CC BY
70
РОССИЙСКАЯ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОСТЬ Russian Statehood
L. Taimasova
FAMILY SECRETS OF THE FIRST ROMANOVS: "DOCUMENTS THAT ARE INDECENT FOR HISTORY"
Л.Ю. Таймасова
Семейные тайны первых Романовых: «Не приличные к истории документы»
On February 28, 1720, Peter I (1682 - 1725) signed a decree entitled "The General Regulations of State Colleges." A special chapter of that document took up the question of archives.1 The decree proposed the formation of two main archives under the auspices of the College of Foreign Affairs - one to be located in St. Petersburg, the other in Moscow. The first archive would preserve all documents of the Imperial government except those pertaining to finance; the second would serve as the repository for papers transferred from the Posolsky prikaz (Foreign Office, literally the Office of Embassies, which had lost operational significance as a result of Peter's reorganization of government administration) as well as documents from the offices of former tsars. In the process of re-archiving the archives, the question about the fate of papers from the personal, or "komnatnaya," library of deceased tsars arose. Undoubtedly, secret, potentially embarrassing, documents were slated for destruction.
However, as emerged later, the persons authorized to burn the compromising papers hid them instead. The documents were then kept in several chests. Two of the chests, containing the most important documents, were deposited with the Emperor's wife, the future Catherine I. The others were hidden in a secret place in Moscow. The disappearance of the compromising papers was first discovered shortly after the Empress's death.
Empress Catherine I died on May 6, 1727.2 The contents of the Empress's testament were revealed after her funeral.3 Among its many provisions, her will included instructions regarding the order of succession to the throne (the throne was transferred to Peter Alekseevich, Peter I's grandson,), and the division of money and movable property between her daughters Anna and Elizabeth.4
Coldly ignoring the protocols of official mourning, two weeks af-
ter the Empress's death Princess Anna's husband, Duke Karl Friedrich of Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorp, asked the cabinet ministers to speed up the division of the late Empress's movable property as he and his wife intended to leave Russia soon for Holstein. Angered by the Duke's impatient intervention in his wife's hereditary affairs, the ministers moved instead to expel the Duke and the Princess from Russia posthaste.5
The couple's departure was set for July 25, 1727. 6 Now, Anna Petro-vna lamented that due to the delay in distributing her legacy, she would be unable to take any mementos of her mother with her. Her Highness asked that she at least be provided an inventory of the valuables, adding that two other chests existed that had not been included in the general register. The government took her statement as a reproach, an implication that they were attempting to conceal a portion of the late Empress's legacy, when in fact she only wanted the two chests that her mother had handed over to her for storage included in the inventory. Incorrectly interpreting the words of Anna Petrovna, the ministers responded that Emperor Peter II and his sister Elizabeth Petrovna did not want for anything and that if the two chests turned up they would be taken into account during the final distribution.7 In the end, Anna Petrovna did not receive the portion her mother had stipulated in her will, but did manage to take the two chests in question with her to Kiel along with other of her personal belongings.
Anna Petrovna died in Kiel on May 4, 1728, leaving her husband to raise their infant son.8 With her passing the Duke not only lost his wife, but the considerable subsidies that the Russian government had been providing the couple as well. Within a year, though, the widower himself came into his inheritance. The two chests that had belonged to Catherine I made up the most valuable portion of his wife's property. As it turned out, they contained documents relating to Russian history. So scandalous, in fact, were the papers contents that the Duke immediately understood that they could be used to extort payment from the Russian government in exchange for his silence. In August 1729, the Duke sent his representative to St. Petersburg with a demand for 100,000 rubles. The court acceded to the blackmail, but warned the Duke that further payments would not be forthcoming. In the event, this turned out to be an idle threat. Karl Friedrich continued to wrest large sums from the Russian treasury, enjoying his ill-gotten compensation until 1733.9
As the Duke's appetites grew, the Russian government found his endless demands for money unbearable. Then, with the help of a provocation (the so-called "Milasevich Affair"), the government managed to establish Karl-Friedrich's culpability in a conspiracy to overthrow Empress Anna Ivanovna10 in favor of his young son Karl Peter Ulrich. A representative from Moscow reminded the Duke that by the terms of his marriage contract he had given up "all claims to the Russian throne."11 In addition, he was accused of treating with Stanislaw Leszczynski, a candidate for the vacant Polish throne.12 The Duke's actions "repaired an injustice" since Russia backed a different candidate. In retaliation, Moscow threatened
war. The Duke of Holstein was forced to surrender the two chests from his deceased wife's estate to the special envoy.13
The chests ultimately found their way into the hands of Chancellor Gavriil Golovkin, who, no doubt, found their contents very useful for his own purposes. He made copies of the documents and placed them under his seal in a special locker that held the most important government documents.
Whatever threat the scandalous papers carried seemed to have been suppressed, but Empress Anna Ivanovna and her ministers' respite proved short lived. Troubles began anew following Golovkin's death on July 24, 1734 when the Cabinet of Ministers came into possession of the deceased chancellor's personal seal and keys to the special locker. The papers from the locker were reviewed in the presence of the Empress's favorite, Ernst Johann Biron14 as well as two other ministers. The copies that they found proved so shocking that the ministers felt compelled to check them against originals dating from the time of Ivan the Terrible and Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov housed in the College of Foreign Affairs archive in Moscow. This they did without submitting an official government request.
The ministers undertook a careful search for old documents in the Moscow archive via Biron's surrogate, Baron Johann Albrecht von Korf, who had been made director of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences thanks to Biron's patronage.15 In February 1735, von Korf submitted an inquiry to the archive. Claiming it had become necessary to re-issue the "Sobornoye Ulozheniye" (a legal code promulgated in 1649) with an accompanying biography of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich16, he insisted that relevant documents be sent to the Academy of Sciences. In addition, the Baron ordered that handwritten letters, drawings, and the travel journals of the tsar's predecessors - Ivan the Terrible17 and Mikhail Fedorovich18 - be found and delivered. The Moscow archive staff spent four months searching for the requested documents. They succeeded in locating papers from the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich and a small sample from that of Mikhail Fedorovich. However, letters or drawings from the time of Ivan the Terrible and documents relating to Mikhail Fedorovich were not found. The archivists duly reported this to von Korf.19
Certain now that the originals of the scandalous documents were not in the Moscow archive, the ministers suspected mischief. The important papers must have been stolen during the reorganization of the archives in 1720-1721. To unravel the mystery, they sought professional help and enlisted the offices of the Secret Chancellery (Taynaya kantselyariya), an organization that engaged in political investigation.20
Traces of the missing documents pointed to an old Moscow printing house. Secret Chancery investigators dug up a four-year-old case involving the former head of that press, one Alexei Barsov, who was currently serving a prison sentence for possessing banned literature. On May 22, 1736, he was taken to the cellars of the Secret Chancery. There, under in-
terrogation in the new case, he died, unable to withstand the torture.21 But not, evidently, before his tormentors got the results they sought. Barsov revealed where the lost documents were hidden.
The documents from Barsov's cache were delivered to the Cabinet within a week. Von Korf immediately learned of this. On June 1, 1736, he sent a "humble petition" to the Cabinet of Ministers for the transfer to the Academy of Sciences of documents taken from the Moscow printing
house.22
The ministers deliberated for about a month. Then, acting on von Korf's petition, they issued a resolution: the letters and other documents taken from the printing house should be studied and recorded. Archive staff should select those documents deemed decent for history and send them to the Academy of Sciences. Documents considered "not decent for history and subject to secrecy" should be sent to the Cabinet.23
The ministerial order was not fully implemented. Manuscripts "in scrolls, bundles, and books," recognized as "decent for history" were never deposited in the Academy of Sciences. The "Sobornoye Ulozheni-ye" was published in 1737 without a biography of Tsar Alexei Mikhailov-ich.24 The "decent documents" were kept in the archives of the St. Petersburg departments of the Governmental Senate for almost a hundred years, and after 1834 were transferred to the State Archive of Foreign Affairs.25 Among these papers were, in the main, documents from the time of Alexei Mikhailovich, and a small number of papers from the period of Mikhail Fedorovich. No documents related to the reign of Ivan the Terrible were mentioned. These manuscripts, apparently, were considered "indecent."
Documents recognized as "indecent for history and subject to secrecy" were safely hidden away in a special locker under the seals of the first three Cabinet ministers. Baron von Korf, who had displayed unnecessary zeal in secret matters of national importance, fell into disgrace. In the autumn of 1736, he left St. Petersburg suddenly and went into hiding for three months in Courland because, it was said, of an unhappy love. Upon his return to St. Petersburg, he was informed that he had lost favor with the court.26
Five years later, however, the ministers again enlisted von Korf to search for scandalous artifacts related to the reign of Ivan the Terrible - this time abroad. In March 1740, the Baron was removed as director of the Academy of Sciences and appointed extraordinary envoy to Denmark. En route to his destination, von Korf acquired a portrait of Ivan the Terrible's niece, Maria Vladimirovna Staritskaya, the Queen of Livonia. The identity of the portrait's subject was certified by a beautiful inscription in Danish in the upper left corner of the canvas which read: "Maria [wife of] Prince Magnus of Denmark Direct Descendent of Grand Duke Ivan Basilovitch The Elder."27 The portrait's notable "indecency" lay in the substantial Catholic cross of crystal hanging on a gold chain that rested on her breast even though she was Orthodox.
As it turned out, the portrait proved to be a crude forgery from the first half of the 18th century. According to contemporary art historians,28 the canvas does not depict the niece of the Russian Tsar, but Maria Vassily-evna Lupu, the second wife of the Lithuanian prince Janusz Radziwill.29 Why a portrait of Maria Lupu shows her wearing a Catholic cross also remains a mystery since she, too, was Orthodox.
Realizing he had purchased a forgery, von Korf created a scandal. He accused a Hamburg shopkeeper deceit.30 Later, the Baron handed the infamous portrait over to the Danish diplomat and collector of antiquities, Terkel Klevenfeld. Von Korf never again returned to Russia opting to stay in Denmark for good. No doubt, he feared returning to court after the portrait fiasco. While living in Denmark, the Baron expended his wealth acquiring old books for his library.31
While von Korf painstakingly examined women's portraits in Hamburg antique shops, in St. Petersburg the hunt for the "indecent" documents began anew. The papers had disappeared from the special locker. The third Cabinet Minister, Artemy Petrovich Volynsky32, who had just assumed his post, fell under suspicion. At the time he was engaged in drafting of the "General Project," a lengthy document "on the improvement of internal state affairs." A review of Russian history from "St. Vladimir to the accession to the throne of Mikhail Fedorovich and down to the present day" made up a separate chapter of the "Project." This covered the period from the 10th century to the accession of the first Romanov tsar in 1613 and then continued to the middle of the 18th century. In his work on the historical section of the "Project," Volynsky evinced a deep interest in the past, especially the circumstances leading to Mikhail Romanov's coronation.
In early 1740, courtiers and diplomats noticed a change in Volynsky's attitude toward Biron. The minister freely criticized the Empress's favorite, and within his circle of close friends he made impertinent comments and exposed certain "false deeds" involving Empress Anna Ivanovna, herself, and the "most illustrious family line."33 This raised suspicions that Volynsky had become acquainted with the "indecent documents," and an audit showed that the papers had, indeed, disappeared.
Volynsky was arrested on April 15, 1740 on a standard charge of bribery. Three days later, however, his case was transferred to the Secret Chancery. New, more serious, charges were now brought against him including treason and preparing an armed coup in order to seize the Russian throne.
The investigation lasted two months and ended the day Volynsky underwent torture. On June 7, the Empress ordered "investigate no further, draw up a detailed account, and make a report from what's been uncovered."34 Obviously, further inquiry had become unnecessary. With the aid of torture, the investigators exposed everything the political trial had intended. Volynsky gave up the cache of documents stolen from the Cabinet of Ministers.
Two weeks later the trial occurred. Volynsky received the death sentence, which was carried out on June 27 in grisly fashion: his tongue cut out, head and right arm chopped off. Thus, the Empress impressed on her subjects the price to be paid for thinking, divulging, or writing "impertinent words" about those of the most illustrious family line. Compromising documents, most likely, were destroyed.
On assuming power, Anna Leopoldovna as regent, and then Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, took actions to correct the injustice meted out in the case and the severity of the punishment. Catherine II repeatedly referred to the materials of the investigation, and warned her descendants to beware of such an unlawful example of judicial practice.35 All tried to assuage the fears instilled in their subjects by the cruel execution of the courtier concerned with the reorganization of the Russian state. In addition, they found it necessary to make clear that Volynsky's "impertinent speeches" concerning "the royal lineage" had no basis in fact, and that the House of Romanov legally occupied the Russian throne.
Doubts, however, did not entirely disappear. It is possible that rumors about the existence of documents testifying to the Romanov's usurpation of the throne continued to circulate within noble circles in the 1820's. These rumors, most likely, had some influence on the Decembrists, whose uprising in 1825 aimed to overthrow the entire ruling dynasty.36
In the autumn of 1823, the historian, N.M. Karamzin, requested documents relating to the Volynsky case from the Secret Chancery archives.37 At that time, Karamzin was working on the eleventh volume of his "History of the Russian State." In particular, he was examining documents on the reign of Boris Godunov and False Dmitri I38. Volynsky's case made a gloomy impression on Karamzin, but he apparently did not find any mention of "indecent" documents. All harmful information had been cleansed years before.
At the beginning of the 1830's, while gathering information about the first False Dmitri and the early Romanovs, the well-known historian V.N. Berkh tried to find traces of "indecent" documents in the archives of the Cabinet of Ministers. His efforts came to naught. Berkh did note that a resolution dated June 23, 1736 indicated that compromising documents had been separated out from "decent" papers, "but an unknown fate has befallen them." The historian expressed the hope that someday they would be found.39
The Volynsky case "surfaced" once again in the autumn of 1893 in connection with Count S.D. Sheremetev's investigation into the identity of the first False Dmitri. Together with his colleague, K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, he sought the key to understanding Volynsky's interest in the Time of Troubles. Judging by their correspondence, Sheremetev found nothing of significance. Bestuzhev-Ryumin wrote, "[I]f the documents are missing, then there is some necessary reason. It follows that the notion of imposture is not quite so strong. All the documents of primary importance are missing."40
The interest of Karamzin, Berkh, Bestuzhev-Ryumin and Sheremetev in the Volynsky case, their search for "indecent" documents while working on the history of the Time of Troubles, is a good indication that they all sought information that could shed light on False Dmitri's origins.41 These documents, they apparently hoped, might reveal the secret of the Romanovs' role in the Pretender's case and the circumstances surrounding the new dynasty's accession.
By the middle of the 19th century, only one so-called "indecent" document had been preserved. This was the portrait of Ivan IV's "niece" purchased by von Korf, and even that had turned out to be a forgery. The portrait now hung in the Royal Danish Museum in Rosenborg. In 1872, the museum director, Jens Jacob Asmussen Worsaae, ordered a copy made of the portrait and donated it to the Kremlin Armory Museum.42
The portrait sat in the vault of the Armory for about four years before Moscow historians expressed interest in it. These scholars did not doubt the identity of the person depicted in the portrait, but they were puzzled by the Queen of Livonia's costume. Some saw it as "non-Russian," and they were at a loss to explain the Catholic cross. Yuri Filimonov, guardian of the Armory Museum, expressed the official point of view. He strongly insisted that the artist had depicted the tsar's niece in traditional Russian dress.43
The painting was last brought to public awareness on the eve of the October Revolution. S.P. Bartenev published the image in his book, "The Moscow Kremlin in the Old Days and Now," in 1916.44 Then, surprisingly, the artifact vanished. At present, the Armory Museum staff has no information about how and when the portrait disappeared from its vault: "The portrait has never been in the museum's storage and now nothing is known about it."45
In conclusion, we can say that documents from the private "komnat-nyaya" library of the Russian tsars presented a special danger to the accepted history of the Romanov dynasty.46 The compromising documents concerned the reigns of Ivan the Terrible and Mikhail Fedorovich. Specifically, the documents have a bearing on the circumstances of the Pretender Dmitri's appearance and the accession of the first Romanov tsar. The nature of these documents may be surmised by the extreme measures - including provocations without and terror within the country - that the slightest possibility of their becoming public motivated the tsarist government to take.
Notes
1 Реформы Петра I: Сборник документов. М., 1937. С. 108-135; Brown, Peter B. Muscovite Government Bureas // Russian History. 1983. Vol. 10. No. 3. P. 269-330.
2 Appleby, John H. The Founding of St Petersburg in the Context of the Royal Society's Relationship with Russia // Notes and Records of the Royal
Society of London. Sept. 2003. Vol. 57. No. 3. P. 273-284.
3 Ostrowski, Donald. The Façade of Legitimacy: Exchange of Power and Authority in Early Modern Russia // Comparative Studies in Society and History. Jul. 2002. Vol. 44. No. 3. P. 534-563.
4 Полное собрание законов Российской империи c 1649 г.: Собрание 1-е. Т. VII. № 5070; Brayley Hodgetts ЕЛ. The Life of Catherine the Great of Russia. N.Y., 1914. Р. 311.
5 Bagger, Hans. The Role of the Baltic in Russian Foreign Policy, 1721 -1773 // Imperial Russian Foreign Policy. Cambridge (Mass.), 1994. P. 52.
6 Бервик-и-Лириа Я. Записки дюка Лирийского и Бервикского во время пребывания его при императорском российском дворе в звании посла короля испанского. 1727—1730 гг. СПб., 1845. С. 139.
7 Петров П.Н. Цесаревна Анна Петровна (1708 - 1728) // Памятники новой русской истории. T. I. СПб., 1871. Отд. 1. С. 84-87.
8 Dukes, Paul. The Making of Russian Absolutism, 1613 - 1801. N.Y., 2013. P. 146.
9 Донесения и другие бумаги английских послов, посланников и резидентов при русском дворе с 1728 года по 1738 год // Сборник Русского исторического общества. Т. 66. СПб., 1889. С. 67, 544, 545.
10 AnisimovE.V. Anna Ivanovna // The Emperors and Empresses of Russia: Reconsidering the Romanovs. N.Y., 2015. P. 37-65.
11 Петров П.Н. Цесаревна Анна Петровна (1708 - 1728) // Памятники новой русской истории. T. I. СПб., 1871. Отд. 1. С. 70.
12 Lukowski, Jerzy. Political Ideas among the Polish Nobility in the Eighteenth Century (To 1788) // The Slavonic and East European Review. Jan. 2004. Vol. 82. No. 1. P. 1-26.
13 Михайлов М. Сборник исторических материалов и документов, относящихся к новой Русской истории XVIII и XIX века. СПб., 1878. С. 194214; Бантыш-Каменский Д. Биографии российских генералиссимусов и генерал-фельдмаршалов. Ч. II. СПб., 1840. С. 165; Пресняков А. Бестужев-Рюмин, граф Алексей Петрович // Русский биографический словарь. Т. II. СПб., 1900. С. 772.
14 Bitter, Michael. Count Ernst Johann Bühren and the Russian Court of Anna Ioannovna // The Man behind the Queen: Male Consorts in History. N.Y., 2014. P. 103-123.
15 Vucinich, Alexander. Science in Russian Culture: A History to 1860. Vol. 1. Stanford (CA), 1963. P. 81.
16 Dunning, Chester S. L. Russia's First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding of the Romanov Dynasty. University Park (PA), 2001. P. 465; Poe, Marshall. Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich and the Demise of the Romanov Political Settlement // The Russian Review. Oct. 2003. Vol. 62. No. 4. P. 537-564.
17 Keenan, Edward L. Ivan the Terrible and His Women // Russian History. 2010. Vol. 37. No. 4. P. 322-359.
18 Orchard, G. Edward. The Election of Michael Romanov // The Slavonic and East European Review. Jul. 1989. Vol. 67. No. 3. P. 378-402.
19 Сухомлинов М.И. Материалы для истории императорской Академии
наук. Т. II. СПб., 1886. С. 591-592, 769.
20 Карпенко С.В. Михаил Хрущов, Степан Шешковский и «преобра-женье» Тайной канцелярии в Тайную экспедицию (1762 - 1764 гг.) // «Новый исторический вестник» к 80-летию МГИАИ-РГГУ: Избранное, 2005 - 2010. М., 2011. С. 114-120; Keenan, Paul. St Petersburg and the Russian Court, 1703 - 1761. N.Y., 2013. P. 65.
21 ЧистовичИ.А. Решиловское дело: Феофан Прокопович и Феофилакт Лопатинский: материалы для истории первой половины XVIII в. СПб., 1861. С. 6, 7; Сухомлинов М.И. История Российской академии // Сборник отделения русского языка и словесности Императорской Академии наук. Т. 19. Вып. 4. СПб., 1878. С. 186-189.
22 Бумаги Кабинета министров императрицы Анны Иоанновны, 17311740 гг. Т. V, 1736 г. // Сборник Русского исторического общества. Т. 114. Юрьев, 1902. С. 269.
23 Берх В.Н. Царствование царя Михаила Федоровича и взгляд на междуцарствие. СПб., 1832. С. 231.
24Маньков А.Г. Соборное Уложение 1649 года. Л., 1987. С. 6.
25 Рехневский Ю.С. Архивы России // Энциклопедический словарь, составленный русскими учеными и литераторами. СПб., 1862. Т. 5. С. 538551.
26 Пекарский П. Маркиз де ла Шетарди в России 1740 - 1742 годов: Перевод рукописных депеш французскаго посольства в Петербурге. СПб, 1868.С. 92.
27 Brock, P. Den oldenborgske Kongestegt, is^r under Enev^lden, belyst ved den chronologiske Samling paa Roseborg Slot. Kjobenhavn, 1870. P. 9.
28 The author expresses heartfelt gratitude to O.D. Bazhenova, professor of the Belarusian State University, for her help in attributing the portrait.
29 Kotljarchuk, Andrej. In the Shadows of Poland and Russia: The Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Sweden in the European Crisis of the Mid-17th Century. Stockholm, 2006. P. 83, 84.
30 Бантыш-Каменский Н.Н. Обзор внешних сношений России (по 1800 год). Т. II. М., 1896. С. 157.
31 Eaton, J.W. The German Influence in Danish Literature in the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge (Mass.), 1929. P. 33.
32 Curtiss, Mina Kirstein. A Forgotten Empress: Anna Ivanovna and her Era, 1730 - 1740. N.Y., 1974. P. 250.
33 Пекарский П. Маркиз де ла Шетарди в России 1740 - 1742 годов: Перевод рукописных депеш французскаго посольства в Петербурге. СПб, 1868. С. 67; Корсаков Д. А. Артемий Петрович Волынский // Древняя и новая Россия. 1877. № 8. С. 280-295.
34 Корсаков Д.А. Артемий Петрович Волынский // Русская старина. 1885. Т. 48 (октябрь-ноябрь-декабрь). С. 27-51.
35 Кр. А.А. Волынский Артемий Петрович // Энциклопедический лексикон. Т. IX. СПб., 1838. С. 472; Сборник Императорского Русского исторического общества. Т. X. СПб, 1872. С. 56-57.
36 Lyons, Martyn. Post-Revolutionary Europe: 1815 - 1856. N.Y., 2006. P.
51-55; Lincoln, W. Bruce. A Re-Examination of Some Historical Stereotypes: An Analysis of the Career Patterns and Backgrounds of the Decembrists // Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas Neue Folge. 1976. Bd. 24. Heft. 3. S. 357-368.
37 Грот Я.К., Пекарский П.П. Письма Н.М. Карамзина к И.И. Дмитриеву. СПб., 1866. С. 362.
38 Dunning, Chester S. L. Russia's First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding of the Romanov Dynasty. University Park (PA), 2010. P. 5.
39 Берх В.Н. Царствование царя Михаила Федоровича и взгляд на междуцарствие. СПб., 1832. С. II-III, 229-231.
40 Шереметев С.Д. Письма Константина Николаевича Бестужева-Рюмина о Смутном времени. СПб., 1898. С. 52, 56.
41 Dunning, Chester. Who was Tsar Dmitrii? // Slavic Review. Winter 2001. Vol. 60. No. 4. P. 705-729.
42 The author cordially thanks Peter Kristiansen, curator of the Royal Museum of Rosenborg (Denmark), for providing information on the portrait.
43 Филимонов Ю.Д. Портрет Ливонской королевы Марии Владимировны // Вестник Общества древне-русского искусства. М., 1874. Вып. 6-10. Смесь. С. 46-47; Garden, Lizette. FashioNordic: Folk Costume as Performance of Genealogy and Place // Journal of Folklore Research. September/December 2014. Vol. 51. No. 3. P. 337-388.
44 Бартенев С.П. Московский кремль в старину и теперь. Т. II. М., 1916. С. 237.
45 The author expresses her deepest gratitude to E.Yu. Gagarina, Director General of the State Historical and Cultural Museum "Moscow Kremlin", for her advice and for providing scientific information.
46 Russell, E. Martin. "For the Firm Maintenance of the Dignity and Tranquility of the Imperial Family": Law and Familial Order in the Romanov Dynasty // Russian History. 2010. Vol. 37, No. 4. P. 389-411; Zitser, Ernest A. A Full-Frontal History of the Romanov Dynasty: Pictorial "Political Pornography" in Pre-Reform Russia // Russian Review. Oct. 2011. Vol. 70. No. 4. P. 557-583.
Author, Abstract, Key words
Lyudmila Yu. Taymasova - Intern, European Division, Library of Congress (Washington, DC, USA)
taimassova@hotmail.com
Relying on little-known sources, the author makes the first attempt to trace the fate of highly secret documents from the personal archive of the early Romanovs. These documents disappeared during the reorganization of the state archives carried out under Peter I. The author considers the possibility that these documents were later discovered in Holstein among the personal belongings of Catherine's daughter, Anna Petrovna, the Duke of Holstein's wife, following her death. The author examines the diplomatic measures employed by Anna Io-
annovna's government to retrieve the documents and return them to Russia. The article also describes the search conducted in Moscow by some of the empire's highest dignitaries together with the secret police for another portion of the missing documents. When ultimately discovered, these documents were placed in a special archive of the Cabinet of Ministers. The author suggests that the content of these documents then became known to Cabinet Minister A.P. Volyn-sky, and served as the basis for the political trial that brought about his downfall. It is also likely that the echoes of the "Volynsky Affair" played a certain role in the preparation of the Decembrist uprising. The author attempts to reconstruct the content of the secret documents as they relate to the accession of the Romanov dynasty in 1613. The author concludes that in response to the slightest possibility of the documents becoming public, the Imperial government undertook extreme measures including foreign provocations and domestic terror.
Russian Empire, Holstein, Romanovs, Peter I, Anna Petrovna, Anna Ioan-novna, E.I. Biron, I.A. von Korf, A.P. Volynsky, Cabinet of Ministers, Secret Chancery, political police, "The Volynsky Affair", state archives, archival reform, Decembrist movement.
References (Articles from Scientific Journals)
1. Appleby, John H. The Founding of St Petersburg in the Context of the Royal Society's Relationship with Russia. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, Sept. 2003, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 273-284.
2. Brown, Peter B. Muscovite Government Bureas. Russian History, 1983, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 269-330.
3. Dunning, Chester. Who was Tsar Dmitrii? Slavic Review, Winter 2001, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 705-729.
4. Garden, Lizette. FashioNordic: Folk Costume as Performance of Genealogy and Place. Journal of Folklore Research, September/December 2014, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 337-388.
5. Keenan, Edward L. Ivan the Terrible and His Women. Russian History, 2010, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 322-359.
6. Lincoln, W. Bruce. A Re-Examination of Some Historical Stereotypes: An Analysis of the Career Patterns and Backgrounds of the Decembrists. Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas Neue Folge, 1976, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 357368.
7. Lukowski, Jerzy. Political Ideas among the Polish Nobility in the Eighteenth Century (To 1788). The Slavonic and East European Review, Jan. 2004, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 1-26.
8. Orchard, G. Edward. The Election of Michael Romanov. The Slavonic and East European Review, Jul. 1989, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 378-402.
9. Ostrowski, Donald. The Façade of Legitimacy: Exchange of Power and Authority in Early Modern Russia. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Jul. 2002, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 534-563.
10. Poe, Marshall. Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich and the Demise of the Romanov Political Settlement. The Russian Review, Oct. 2003, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 537-564.
11. Russell, E. Martin. "For the Firm Maintenance of the Dignity and Tranquility of the Imperial Family": Law and Familial Order in the Romanov Dynasty. Russian History, 2010, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 389-411.
12. Zitser, Ernest A. A Full-Frontal History of the Romanov Dynasty: Pictorial "Political Pornography" in Pre-Reform Russia. Russian Review, Oct. 2011, vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 557-583.
(Articles from Proceedings and Collections of Research Papers)
13. Anisimov E.V. Anna Ivanovna. The Emperors and Empresses of Russia: Reconsidering the Romanovs. N.Y., 2015, pp. 37-65.
14. Bagger, Hans. The Role of the Baltic in Russian Foreign Policy, 1721 -1773. Imperial Russian Foreign Policy. Cambridge (Mass.), 1994, p. 52.
15. Bitter, Michael. Count Ernst Johann Bühren and the Russian Court of Anna Ioannovna. The Man behind the Queen: Male Consorts in History. N.Y., 2014,pp.103-123.
16. Karpenko S.V. Mikhail Khrushchov, Stepan Sheshkovskiy i "preo-brazhene" Taynoy kantselyarii v Taynuyu ekspeditsiyu (1762 - 1764 gg.) [Mikhail Khrushchov, Stepan Sheshkovskiy and the "Transfiguration" of the Secret Chancellery into the Secret Expedition (1762 - 1764).]. "Novyy is-toricheskiy vestnik" k 80-letiyu MGIAI-RGGU: Izbrannoe, 2005 - 2010 ["The New Historical Bulletin": On the 80th Anniversary of MSHAI-RSUH: Selected Works, 2005 - 2010]. Moscow, 2011, pp. 114-120.
(Monographs)
17. Bartenev S.P. Moskovskiy kreml v starinu i teper [The Moscow Kremlin Then and Now.]. Moscow, 1916, vol. 2, p. 237.
18. Brayley Hodgetts E.A. The Life of Catherine the Great of Russia. N.Y., 1914, p. 311.
19. Curtiss, Mina Kirstein. A Forgotten Empress: Anna Ivanovna and her Era, 1730 - 1740. N.Y., 1974, p. 250.
20. Dukes, Paul. The Making of Russian Absolutism, 1613 - 1801. N.Y., 2013, p. 146.
21. Dunning, Chester S. L. Russia's First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding of the Romanov Dynasty. University Park (PA), 2010, p. 5.
22. Dunning, Chester S. L. Russia's First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding of the Romanov Dynasty. University Park (PA), 2001, p. 465
23. Eaton, J.W. The German Influence in Danish Literature in the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge (Mass.), 1929, p. 33.
24. Keenan, Paul. St Petersburg and the Russian Court, 1703 - 1761. N.Y., 2013, p.65.
25. Kotljarchuk, Andrej. In the Shadows of Poland and Russia: The Grand
Duchy of Lithuania and Sweden in the European Crisis of the Mid-17th Century. Stockholm, 2006,pp.83,84.
26. Lyons, Martyn. Post-Revolutionary Europe: 1815 - 1856. N.Y., 2006, pp.51-55.
27. Mankov A.G. Sobornoe Ulozhenie 1649 goda [The Sobornoye Ulozheni-ye of 1649.]. Leningrad, 1987, p. 6.
28. Vucinich, Alexander. Science in Russian Culture: A History to 1860. Stanford (CA), 1963, vol. 1, p. 81.
Автор, аннотация, ключевые слова
Таймасова Людмила Юлиановна - стажер-интерн Европейского отдела Библиотеки Конгресса США, литератор (Вашингтон, США)
taimassova@hotmail.com
В статье на основе малоизвестных источников впервые делается попытка проследить судьбу особо секретных документов из личного архива первых Романовых. Эти документы пропали во время реорганизации государственных архивов при Петре I. Рассматривается возможность появления части этих документов в Голштинии вместе с личными вещами цесаревны Анны Петровны, супруги герцога Голштинского. Автор исследует приемы внешней политики правительства Анны Иоанновны, которые применялись в ходе операции по возвращению исторических документов в пределы Российской империи. Также описан ход поиска другой части исчезнувших документов в Москве, в котором принимали участие как высшие сановники империи, так и служащие тайной политической полиции. В итоге документы были найдены и помещены в особый архив Кабинета министров. Автор выдвигает предположение, что в дальнейшем содержание этих документов стало известно кабинет-министру А.П. Волынскому и послужило основанием для организации политического процесса против него. Не исключается возможность, что отзвуки «дела Волынского» сыграли определенную роль в подготовке восстания декабристов. Автор делает попытку реконструировать содержание секретных документов, относившихся к обстоятельствам воцарения дома Романовых. По заключению автора, возникновение любой возможности огласки этих документов вынуждало императорское правительство идти на крайние меры, вплоть до провокаций во внешней политике и террора внутри страны.
Российская империя, Голштиния, Романовы, Петр I, Анна Петровна, Анна Иоанновна, Э.-И. Бирон, И.-А. фон Корф, А.П. Волынский, Кабинет министров, Тайная канцелярия, политическая полиция, «дело Волынского», государственный архив, архивная реформа, движение декабристов.
