Ivan the Terrible

The author of the essay reflects on the attitude in today's Russia to the
personality of Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible, reverence for him in certain circles of Russian society and analyzes the commemorative practice associated with this. Most of all he is occupied by the problem of the relationship between academic knowledge and public perception of the figure of the first Russian Tsar.

В статье реконструируется история создания арии (каватины) Ивана Грозного из второй редакции «Псковитянки», до сих пор ошибочно атрибутируемой как вставной номер третьей редакции. Рассматривается версия Ф. И. Шаляпина о том, что ария была написана Н. А. Римским-Корсаковым специально для него (в книге «Маска и душа»), и причины ее появления. Восстанавливается история автографа арии и ее протографа — каватины Грозного из второй редакции оперы, анализируется роль арии-каватины в развитии образа Ивана Грозного и драматургии «Псковитянки». Делается вывод о том, что Римский-Корсаков стремился усилить в опере линию Ивана Грозного, существенно углубить его образ в плане интимных чувств и переживаний, в чем можно увидеть влияние образа Бориса Годунова из оперы М. П. Мусоргского. В музыкальном отношении ария Ивана Грозного знаменует поворот к певучести, пению в стиле Римского-Корсакова, который был осуществлен композитором в конце 1870-х годов / The article reconstructs the history of the creation of Ivan the Terrible aria (cavatina) from "The Maid of Pskov" 2nd edition still mistakenly attributed as an inserted number in the 3rd edition. F. Chaliapin’s version that the aria was written by N. Rimsky-Korsakov specifically for him ("Mask and Soul" book), and the reasons for its creation are considered. The history of the aria's autograph and its protograph, Ivan the Terrible's cavatina from the opera’s 2nd edition is retraced, the role of the cavatina aria in the development of Ivan the Terrible' image and 'The Maid of Pskov's dramaturgy is analyzed. It concludes that Rimsky-Korsakov sought to improve the character development of Ivan the Terrible in the opera and add depth significantly to his image in terms of intimate feelings and experiences which can be seen as being influenced by Boris Godunov' image from M. Mussorgsky's opera. Musically, Ivan the Terrible aria marks a turn towards melodiousness, singing in Rimsky-Korsakov’s style which was done by the composer in the late 1870s

В статье рассматриваются обстоятельства местнического конфликта князей А.Б. Трубецкого и П.М. Щенятева на полоцком воеводстве весной 1564 г., а также причины окончательного перехода князей Трубецких на государеву службу. Вплоть до 1560-х гг. Трубецкие занимали военные и административные посты эпизодически и не были прочно встроены в систему служебных отношений Московского государства. Принятие в начале 1560-х гг. нового земельного законодательства поставило под угрозу дальнейшее существование удела Трубецких и вынудило их активизировать служебную деятельность. Конфликт в Полоцке стал первой попыткой Трубецких выяснить свой настоящий местнический статус. Князь А.Б. Трубецкой руководствовался старыми представлениями об исключительной роли служилых князей, характерными для первой трети XVI в. Он вступил в местнический спор с заведомо превосходящим противником и не вышел из него победителем. Столкнувшись с новыми реалиями государевой службы, Трубецкие, вследствие своей служебной пассивности уступавшие в местническом отношении многим менее знатным родам, пожертвовали своей относительной независимостью и всецело перешли на царскую службу. В годы опричнины они активно служили в опричном уделе царя Ивана Грозного, снискали его расположение и смогли повысить свой местнический статус.

In his book An Attempt at Microhistoriography (Rus. Опыт микроисториографии), Gyula Szvák, an outstanding Hungarian specialist in Russian history, republishes seven of his earlier articles and presents a previously unpublished eighth article on the Soviet historiography of the key issues of 16th-century Russian history. The articles consider Ivan Peresvetov’s works, reforms and oprichnina between the middle and second half of the sixteenth century; also, they compare the reigns and personalities of Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great. Additionally, the author explores the personal stories of his mentors, Russian historian Ruslan Skrynnikov and Hungarian József Perényi. The book reviewed presents a kind of panorama of two historiographic traditions of studying the Russian Middle Ages in the Soviet Union and Hungary before the collapse of the communist regime there. The author returns to the peculiarities of Russia’s historical development and comprehension of the concept of “Russian feudalism” and reflects on the fate of historians who were engaged in the study of mediaeval Russia under rigid ideological principles.

В книге «Опыт микроисториографии» выдающийся венгерский специалист по русской истории Дюла Cвак переиздал семь своих прежних и представил ранее не опубликованную восьмую статью о советской историографии ключевых проблем истории России XVI в.: творчества Ивана Пересветова, реформ и опричнины середины – второй половины XVI столетия, сопоставления правления и личностей Ивана Грозного и Петра Великого. Он также исследовал персональные истории своих наставников, русского историка Руслана Скрынникова и венгерского Йозефа Перени. В рецензируемом издании разворачивается своеобразная панорама двух историографических традиций изучения русского Средневековья в Советском Союзе и Венгрии до падения там коммунистического режима. Автор вновь возвращается к проблемам специфики исторического развития России, осмысления концепта «русский феодализм», размышляет о судьбах историков, занимавшихся исследованиями средневековой Руси в условиях господства жестких идеологических установок.

The article is devoted to the vitality of historical painting. The purpose of the article is to identify those characteristic features of a historical work that contribute to the fact that the picture, while remaining a product of the epoch that created it, acquires a timeless character. The emphasis is placed on the content aspect of the historical picture; its allusiveness, iconography, dialogism; external aspects of the perception of the picture (politicization, laughing and playing aspects). The author also analyzes such a complex aspects of perception of a picture as its transformation into a “living organism” with which one can “conduct a conversation” or “argue”. These aspects are considered on the example of the painting Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan on November 16, 1581 by Ilya Repin (1885). / Статья посвящена феномену витальности исторической живописи. Цель статьи — выявить те характерные особенности исторического произведения, которые способствуют тому, что картина, оставаясь порождением эпохи, создавшей ее, обретает вневременной характер. Акцент сделан на содержательный аспект исторической картины; ее аллюзивность, иконографию, диалогизм; внешние аспекты восприятия картины (политизированность, смеховое и игровое начала). Анализируется и такой сложный аспект восприятия картины как превращение ее в «живой организм», с которым можно «вести беседу» или «спорить» на протяжении исторического времени. Эти аспекты рассматриваются на примере картины И.Е. Репина «Иван Грозный и сын его Иван 16 ноября 1581 года» (1885).

The study focuses on the development of reporting in Early Modern Europe. In the Kingdom of Bohemia the first news media, reporting letters and handwritten newspapers, occured in the middle of the 15th century. Their reliability was appreciated much, but they were quite expensive. In the middle of the 16th century the situation started to change and several social groups started to buy or borrow the handwritten newspapers.
Printed newspapers and leaflets also originated in the 15th century like the handwrittten ones. Their advantage was that the printers were able to make more copies at once, so they could sell them for a lower price. On the other hand, till the middle of the 17th century the printed media were disadvantaged by the slowness of the printig process.
The first news on events in Russia occured in the reporting of the Kingdom of Bohemia at the beginning of the 16th century. Czech nobles cared about the conflicts between Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia in the first decades of the 16th century a lot, since at that time the Kingdom of Bohemia was ruled by the members of Jagellonian dynasty. When Ferdinand I. of Habsburg became the king of Bohemia, the interest in Russian affairs declined. It raised again in 1560ies in connection with the Livonian wars. Till the beginning of 1570ies the majority of reporting media described Russians as brutal raiders. However, the negative image of Russia in the reporting media of the Habsburg monarchy started to change partly after the death of Sigismund II Augustus. During the elections of Polish kings and in the first years of the reign of Stephen Báthory the Habsburgs were seriously considering possibilities of cooperation wirh Ivan IV. Therefore, they supported a more favourable image of the czar.

Мартін Берзевіций  — угорський дипломат Польсько-Литовської Речі Посьполитої
The epoch of Polish king and Lithuanian grand duke Steven Bathory (of Hungarian origin) has already been in the focus of the research, although his diplomats of Hungarian origin are less known. In this 2021st year is celebrated the 450th anniversary of that he was elected for the Grand Duke of Transylvania. (Then he was elected by the Polish noblemen for the King of Poland in 1576.) Although his general Kaspar Békés, who is buried in Grodno, too, with King Báthory, is better known, but another diplomat, Martinus (Márton) Berzeviczy, the Royal Cancellor of Polish King Steven Báthory in the 16th century, was of Hungarian origin, too. He got the nobility according to laws of the Polish Rzeczpospolita, and then he found a Polish family. He owned a land in Livonia, too; therefore, he was not only a vassal of his king Báthory but also of margrave Albert Frederick of Brandenburg, too, formally. Although another person, Kaspar (Gáspár) Békés was and has been mentioned more, because of his protestant confession, the mentioned above Berzeviczy’s activity in diplomacy and state management was of more significance, and he served his king Báthory in more positions. The treaty of peace with Tsar Ivan The Terrible, and negotiations with Moscow, were mostly the result of his work, and Berzeviczy was negotiated in Moscow. There are still about twenty Hungarian names published in the literature on the history of Lithuanian Grand Duchy, most of them in diplomatic service. Some sporadic papers are published by Lithuanian colleagues, who don't read Hungarian sources (esp. by Raimonda Ragauskienė, and others, too). Therefore, it is necessary to compare this prosopography with the earlier Hungarian literature in the field, which was published in early 20th century. Because Hungarian historians had been to archives up to Königsberg; and there they collected primary sources, which were later disappeared with the historical storms. Thus, archival data on the diplomatic relations of Polish-Lithuanian Rzeczpospolyta in the 16th century (when Hungarian Báthory was the Polish King and also defeated the Moscow Ruler in a battle) have been published in Hungarian papers and monographs, and the original archival sources have already been destroyed by the storms of history in East Europe or became less accessible due to the Soviet power; mainly in Königsberg and in the contemporary Belarus. This paper is to be presented with purposes to complete the literature in the field by those data are hardly accessible for the non-Hungarian scholars, contributing to the diplomatic history of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

The painting Conclusia for the Order of Succession held in the State Hermitage Museum was displayed at the exhibitions ‘Russian Art of the Baroque Period’ (1984) and ‘Mikhail Lomonosov and the time of Elizabeth I’ (2011–2012). The exhibition catalogues provided the following descriptions for the painting subjects. The celestial tier of the picture contains personification of Russia, with Peter I and Catherine I standing on both sides and Prince Vladimir and Tsar Ioann IV shown above them; in the lower tier, Elizabeth Petrovna is represented pointing at her successor, Crown Prince Peter Fyodorovich. The only recognisable likeness in the painting is Peter I. ‘Russia’, Prince Vladimir and Ioann IV are mentioned in the surviving fragments of the inscription at the bottom of the picture; all the other subjects had to be identified by inference. The article compares Conclusia with a drawing created by Fyodor Soimonov to illustrate his ‘A Brief Description of the Lands Added to the Russian Empire’ (1754) and an print based on this drawing, which was used by Soimonov for his ‘History of Peter the Great’ (after 28 June 1762). Both works share the same composition as the top tier of the Conclusia for the Order of Succession held in the Hermitage; however, the figure paired with Peter I is Elizabeth Petrovna rather than Catherine I. The verses placed below explain the programme. The use of the images in this context suggests that the damaged inscription in Conclusia was misinterpreted, casting doubt on the existing dating and the identity of the figures. The available evidence appears to indicate that the top tier shows Empress Elizabeth, not Catherine I, while female figure in the lower tier represents Catherine II pointing at Peter Fyodorovich.
В Отделе истории русской культуры Государственного Эрмитажа хранится живописная «Конклюзия на престолонаследие» (ЭРЖ-2897; холст, масло; 93,0x74 см). Привлечение к ее анализу рисунка Ф.И. Соймонова, созданного им как иллюстрирация к его «Сокращенному описанию о приращениях Всероссийской Империии» (РГАДА), и гравюры с него, выполненной по его заказу как иллюстрация для его «Истории Петра Великого» (ОР РНБ), заставляет поставить вопрос о правомерности существующей идентификации персонажей и датировки, а также восстановить подлинный текст фрагментарно сохранившейся надписи, которая была воспроизведена в литературе неверно.

Для Андрея Курбского как писателя-традиционалиста и новатора одновременно топика жертвы и аллюзии на жертвы в библейском и историческом контексте играли большую роль в воплощении сложного авторского замысла в «Истории о великом князе Московском» (вторая половина XVI в.). В статье фиксируется полярное разграничение писателем аксиологии жертвенного подвига для акторов власти и преследуемых героев. Обращение к дальнейшему восприятию произведений Курбского выявило также неоднозначную рецепцию его трактовки читателями и переписчиками. Современники и читатели конца XVII — начала XVIII вв. по-разному относились к определению Курбским личности Ивана Грозного как жестокого тирана, приносящего неправедные жертвы, и характеристике пострадавших от него людей как новомучеников. Богатая рукописная традиция «Истории», в том числе в составе Сборников Курбского, способствовала появлению новых читательских интерпретаций на основе литературной топики и аллюзий, использованных Курбским. К ней оказались причастны интеллектуалы «переходного» времени А.С. Матвеев, Евфимий Чудовский, А.И. Лызлов, В.В. Голицын и др. Ряд текстологических и типологических сопоставлений тех или иных памятников и «Истории» Курбского позволил глубже понять литературный контекст времени распространения сочинений опального князя и показать, какие грани идеи Курбского о жертве оставались актуальными для представителей разных сословных групп, а какие нивелировались и устаревали в процессе освоения текста.

Neuberger J. "Introduction"
Brandenberger D. "Interpreting Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible"
Клейман Н.И. "Продуктивное триединство"
Petrone K. "Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible and the History of Mentalités"
Platt K.M.F. Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible, Indeterminacy, and the Hermeneutics of Suspicion"
Tsivian Yu. "Joan Neuberger's This Thing of Darkness"
Neuberger J. "Response to Roundtable Comments"

Статья посвящена визуализации методом мультиспектральной съемки с последующей программной обработкой единственного прижизненного портрета Ивана Грозного, выполненного в технике тиснения на коже верхней крышке переплета Апостола Ивана Федорова. The article is devoted to the visualization by the method of multispectral shooting with the subsequent program processing of the only lifetime portrait of Ivan the Terrible, made using the embossing technique on the binding of the Ivan Fedorov's Apostle.

Introduction. The visit of the Russian envoy Osip Nepeya to London in 1556-1557 is usually considered as the beginning of the official relations between Russia and England. In the light of modern views about the sixteenth-century diplomacy, this event requires a more thorough research. Methods. The Nepeya's trip was traditionally viewed as an insignificant episode in the context of general reviews of bilateral relations concentrated mainly on trade. The reasons and possibilities of the military and political rapprochement between England, Spain and Russia in the 1550s, which was the most likely goal of the Nepeya's journey to England, have never been investigated. Therefore, this article is based on an analysis of numerous multilingual sources. Analysis. The author clarifies the Nepeya's diplomatic rank and certain previously unknown details of the Muscovites' stay in London. He analyzes Nepeya's mission to England in the context of foreign affairs of Ivan IV, Mary Tudor and Philip II Habsburg. Results. It is concluded that the rulers of Spain and England could provide military support to Ivan IV, but they were not interested in military and political alliance with the Muscovy and the war against Turkey. However, establishing official equal relations between England and Russia at the highest level, as well as obtaining trade privileges for Russian merchants was the main result of Nepeya's trip. This allows us to conclude that the first Russian diplomatic mission in London was successful.

Tsar Ivan the Terrible (Ivan IV, 1533-1584) is one of the most controversial rulers in Russian history, infamous for his cruelty. He was the first Russian ruler to use mass terror as a political instrument, and the only Russian ruler to do so before Stalin. Comparisons of Ivan to Stalin only exacerbated the politicization of his image. Russians have never agreed on his role in Russian history, but his reign is too important to ignore. Since the abolition of censorship in 1991 professional historians and amateurs have grappled with this problem. Some authors have manipulated that image to serve political and cultural agendas. This book explores Russia’s contradictory historical memory of Ivan in scholarly, pedagogical and political publications.

Learn more: https://www.academicstudiespress.com/russianandslaviclit/ivan-the-terrible-in-russian-historical-memory-since-1991

Главной целью настоящей статьи является демонстрация перемен, произошедших в русской церковной иконографии XVI в. Авторы анализируют новые иконографические сюжеты, появившиеся в XVI в, такие как «Новозаветная Троица», «Древо Иессево», «Воинствующая Церковь», а также обращаются к сюжетам, в которых в этом столетии произошли коренные изменения, например, «Страшный суд». Подробно рассматривается иконография знаковой для московской иконописи XVI в. Четырехчастной иконы Благовещенского собора Московского Кремля.
Восстанавливается основная тенденция эпохи, заключающаяся в постепенном вытеснении исторических сюжетов сюжетами аллегорически-символическими, основанными на толковании Библии богословами и на откровениях.
The main purpose of this article is to show the changes that occurred in Russian church iconography in the 16th century. The authors analyze new iconographic plots that appeared in the 16th century, such as the “New Testament Trinity”, “The Tree of Jesse”, “The Militant Church”, as well as showing plots in which radical changes took place in this century, for example, “The Last Judgment”. The iconography of the four-part icon of the Annunciation Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, iconic for 16th-century Moscow iconography, is examined in detail. The main tendency of the era is being restored, consisting in the gradual displacement of historical plots by allegorical-symbolic plots based on the interpretation of the Bible by theologians and on revelations.