latestedition) supplemented by a four-page-longpoem. Its readingon 22 July 1709 lasted no less thanan hour,but the lengthyreading did not tirePeter. On thecontrary, he was greatlyimpressed and orderedit to be publishedand widelydistributed. There is no need to delveinto all of Prokopovych'sbattle descriptionsand whathe wroteabout its significance, as theSlovo pokhvaVnoe has been thoroughlyanalyzed in recentarticles by Evgenii Anisimov and Gio- vanna BrogiBercoff.5 The real cruxof the Poltavaquestion is the deliberate attemptto constructa mythabout a realhistorical event, which was to be used as a tool ofRussian political propaganda and officialideology. Prokopovych's adviceto Peterwas to use imagesof the victory at Poltavaas widelyas possible: "Depictit with skillful art not only on greatpillars, walls, pyramids, and other buildings,but also on smallweapons and guns."6

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions POLTAVAIN RUSSIANHISTORICAL MEMORY I97

In establishingthe political significance of Poltava, Prokopových turned it intoan eventof secular, not sacred, history. It is no accidentthat in 1709Peter refusedto approvethe textof FeofilaktLopatyns'kyi's sermon dedicated to thevictory at Poltava.In his letterto Lopatyns'kyithe tsar commented that, inasmuchas theSwedes also had a blessedcross that they worshipped, it was notso mucha warabout religious beliefs as about"measure," as he putit.7 (As is oftenthe case withPeter Ts pronouncements, itis notclear what he meantby thatword.) This shift in interpretationprovides a clue to a speechthat the tsar reportedlymade beforethe start of the battle, in whichhe enjoinedhis troops to fight,not forthe Orthodoxfaith or the tsar,as Russiantradition dictated, butfor the Fatherland ( Otechestvo ).8 Historians doubt whether such a speech was evermade or was composedafter the battle; but this merely confirms the above remarks. The followingexample reveals the mechanismof constructinga historic myth.The Battleof Poltava took place on thevery day of the Orthodox Church feastday of St. Sampsonthe Hospitable(Sampsonii Strannopriimets). In his Slovopokhval'noe Prokopových replaced St. Sampson with the biblical Samson, depictingPeter as Samson tearingapart the jaws of the Swedishlion. This imageproved to be veryeffective: italso appearsin StefanIavors'kyi's work on thevictory at Poltavaand was reproducedin thedecorations that appeared in Moscow in December1709 when the victory was celebrated,as well as in an engravingby Ivan Zubov and MykhailoKarnovs'kyi created during the same period.The Peter-as-Samsonimage was reproducedin the1720s in thedesign ofa triumphalpillar by Andrei Nartov and BartolomeoRastrelli. In 1735a statue of Samson and a lion,sculpted by Carlo Rastrelli,was erectedin Peterhof; thestatue that we see todayis not theoriginal but a replicamade byMikhail Kozlovskiiin theearly nineteenth century. By the mid-eighteenth century this imagehad becomefamiliar to everyone.In his"Ode to theSovereign Emperor Peterthe Great" Aleksandr Sumarokov wrote: "Peter, by God's will / Tormented a lion in the Poltavafield: / The lion roaredhelplessly / Beneaththe eagle's wings,/ Wounded by its claws / The lion did notdare resist."9 The fateof the Swedishlion, the imageof Peteras Samson,and the glo- rificationof Peters heroicmilitary deeds were all elementscommon to the manypoetical and prosetexts written in eighteenth-centuryRussia. Mikhail Lomonosov,for example, mentions the Battleof Poltavatwice in his Slovo pokhval'noeblazhenniia pamiati imperatoraPetra Velikogo.To thisRussian writerthe victory at Poltavasymbolized the success of Peter's efforts to create a new Russianarmy; at thesame timeit was proofof God's mercy.He repeats thisidea whenhe mentionsthat Peter was notkilled, or evenwounded, during thebattle. Other literary works, such as theone writtenby loan Maksymovych, the archbishopof Chernihiv,contained vivid descriptions of the battle,but theynever enjoyed popularity and werequickly forgotten.

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 198 KAMENSKII

The Battleof Poltava was also a sourceof inspiration for many artists. The firstpaintings appeared soon afterthe battle,a themethat was frequently revisitedthroughout the eighteenthand nineteenthcenturies. Among them is thefamous mosaic by Mikhail Lomonosov, but none of the dozens of paint- ingsthat we knowbecame a universallyrecognized masterpiece familiar to all Russians. Meanwhile,27 Junebecame partof the officialcalendar of Russianholi- days,first celebrated during Peter's reign as one ofthe so-called victory days ( viktorial'nyedni). The firstcelebration in 1710,described in the memoirsof JustJuel, the Danish ambassador,included a militaryparade featuringthe Preobrazhenskiiand Semenovskiiregiments, a church service, a publicsermon read by FeofilaktLopatyns'kyi, fireworks, and a feast.10That year, and two yearsafterward, Peter still remembered that 27 Junewas associatedwith St. Sampson,as he mentionedin a letterto AlexanderMenshikov on 29 June 1712.In lateryears this day was associatedstrictly with the Poltava victory and celebratedregularly every year, including the celebration that was heldin 1718, theday after Peter's eldest son Alekseidied. Elena Pogosian,who has studied the Russiancalendar of the Petrineera, notes thatuntil 1718 there was no concrete"ideology" underpinning this holiday. In somecases, it was combined withcelebrations of Peter's name day or some otherimportant event, like the arrivalof the ambassadorof Persiain 1713.The wayit was celebrateddid not differgreatly from other holidays, including New Year'scelebrations.11 The victoryat Poltavawas celebratedregularly even afterPeter's death, and in 1727it is mentionedin a long listof othervictories over the Swedes. Altogetherthirty-seven victories are mentioned,and whilethey comprised onlypart of the official calendar, it is obviousthat each ofthese victories could notbe celebrated.During the reign of Anna Ivanovna (1730-40) onlyso-called tsar'sdays, like name days, birthdays, and anniversariesof the coronation, were publiclymarked. Other holidays, including the day commemorating Poltava, werecelebrated only at theroyal court. In 1739,toward the end ofthis period, thedate of the Battle of Poltava found its way into the list of official holidays; but now it was slatedas a publicholiday and notcelebrated at theroyal court. The holidaywas restoredduring the rule of Elizabeth, but in CatherineII's timeit was pushedaside by new militaryvictories. Aleksandr Khrapovitskii, whosediary covers the ten years that he was Catherine'ssecretary, refers to the Poltavaholiday only three times. The first entry mentions that on 27 June1786 he congratulatedthe empress on theday of the holiday. Exactly two years later Catherinewas signingorders about a newwar with Sweden, and Khrapovitskii commentedto theempress that this was not accidental.In 1790he mentions a serviceat the cathedralin TsarskoeSelo, whichwas dedicatednot to the memoryof Poltava,but Russia'slatest (naval) victoryover the Swedes,the Battleof Vyborg Bay.12 This service is also mentionedin Catherine'sletter to

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions POLTAVAIN RUSSIANHISTORICAL MEMORY I99

GrigoriiPotemkin, dated 28 June1790. "I helda servicehere yesterday, on the dayof the Battle of Poltava," she writes,congratulating her correspondent on the occasion of "today'sholiday."13 The date of 28 Junewas markedin Cath- erine'scalendar as theday she ascendedto the Russianthrone, and it is clear thatof the two eventsCatherine certainly preferred the latter.The storyof the coup d'etatthat brought Catherine to power in 1762shows thatduring the shortreign of Peter'sgrandson (Peter III) therewas no greatcelebration ofthe Poltava date, either. On 27 Juneof that year the emperor was awayfrom St. Petersburg,and some kindof festivity was scheduledto takeplace thenext day,Peter Ill's name day. PeterI is oftenmentioned in the pages of anotherdiary, that of Semen Poroshin,the tutor of Grand Prince Paul. Althoughstories of Peter'slife and deeds werewidely used in thelessons given to his great-grandson,the Battle ofPoltava was nevermentioned. It would appearthat from the standpoint of Paul'stutors Peter I thestatesman was a muchmore instructive figure for the youngman than Peter the military leader. In hisdiary for the year 1765 Poroshin describesa typicalpastime on 27 June.On thatday the courtremained in KrasnoeSelo, and officersfrom the two divisionsthat had come to takepart in the parade paid a visitto eleven-year-oldPaul. In the eveningthe prince's othertutor, Nikita Panin, discussed some historical issues with the boy, but did notmention Peter I: "He spokeabout Aleksei Petrovich Besstuzhev, and how he had come hereas a ministerin the timeof the Sovereign,and also about therevolutions under Anna Ioannovna and afterher death."14 What happened to thememory of the Battle of Poltava? Two factsmust be consideredin orderto answerthis question. First, in the immediateaftermath of the battle Peter took control over all informationcon- cerningthis event, and theofficial and undisputableversion of the battle was soon constructed.Second, fifty-five years later there were no morewitnesses of the battleleft at Catherine'scourt who could tellthe heirto the Russian throneabout this event. Moreover, not only had no readablehistory of it been published,none had evenbeen written.The onlysources of information were officialannouncements from the Petrine era or panegyricalcompositions. Both ofthese types of sources contained an identicalcanonical version, not a living story,and one readingof either sufficed. Anotherimportant fact to consideris thatthere are no memoirsby Russian veteransof Poltava.It would seem thatone ofthe greatestevents in Russian historyhad notimpressed its participants enough for them to commemorate theirexperiences. Furthermore, besides Peter'scorrespondence, there is no extantpersonal correspondence of those who witnessedthe battle. Thus, it is not possibleto writea book about the Battleof Poltava,like Peter Englund's Poltava, based solelyon Russiandocuments. As longas thePoltava veterans were still alive, the memory of the battle lived

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 200 KAMENSKII on. One mayagree with Evgenii Anisimov, who in his book on TsarinaElizabeth wrotethat the veterans of the Preobrazhenskii Regiment probably recounted storiesabout Peter I to theiryoung comrades in arms,thereby preparing them forthe coup d'etatof November 1741 that brought Peter's daughter to power.15 Butsince the military service of the veterans was mostlylifelong and thebattle had takenplace in farawayUkraine, their stories could not spread throughout thecountry. When the veterans died, the living memory of Poltava disappeared withthem. Thus, there was simplyno wayfor the Battle of Poltava to become partof the collectivememory of the Russianpeople. Also, neitherPeter nor Prokopovych'ssuggestions concerning the wide distribution of images of Pol- tava wererealized. The firstmonument was erectedat the battlesite during thereign of Catherine II, butit was a privateinitiative. The anniversaryof the battle was occasionallycelebrated in latercenturies. On 27 June1812, the day on whichAlexander I was planninga decisivebattle withNapoleon, the Russian tsar issued a manifestoto thearmy reminding his troopsthat this was a day of Russianmilitary glory. Five years later the 3rd InfantryCorps held maneuverson the site of the victoryat Poltava,where theytried to recreatethe battle. By now, the memoryof Poltavahad become transformedinto a matterof artificial formality. For the majority of Russians it was just anotherstate holiday, with which they had no personalconnection. WhereRussian intellectuals were concerned, the situation was slightlydif- ferent.In theearly part of the nineteenth century Peter I was stillan intriguing and attractivefigure, and his heroicimage continued to inspirepoets. In one of his earlypoems (1818)Petr Viazemskii writes about Peterastride a "Pol- tava horse"and describes"an enemyfrightened by repeatedPoltavas."16 The poet was thusattempting to turnthe word "Poltava" into a watchwordfor all Russianmilitary victories, but his poetic endeavorfailed. Viazemskii's close friend,Aleksandr Pushkin, was a moregifted poet and thereforemore adept at creatingmemorable images. Thanks to hispoem Poltava (1828-29),the Battle ofPoltava was restored- butto culturalmemory, not historical memory. For thosewho read Pushkintoday the very word "Poltava" is now associatedwith (1) the titleof the poem, (2) the name of a cityin Ukraine;and (3) the name of a historicalevent. One shouldalso keep in mindthat the originaltitle of Pushkin'spoem was notPoltava butMazepa , a clearindication that the Rus- sian poet was inspiredby the romanticfigure of the Ukrainianhetmán, not theRussians' victory over the Swedes. A trendcritical of PeterI and his achievementsemerged in the late eigh- teenthcentury and thebeginning of the nineteenth. Prince Mikhail Shcherba- tovwas thefirst to attemptan examinationof Peter's mistakes in hisessay "On theCorruption of Morals in Russia."In 1810Nikolai Karamzin wrote "A Note on Old and New Russia,"a detailedanalysis of Peter's rule. Neither Shcherbatov norKaramzin denied Peter's greatness; that was a given.This perhaps explains

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions POLTAVAIN RUSSIANHISTORICAL MEMORY 201 whyneither Peter's heroic deeds norhis military victories, including the Battle ofPoltava, were mentioned in thesetwo works. Most Russianthinkers of the nineteenth century concurred. As Aleksandr Panchenkoput it,"Peter is a touchstoneof Russian thought, its eternal prob- lem,which has to do not onlywith the philosophyof historybut also with religion,not only with the national path but also nationalexistence"17 Thus, one need onlyexamine the writings of any nineteenth- or early-twentieth-century Russianessayist, philosopher, or literarycritic to findnumerous references to PeterI and diverseassessments of what he had done forRussia. But readers willsearch in vain forany mention of the Battle of Poltava. In 1994 an anthologydevoted to PeterI, consistingof severalhundred citationsby about 250 authors,was publishedin Russia,lhe citationsare groupedunder thirteen headings, such as "TheCreator of Russia," "A Typical Russian,""The Heir to theMuscovite Tsardom," "A Nontraditional Autocrat," "Antipatriot,""Pseudo Reformer," and so on. Thevarious authors discuss what Peteraccomplished for the benefit of the Russian people, Russian culture, and Russiantraditions. Again, there is nothingabout Peteras the militaryleader who defeatedCharles XII at Poltava.18Clearly, both Peter's supporters and his detractorsregarded as positivehis transformationof Russia intoan empire thatbecame an activeplayer in theinternational arena.19 This is not to say thatthe Battleof Poltavadisappeared altogether from the officialpatriotic discourse or the pages of school textbooks.The noted children'swriter and educatorAleksandra Ishimova, in herbook entitledThe Historyof Russia in Storiesfor Children(1837), devoted a whole chapterto Poltava."Peter was fightingfor the happiness of his people, for the tsardom that he had createdanew, that would have been destroyedwith Charles's triumph. Charleswas defendinghis glory,his hero'sname, and his poor soldiers,who wereunable to escape deathin theland oftheir victorious enemies. On that famousday it was notpossible to decidewhich of the two sovereigns was more fearless.Thousands of bulletswere flyingpast them;frightening neither.... In thehistory of Peter'sreign this victory is regardedas themost famous. By assertingRussian power over the lands captured from the Swedes, with a new portand a new capitalthere, this victory allowed the Russianpeople to join theranks of educated Europeans, which was themain goal ofPeter's life."20 It shouldbe notedthat the respectful description of Charles XII disappearedin theSoviet period. A tremendouseffort to restorethe memoryof the Battleof Poltavawas undertakenin 1909,during the celebrations of the 200th anniversary. Nicholas II arrivedin Poltava,where lavish festivities took place overseveral days: mili- taryparades and churchservices were held, monuments were unveiled, and delegationsarrived from various communities, bringing bread and saltfor the tsar.Russian newspapers reported, for example, that "the Moscow citycouncil

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 202 KAMENSKII was invitedto buya silverscoop fromwhich Peter the Great had drunk,a silver picturedepicting the feast after the Battle of Poltava, and a silvertray on which thekeys from the fortress at Orekhovwere brought to Peter.For these treasures theowner wants 6,000 rubles"On 8 June"Mazurovskii, a well known painter ofbattle scenes, was leavingfor Poltava to makesketches of the place. He was preparinga largepainting for the military museum." It is interestingto notethat twoweeks prior to thecelebration the Russian emperor and his familyvisited Sweden.On 15June the royalyacht anchored at StockholmHarbor, where it was greetedwith fireworks. That day a largedetachment of policemen left St. Petersburgfor Poltava to participatein thecelebrations.21 Thirtyyears later the newspaperBolshevik Poltavshchiny republished an articlethat Vladimir Korolenko had writtenin 1909,on the eve of the tsar's visitto Poltava.In his commentarythe authoroffers a differentview of the celebrations:"Many townspeople are askingwith anxiety, what will the next daysbring them and theRussian people- repressions,prison, administrative obstacles,pogroms?" In Korolenko'sview, Peter Ts reformshad givenbirth to a progressiveRussian people. But "where are thechildren of the reforms?" he asked. His answer:"There - in penal servitude,in prisons,in exile;everyone is underthe control of the secret police."22 The 1909 celebrations,held just a fewyears after Russia's defeat in thewar withJapan, had a strongpatriotic connotation. This facet of the memory of the Battleof Poltavadeserves special discussion. In 1854Petr Chaadaev wrote in his "AnExtract from a Letterby an UnknownMan to an UnknownWoman": "Whenby happenstance we had a victoryover it [Europe],as ithappened with Peterthe Great, we used to say:we owe thisvictory to you,gentlemen." (Chaa- daevwas referringto a legendabout Peter drinking a toast to the"Swedes- our mentors"during the feast after the battle.) "Let me lovemy motherland as Peter the Great,Catherine, and Alexanderdid. I believethat soon it willprobably be acknowledgedthat this kind of patriotism is no worsethan any other," he concluded.23 In myarticle on Russianpatriotism in theeighteenth century I arguethat it is worthtrying to determinein whatway Hetmán Ivan Mazepa's "treason" and thevictory over the Swedes at Poltavainfluenced mass consciousness.24 Thisquestion has yetto be explored.In general,the storyof what happened to the memoryof the Battleof Poltavaclearly demonstrates that sometimes even a vigorouspropaganda campaign cannot make an importantevent, one thatis crucialto a nation'shistory, part of collectivememory if most people haveno personalconnection with it.

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions POLTAVAIN RUSSIANHISTORICAL MEMORY 203

Notes

1. Russianlawmakers who established this date obviously did not know that there is a differenceofeleven (not thirteen) days between the eighteenth-century Russian calendarand the twentieth-century calendar. Thus, the correct date should have been8 July. 2. Igor'L. Andreev,Na putik Poltave(Moscow, 2009); ValeriiA. Moltusov,Pol- tavskaiabitva : uroki voennoi istorii, 1709-2009 (Moscow, 2009); Pavel A. Krotov, Bitvapri Poltave : k 300-letneigodovshchiny (St. Petersburg, 2009); Vladimir V. Lapin,Poltava- rossiiskaia slava: Rossiia v Severnoivoine, 1700-1721 gg. (St. Petersburg,2009); Aleksei G. Shkvarov,Poltavskaia bitva : k 300-letiiu "Preslavnoi batalii"(Moscow, 2009); Iurii V. Pogoda and la. G. Ivaniuk,Poltavskaia bataliia : Krepostii geroi (Moscow, 2009); Pobednyezori : k 300-letiiuPoltavskoi bitvy; Sborník(Moscow, 2009); Poltava : k 300-letiiuPoltavskogo srazheniia : Sbornik statei,ed. O. G. Ageevaet al. (Moscow,2009); T. Torstendahl-SalychevaandL. Iunson,eds., Poltava : sud'by plennykh i vzaimodeistvie kul'tur (Moscow, 2009). 3. Pis'ma i bumagiimperatora Petra Velikogo , vol. 9, pt. 1 (Moscow,1950), 285. 4. RichardWortman views the victory at Poltavaas a symbolicwatershed in the presentationof the tsar, who now claimed to be bothemperor and deity.The triumphalcelebration in Moscowcombined both biblical and classical images. Seehis study, From Peter the Great to the Death of Nicholas /, vol. 1 ofScenarios of Power:Myth and CeremonyinRussian Monarchy (Princeton, N. J.,1995-2000). 5. E. V.Anisimov, "Mif velikoi viktorii," Rodina, no. 7 (2009):50-55. Giovanna Brogi Bercoff's article, "Poltava: A TurningPoint in the History of Preaching," is in this volume. 6. V.P. Grebeniuk, "Panegiricheskie proizvedeniia pervoi chetverti XVIII v. i ikhsviaz' s petrovskimipreobrazovaniiami," inhis Panegiricheskaia literatura petrovskogo vremeni, ed. O. A. Derzhavina(Moscow, 1979), 27. 7. Ibid. 8. See myarticle "Poddanstvo, loiaTnosť, patriotism v imperskom diskurse Rossii XVIIIv.: k postanovkeproblémy," AbImperio , no. 4 (2006):71-72. 9. "IleTpno BbiniHeííBOAe, /AbBa Tep3aA b IloATaBCKOMnoAe: / AeB óecnoMoujHO peBeA,/IlOA OpAOBbIMM KpblAaMM, /M3T>flB3AeH eroKOrTHMM, /]/[ npOTMBMTbCH He CMeA."A. P.Sumarokov, Ody torzhestvennyia: Elegii liubovnyia. (Moscow, 2009), 23. 10. LavryPoltavy, comp. V. Naumov(Moscow, 2001), 188. 11. E. Pogos'ian,Petr I-arkhitektor russkoi istorii (St. Petersburg, 2001), 120. See also O. G. Ageeva,"Prazdniki v chesť Poltavskoi pobedy v XVIIIveke," in Poltava: k 300-letiiuPoltavskogo srazheniia , 257-73. 12. EkaterinaII: iskusstvoupravliať , comp. A. Kamenskii(Moscow, 2008), 17, 59, 189.

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 204 KAMENSKII

13. Love& Conquest: Personal Correspondence ofCatherine the Great and Prince GrigoryPotemkin , ed. and trans. Douglas Smith (DeKalb, 111., 2004), 349. 14. RusskiiGamlet , comp. A. Skorobogatov(Moscow, 2004), 221. 15. E. V.Anisimov, Rossia v seredine XVIII veka: Bor 'ba za naslediePetra (Moscow, 1986),28. 16. P.Viazemskii, Zapisnye knizhki (Moscow, 1992), 43. " 17. A.M. Panchenko,Tserkovnaia reforma i kultura petrovskoi epokhi" in XVIII veky vyp.17 (St. Petersburg, 1991), 10. 18. A. A. Kara-Murza,Reformator : Russkie o PetreI: opytanaliticheskoi antologii (Ivanovo,1994). 19. Theonly exception, as RolfTorstendahl notes, was probably the anarchist Mikhail Bakunin,who condemned Peter's military victories because they strengthened the Russianstate (R. Torstendahl,"Poltava: srazhenie, istoriia i simvol," in Poltava : Suďbyplennykh i vzaimodeistvie kultur (Moscow, 2009), 32. 20. A. Ishimova,Istoriia Rossii v rasskazakhdlia detei,vol. 1 (Moscow,1993), 382, 385. 21. Recountedon the "Moskovskie starosti" program broadcast by the Moscow radio station,Ekho Moskvy on 6 and 21 June2009: http://www.echo.msk.ru/programs/oldmsk/597083-echo/#element-text;http://www.echo.msk.ru/programs/ oldmsk/600394-echo/#element-text. 22. N. Kondratenkoand N. Shumeiko,"Sviatkuvannia 200-richchia Poltavskoï bytvy ochymaV. H. Korolenka,"inPoltavs'ka bytva 1709 roku: pohliad kriz' pryzmu tr'okhstolit ',1709-2009 (Poltava, 2009), 113-14. 23. P.Ia. Chaadaev,"Výpiska iz pis'maneizvestnogo kneizvestnoi," inPolnoe sobranie sochineniii izbrannye pis'ma , vol.1 (Moscow,1991), 570-71. 24. Kamenskii,"Poddanstvo," 96.

This content downloaded from 195.209.247.163 on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:34:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions