CC BY
48
Русская литература Russian Literature
D. Kemper (Moscow) ORCID ID: 0000-0002-3099-6836
THE BEGINNINGS OF FOREIGN CULTURAL POLITICS IN RUSSIA Part 2. Heinrich von Huyssen as a Manager of Foreign Cultural Policy
in the Great Nordic War
The publication has been supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR), through realization of the research project 16-24-49005
Abstract. The article continues the cycle author's cycle of works in area of clarifying and researching the origins of foreign cultural policy in Russia. The author emphasizes that the implementation of his new foreign cultural policy, Peter I primarily employed well connected Europeans as experts who could refute anti-Russian writings on a journalistic level that would conceal, in the first instance, the programmatic, political character of their written rebuttals, which would appear rather as an intellectual battle endeavouring to portray the truth in the context of a conflict between educated experts. His first and longest-serving specialist in this regard was the German Heinrich von Huyssen (1666-1739), who not only appeared from 1705 onwards in the Great Nordic War (1700-1721) as a propagandist for the Russian side but also tried, in numerous writings presented in the current paper, to undertake foreign cultural policy in the sense of disseminating a postive image of Russia, its government and the Tsar. The author's attention is focused on the personality of Heinrich von Güssen and the value of his epistolary heritage, which is cited from rarely and difficult of approach sources. The main subject of research is making of propaganda discourse at the turning point of Russian history - during the period of Peter I reign.
Key words: Heinrich von Huyssen; Martin Neugebauer; Peter I; Great Nordic War; Propaganda; foreign cultural policy.
Д. Кемпер (Москва) ORCID ID: 0000-0002-3099-6836
Истоки внешней культурной политики в России
Часть 2. Генрих фон Гюйссен в роли «распорядителя» внешней культурной политики во время Великой Северной войны
Публикация подготовлена в рамках поддержанного РФФИ научного проекта № 16-24-49005
Аннотация. Статья продолжает цикл работ автора в области уточнения и исследования истоков внешней культурной политики в России. Автор
подчеркивает, что в качестве специалистов по новой внешней культурной политике Петр Первый использовал, прежде всего, европейцев с соответствующими связями, которые могли бы в своих публикациях на правах экспертов противодействовать различным русофобским сочинениям, причем делать это так, чтобы официальный характер их контрпропагандистских текстов на первый взгляд не был бы очевиден и производил впечатление борьбы за истину в рамках академического спора между учеными или экспертами. Первым и в течение продолжительного времени важнейшим специалистом в этой области был немец Генрих фон Гюйссен (1666-1739), который во время Великой Северной войны (1700-1721), начиная с 1705 г., не просто выступал в роли пропагандиста русской стороны, а пытался в многочисленных текстах, приведенных в данной публикации, заниматься внешней культурной политикой, т.е. распространять положительный образ России, ее правительства и царя. Именно на фигуре Генриха фон Гюйссена и роли его эпистолярного наследия, которое цитируется по малоизвестным и труднодоступным источникам, сосредоточено внимание автора статьи. Непосредственным предметом изучения становится формирование пропагандистского дискурса в поворотный момент русской истории - в период правления Петра I.
Ключевые слова: Генрих фон Гюйссен; Мартин Нейгебауэр; Петр Первый; Великая Северная война; пропаганда; внешняя культурная политика.
4
In 1704, an anonymous anti-Russian satire by Martin Neugebauer was published which enjoyed a broad dissemination until 1705, in a series of at least nine editions [cf. the reprint: Neugebauer 1705, 9th ed.] - and later appeared under a new variation of the title, Vertrautes Schreiben <...> (The Intimate Writings <...>) [Neugebauer 1705]: „Schreiben eines vornehmen Deutschen Officirers an einen geheimen Rath eines hohen Potentaten wegen der üblen Handthierung der frembden Officirer, so die Moscowitter in ihre Dienste locken. Anno M DCCIV" [According to Minzloff 1872, 106. Cf. OPAC of the Russian National Library at St. Petersburg]
("The writings of a noble German officer to the secret council of a high potentate regarding the despicable treatment of foreign officers having been cajoled into serving the Muscovites. Anno M DCCIV.")
The early editions were seven pages of text [According to Minzloff 1872, 106, the first edition was printed on 4 pages], but the eighth edition quoted here [cf. the reprint: Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed.] was sixty-three pages long. The beginning and end of the text were hardly changed in this expanded version [According to a comparison of the editions available to us with a range of 44 to 63 pages of text "Vertrautes Schreiben" / "The Intimate Writings", 1705], but the number of descriptions of instances of maltreatment was far greater [It is therefore not entirely accurate of [Korzun 2013, 43, 44f., 236], to treat the "Schreiben / Eines Vornehmen Deutschen Officierers" ("Writings of a Noble German Officer", 1704 and "Vertrautes Schreiben Eines Vornehmen Teutschen Officirs" ("The Intimate Writings of a noble German Officer", 1705) as two
different texts]. The central criticism of this lampooning satire was aimed directly at Huyssen's official work for Peter I.
The educated lawyer Heinrich Freiherr von Huyssen (1666-1739) from Essen was active at the court of Peter I from 1702, recruited by the responsible commissioner at the time, Johann Reinhold von Patkul. The latter had taken over the role of "master of the court of the successor to the throne", Aleksej Petrovic, from Martin Neugebauer in 1702 and engaged Huyssen as an informer following his arrival in Russia. In November 1703, Peter I appointed Huyssen as master of the court of his son, whom he had originally wanted to educate in western Europe but, following the outbreak of the Great Nordic War, instead employed German teachers to educate him at home. In March 1705, Huyssen was sent to the Prussian court in Berlin and in June of the same year to the Viennese court.
About this time we are informed by old sources. Huyssen, who live in abject conditions in St. Petersburg after the death of Peter I, put together a memoir in the last years of his life where he listed all the work he did for Peter I, in the hope of receiving some benefits from the Russian court. The Danish traveller Peder van Haven gained insight into these notes and used them as the basis of his "Nachrichten" in 1776 [Haven 1776]. Guerrier [Guerrier 1873, 43) mentiones "a much completer concept of the memoirs" in Russian. Petschauer [Petschauer 1978] analysed this for his study in 1978, describing it as Huyssen's "Autobiography": "Essentially, he had three main tasks that he carried out from 1702 onwards and then continued in his work in Vienna. He collected news and notifications relating to the war from all available sources including printed material, information made available to him in written correspondence as well as oral information and sent them as quickly as possible by post to the Tsar and his employees. Huyssen was also active as a recruitment officer whose task was to win high-ranking officers over to serve Russia. In 1776, Peder van Haven recounts significant successes in this area" [Haven 1776, 319 f.]; for more detail cf. [Korzun 2013, 156-160]. Recruiting generals from other forces, wooing them away in the process of long and complex bargaining about their wages, was an integral part of the war business at the time. This pre-modern headhunting took place under the auspices of Peter I's recruitment manifesto from the 16th April 1702, which was aimed not just at the military but also addressed the employment of administrative bureaucrats, educational experts, specialist craftsmen and others. The recruitment manifesto was a central part of the "civilising" modernization programme [cf. Bloome 2002] by means of which the Tsar intended to bring his country up to the level of the more highly developed west European standards and to make it as powerful and significant as the west European nations, at least in relation to the politics of power.
Neugebauer, with his critical pamphlet, was by no means the first person to darken the image of Peter I's new Russia. In 1700, Johann Georg Korb had published the journal of his travels to Russia [Korb 1700] that he undertook in his role as the secretary of an Austrian delegation between 1698 and 1699. The diaries were published in Latin in Vienna, with the permission of the royal court.
It was not just the communication of pertinent military details that disturbed the interests of the Russian court, but also reports about the quashing of the uprising in Streltsy as well as a description of the insecure status of foreigners in Russia and their lack of rights. Others, too, who had been disappointed by the Russian authorities or expelled from the country, published explicitly negative criticisms. Such reports served Neugebauer as sources and it was Huyssen's task to "tone them down". Amongst the critics were the engineer La Motte des Champs [cf. Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (42), (46) f.], [cf. in this regard Almquist 1938, 51-57], Otto Sigismund Freiherr von Cornberg [cf. Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (42), (46) f.], [cf. Almquist 1938, 51-57] and General Guerin [cf. Almquist 1938, 75-83].
Neugebauer's satire was aimed directly at this central nerve of Russian politics at the time. As the teacher of the Tsar's son, Neugebauer had entered into Russian service in 1701 but had a number of extreme differences of opinion with his superior, Aleksandr Danilovic Mensikov, from the outset. These escalated to the extent that he was removed from his position, arrested and expelled from Russia in June 1702.
In 1706, he changed sides publicly and entered into Swedish service. Indeed, his satirical tract from 1704 served the interests of Swedish propaganda very well indeed and will have paved the way for his later move. Neugebauer was already corresponding with the Swedish side in 1704, specifically with the counsellor of the chancellery and secretary of state for internal affairs Carl Piper, and proffered his information in the interests of the propaganda war. (The correspondence is partially reproduced in [Almquist 1938, 26 ff.]). Neugebauer's own formulation of the intention of his text is accordingly pointed, when he describes having written the tract after "God had led me out of the barbarism" [Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (3)]: "Der Czaar und seine Bedienten tractiren die honnettesten und braffsten Officirer wie Hunde-Jungens / mit Maulschellen / Stockschlägen / Peitschen und Tausend andern Beschimpffungen" [Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (3)]. (The Tsar and his servants mistreat the most honest and dilligent of officers with slaps in the face, beatings with a stick, whips and a thousand other insults.)
This is precisely what Neugebauer wants to prove with the collection of examples he presents in his tract, and he proclaims: "...let my soul carry the truth of all that follows" [Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (3)]. There is no cliche he fails to use in describing the pre-modern, indeed anti-civilized conditions in Russia and the staccato tone of the discriminatory "case" peaks in the announcement of a follow-up work entitled "Newly Polished Russian Mirror", in which he plans to describe the "Mishandling of a German lady by the Tsar's aforementioned darling Menschenkoth (literally: human excrement, and a play on words between the German and the subject's surname) [Aleksander Danilovic Mensikov] and others, using violence and then forcing her upon German officers" [Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (61) f.]. There can have been no more pointed way of undermining the Tsar's "civilising" programme.
With his text, Neugebauer also positioned himself at the centre of the ongoing war. Whilst the Russian Tsar is described as an aggressive, pugilistic and
barbaric monster and destroyer of "people's rights", and the Russian orthodox population are described as the "excrement of Christianity" [Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (42), (12), (19)], the Swedish king is stylized to a glowing opposite, imbued with "generosity, gentleness, mercy or charity" [Neugebauer 1705, 8th reprint, (48)]. God's support for the Swedish king during the war was a certainty [cf. Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (48) f.]: "Der gerechte GOtt aber wolle Königl. Majest. von Schweden Helden- Hertz mit einem so empfindlichem Eyfer anfüllen / diese unmenschliche Grausamkeit / an denen schändlichen Unflätern / mit solchem Nachdruck zu rächen / daß sie mit allen ihren Nachkommen / so lange die Welt stehet es empfinden und beseuffzen mögen" [Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed., (61)]. (Our just God wanted to fill his royal majesty of Sweden, Heroic Heart, with such zeal that he could effectively and lastingly revenge the inhuman atrocities of these shameful beasts / that they may with all their progeny feel and suffer it as long as the world exists).
Neugebauer's strategic plan to serve the Swedish side cannot be overlooked. In Stockholm, the signals were understood and in 1705 an eight-page reprint appeared in the local "kongl. tryckeriet" [Documented at the Royal Libray in Stockholm. According to the catalogue reference, three editions of Neugebauer's critical satire were printed in 1705 in Stockholm]. This testifies to the fact the the reaction to the first seven-page edition of 1704 was immediate.
The Russian court tasked Huyssen with the publication of a journalistic refutation. This constituted his third sphere of work in Vienna [cf. Fundaminski 1997, 47; Guerrier 1873, 44]. The job was a sensitive one, insofar as it could not be a question of combatting one pamphlet with another or responding to one decrial with a similar slur. Rather, there was a pronounced need for a diplomatic response in order to present the Tsar and the Russian state to the Western world in the way they wanted to be seen, thus serving the overriding political interests of the regime in foreign reports on the country. Moscow - unlike Stockholm -still had no appropriately educated diplomats [with regard to Swedish anti-Russian propaganda with an illustrative example cf. Moepps 1987, 79], so that Russia was obliged to rely on "borrowed plumes" (or quills) like Huyssen's [cf. Doerries 1939, 52, 54 f.]. Peter's recruitment policy, a central tenet of his modernizing "cultivation" programme, could only be successful if qualified experts were able to exert a positive influence on the image of Russia. In other words: it fell to Huyssen to fulfil an early form of the role of generating foreign cultural propaganda.
A brief prelude to this effect appeared in the form of his four-page text Hoch-und Viel-geneigter Leser (Esteemed and highly inclined Reader) [eight-page manuscript; cf. further Minzloff 1872, 107], which appeared on the 6th August 1705 under the pseudonym "Simon Petersen" - the name of a Danish ship builder serving the Russians [cf. Amburger 1968, 51, annotation 200] - in Altona and primarily served to protect the Tsar against the lese-majesty committed by the satirist. As far as form, detail and argumentation were concerned, this first attempt was not sufficient to fulfil the goals he was intended to achieve. The text did, however, provoke a rapid response from Neugebauer, Der ehrliche Simon
Petersen Wider Den Schelmischen. Altona den 10. Septemb. Anno 1705 (Honest Simon Peter versus The Rascal. Altona on the 10th September in the year of 1705) [also manuscript at SLUB Dresden]. His real service to publicizing a more positive image of Russia was achieved in his 102-page text:
„Ausführliche Beantwortung Des freventlichen und lügenhaften Pasquils, welches unter dem Titul: Vertrautes Schreiben eines vornehmen Deutschen Officiers an eines gewissen hohen Potentatens Geheimen Rath von den jetzigen Conjuncturen in Moscow, [et]c. vor einiger Zeit ans Licht gekommen: Darinnen Von dem Tractament so wohl des Fremden insgemein, als insonderheit der gefangenen Schweden in Moscow, wie auch von dem Moscowitischen Hof- und Kriegs-Staat warhaffte Nachricht gegeben, und alles mit curiösen Anmerckungen aus der Historie, Politique und Re litteraria erläutert wird. Gedruckt nach dem Exemplar, welches in Narva 1705. herausgekommen. [S. l.] 1706".
(Detailed response to the outrageous and lie-ridden satire which came to light under the title: Intimate writings of a noble German officer to the secret council of a high potentate on the current situation in Moscow, etc. In which the treatment of foreigners in general as well as that of a particular imprisoned Swede in Moscow is reported, as well as truthful notes on the Muscovite state at court and in war, and all of the above illuminated with curious references to history, politics and the literary sphere. Printed according to the edition published in Narva in 1705. [S. l.] 1706.)
["Narwa" / "Narva" in what is now Estonia was the scene of Peter I's defeat against Karl XII on the 19th November 1700. There is no evidence edition published at this location. The reference therefore seems to be a case of fiction with propagandistic purposes.]
Formally, this was a large-scale rebuttal that attempted to refute the individual claims with explicit reference to the passage in question and page number of the critical text. Huyssen's main concern in the content, though, was not primarily protest or polemics. Rather, he employed a thought process typical of the age of Enlightenment, a criticism of prejudice. A number of Enlightenment texts included images that symbolized Enlightenment by clearing away the dark clouds of prejudice [cf. Schneiders 1974], which were dissolved solely in order to let the light of truth - in this case, the sun of Peter I - shine through again [With regard to the literal use of "prejudice", cf. Huyssen 1706, 102]. This process of enlightenment took place on the stage of public media, which led Huyssen to his first introductory argument pertaining to publicity, using the open platform to influence the public sphere:
„Die öffentlichen Zeitungen, und verschiedene in allerley Sprachen gedruckte Schrifften, legen diesem Monarchen den Ruhm eines der löblichsten Regenten unserer Zeiten bey, als welcher in der kurtzen Zeit seiner Regierung, so viel gute Gesetze zu Beförderung der Justitz, und zur Verbesserung der Policey gegeben, so viel schöne Verordnungen und Anstalten zu Wasser und Lande, in Friedens- und KriegsSachen, zu besserer Errichtung der Commercien, Manufacturen, und andern Künsten und Wissenschaften gemacht, daß er diesfalls alle seine glorieusen Vorfahren weit
übersteiget".
(The public newspapers and diverse writing printed in an array of languages give this monarch the renown of one of the most praiseworthy regents of our times, who, in the brief time of his government, has passed so many great laws to aid the advancement of justice and the improvement of policy, has created so many decrees and institutions in the waters and the lands, in matters of peace and war and towards a better establishment of commerce, manufacture and other arts and sciences, that he has, in this case, far exceeded the achievements of all his glorious predecessors.) [Huyssen 1706, 1 f.]
This is said to have been a well known fact in the German-speaking public sphere, which was reinforced for the German-speaking public through the recently published "Relation" [Huyssen 1706, 1. The reference here is to the "Relation" ascribed to Christian Stieff from 1706], and was also true in the case of the Chinese, who until then "had held the Europeans for one-eyed and the the rest of the world for blind" [Huyssen 1706, 2], but could now recognize the teachings of Confucius in the governmental principles of Peter I.
Neugebauer's pamphlet may have been the expression of extreme dissatisfaction by one who had been insulted - and his story is portrayed in great detail - but more important still is the function of critical satire in relation to power and politics. The text is said to serve the interests of those powers who were concerned that, through Peter's politics of recruitment and modernization, "his already flourishing power might further increase" [Huyssen 1706, 3].
The fact that Huyssen's cultural political work here was based on the orders of the Tsar was cleverly concealed. His response to Neugebauer was declared as a commission of a German prince and as such could be seen as a contribution to German-language public discourse pertaining to Russia:
„Inmassen denn meinem Leser nicht verhalten will, wie ein gewisser Fürst in Deutschland, welcher so wohl auf eigenen Reisen, als durch fleissige Lesung allerhand curieuser Reise-Beschreibungen eine sonderbahre Kenntniß von auswärtigen Sachen, von fremder Völker Sitten, Leben und Regierungs-Art sich erworben, so viel rühmliches von Ihro Czar. Maj. sonderbahren Qualitäten und Regierungs-Maximen durch münd-und schriftliche Relationes vernommen, daß sie diesen Herrn als einen von den besten und klügsten Regenten dieses Seculi zu admiriren anfiengen. Als aber diese Läster-Schrifft heraus gekommen, wurde selbiger fast in etwas stutzig, und veranlassete er mich Anno 1704, als der ich ohne dem nicht wenig Lust dahin zu reisen hatte, daß ich unter dem Vorwand Ih. Czar. Maj. und dero Generals einige neue Erfindungen und compendieuse Kunst-Stücke in der Artillerie &c. zuweisen, und Kriegs-Dienste anzunehmen, auf eine anständige Weise mich in dem Lande wohl umsehen, und genau untersuchen möchte, ob dann so gar starcke Solrecismi bey der Moscowitischen Regierung wider alle Principia civilis prudentis & humanitatis begangen würden, als wie in diesem Scripto mit so vielen scheinbahren Exempeln angeführet würde".
(On the whole considering that my reader does not desire to comport himself like a certain Prince in Germany, who not only in his own travels but also through diligent reading of all sorts of curious travel descriptions has gathered a peculiar knowledge of
the foreign affairs, of the customs of foreign peoples, as well as their lives and form of government, so many praiseworthy aspects of their great Tsar, his extraordinary qualities and maxims of government, by means of spoken and written communication, that they began to admire this gentleman as one of the best and wisest regents of this century. When, however, this malignant accusatory text appeared I indeed became suspicious and led me, in 1704, considering that I had more than a little urge to travel, to undertake to explore the country in an upright manner in the interests of his majesty the Tsar and his generals, presenting to them a number of new inventions and compendious works of art in the field of artillery etc. and to serve them in matters of war, and to want to examine precisely whether indeed such strong solecims were being committed by the Muscovite government, against all Principia civilis prudentis & humanitatis, as was described in this text with so many alleged examples) [Huyssen 1706, 5 f.].
The rectification of prejudices in good faith - from a seat of judgement imbued with reason and publicity - is thus presented as his motivation for writing, rather than revealing the actual task, which is to say, the generation of cultural propaganda in the interests of the Tsar himself.
The very genre of a rebuttal forces Huyssen into minutiae, refuting numerous details, and also leads him to polemicize against the writer of the critical text, claiming that "this scribing soul" must be taken "for a brutal, godless and raging soul rather than a reasonable Christian" [Huyssen 1706, 6]. Huyssen of course knows the identity of the writer he is polemicizing against ("this N." [Huyssen 1706, 50. - With regard to Neugebauer in Moscow, cf. Ibid. 50-59]), and reassures his readership that Neugebauer had been brooding over his lies for three whole years. Huyssen does not, however, manage to go beyond the enforced rhetoric of defence and rebuttal in his direct textual confrontation with Neugebuaer. Not even the concluding note that Neugebauer's text had been forbidden in Prussia and Saxony [cf. Huyssen 1706, 102] could strengthen the position of his argumentation.
Neugebauer's conduct was entirely different, insofar as the constant stirring up of the alleged "chronique scandaleuse" in relation to Russian recruitment policies could only help to serve his purposes. In a further rebuttal, he tried to force Huyssen, who by now was openly named, into keeping the public discourse alive: "Kurtze Gegen-Antwort Auf Des Czaarischen Pasquillanten N. Huyssens Lügen-Schrifft / So er in Wien / Wider Das warhaffte Schreiben Von Dem übeln Tractament der Frembden in Moscau / abgefasset. [S.a. et l.] [ca. 1707/08], 12 S., unpag. (Brief counter-response to the Tsar's satirist N. Huyssen's text of lies / that he composed in Vienna / in opposition to the Writings on the Base Treatment of Foreigners in Moscow. [S. a. et l.], 12 p., unpaginated.) [Approx. 1707/08. Library catalogues usually date this edition to 1720. At the beginning of the text, however, Neugebauer notes: "Vor ungefehr drittehalb Jahren kam eine Schrifft heraus / von dem üblen Tractament der Frembden in Moscau" ("About three and a half years ago a text appeared on the base treatment of foreigners in Moscow" (p. (3); unpaginated), i.e. referring to Neugebauer's "Writings of a noble German officer", which appeared in "Anno MDCCIV"].
Here, the confrontation slipped out of control into an explicitly personal sphere ("the slanderer", "the godless, honourless, consciousless person", "the phantasist who would be clever", "the opprobrious liar", "this bird of shame", "the blasphemer", "the scoundrel", "the ragged hound" [Neugebauer (1707/08), (4), (5), (6), (7)], to the extent that the genre became useless for the fulfilment of Huyssen's purposes of creating positive foreign cultural propaganda.
REFERENCES (RUSSIAN)
1. Almquist H. Paktul och Neugebauer. Rysk värvning och ryssfientlig agitation i Europa 1702-1705 // Karolinska förbundets ärsbok. 1938. P. 7-83.
2. Amburger E. Die Anwerbung ausländischer Fachkräfte für die Wirtschaft Russlands vom 15. bis 19. Jahrhundert. Wiesbaden, 1968. (Series: Gießener Abhandlungen zur Agrar- und Wirtschaftsforschung des europäischen Ostens. Vol. 42).
3. Amburger E. Huyssen, Heinrich Freiherr von // Neue Deutsche Biographie. 1974. Vol. 10. P. 106 f. URL: https://www.deutsche-biographie.de/gnd120584638. html#ndbcontent_(accessed 17.02.2019).
4. Blome A. Das deutsche Rußlandbild im frühen 18. Jahrhundert. Untersuchungen zur zeitgenössischen Presseberichterstattung über Rußland unter Peter I. Wiesbaden, 2000 (Series: Forschungen zur osteuropäischen Geschichte. Vol. 57).
5. Blome A. Die ,Civilisirung' Rußlands durch Peter I // Von der „Civilisirung" Rußlands und dem „Aufblühen" Nordamerikas im 18. Jahrhundert. Leitmotive der Aufklärung am Beispiel deutscher Rußland- und Amerikabilder / A. Blome, V. Depkat (eds.). Bremen, 2002. (Series: Presse und Geschichte. Vol. 2). P. 15-71.
6. Doerries H. Rußlands Eindringen in Europa in der Epoche Peters des Großen. Studien zur zeitgenössischen Publizistik und Staatenkunde. Königsberg; Berlin 1939.
7. Fundaminski M.I. Resident Johann Friedrich Böttiger und die russische Propaganda in der ersten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts // Europa in der Frühen Neuzeit. Festschrift für Günter Mühlpfordt. Vol. 3: Aufbruch zur Moderne / E. Donnert (ed.). Köln; Weimar; Wien, 1997. P. 47-60.
8. Guerrier W. Leibniz in seinen Beziehungen zu Russland und Peter dem Grossen. Eine geschichtliche Darstellung dieses Verhältnisses nebst den darauf bezüglichen Briefen und Denkschriften. Saint-Petersburg; Leipzig 1873.
9. Haven P. von. Nachrichten von dem Baron von Huyssen // Magazin für die neue Historie und Geographie. 1776. Vol. 10. P. 317-326, 279-364.
10. Huyssen H. von. Ausführliche Beantwortung Des freventlichen und lügenhaff-ten Pasquils, welches unter dem Titul: Vertrautes Schreiben eines vornehmen Deutschen Officiers an eines gewissen hohen Potentatens Geheimen Rath von den jetzigen Con-juncturen in Moscow, [et]c. vor einiger Zeit ans Licht gekommen: Darinnen Von dem Tractament so wohl des Fremden insgemein, als insonderheit der gefangenen Schweden in Moscow, wie auch von dem Moscowitischen Hof- und Kriegs-Staat warhaffte Nachricht gegeben, und alles mit curiösen Anmerckungen aus der Historie, Politique und Re litteraria erläutert wird. Gedruckt nach dem Exemplar, welches in Narva 1705. herausgekommen. [S. l.], 1706.
11. Korb J.G. Diarium itineris in Moscoviam Perillustris ac Magnifici Domini Ig-
natii Christophori nobilis domini de Guarient, & Rail, Sacri Romani Imperii, & Regni Hungariae Equitis, Sacrae Caefareae Majestatis Consiliarii Aulico-Bellici ab Augustißi-mo, & Invictißimo Romanorum Imperatore Leopoldo I. ad Serenißimum, ac Potentißi-mum Tzarum, & Magnum Moscoviae Ducem Petrum Alexiowicium anno MDCXCVIII ablegati extraordinarii. Wien, s.a. [1700].
12. Korzun S. Heinrich von Huyssen (1666-1739). Prinzenerzieher, Diplomat und Publizist in den Diensten Zar Peters I., des Großen. Wiesbaden, 2013 (Series: Jablonia-na. Vol. 3).
13. Matthes E. Das veränderte Rußland. Studien zum deutschen Rußlandverständnis im 18. Jahrhundert zwischen 1725 und 1762. Frankfurt a.M. u.a., 1981. (Series: Europäische Hochschulschriften III. Bd. 135).
14. Minzloff R. Pierre Le Grand dans la littérature étrangère. Publié à l'occasion de l'anniversaire deux fois séculaire de la naissance de Pierre Le Grand, d'après les notes de M. le Comte de Korff. Saint-Pétersbourg, 1872. (Series: Catalogue raisonné des Rus-sica de la bibliothèque Impériale publique de Saint-Pétersbourg. Vol. I).
15. Moepps E. Christian Stieffs ,Relation von dem gegenwärtigen zustande des Moscowitischen Reichs' und ihr Platz im Umfeld von Presse und Propaganda // Russen und Rußland aus deutscher Sicht. 18. Jahrhundert: Aufklärung / M. Keller (ed.). München, 1987. (West-östliche Spiegelungen. Russen und Rußland aus deutscher Sicht und Deutsche und Deutschland aus russischer Sicht von den Anfängen bis zum 20. Jahrhundert. Wuppertaler Projekt zur Erforschung der Geschichte deutsch-russischer Fremdenbilder unter der Leitung von Lew Kopelew. Series A, vol. 2). P. 59-83, 84-108. (In German).
16. [ca. 1707/08]. [Neugebauer M.] Kurtze Gegen-Antwort Auf Des Czaarischen Pasquillanten N. Huyssens Lügen-Schrifft / So er in Wien / Wider Das warhaffte Schreiben Von Dem übeln Tractament der Frembden in Moscau / abgefasset. [S. a. et l.].
17. [Neugebauer 1705, 8th ed.]. [Neugebauer M.] Schreiben / Eines Vornehmen Teutschen Officierers, An einen Geheimen Rath Eines Hohen Potentaten / Wegen Der üblen Handthierung der frembden Officirer, so die Moscowiter in ihre Dienste locken. Jetzo Zum Achtenmahl nachgedruckt/ und mit unterschiedenen neuen Historien und Anmerckungen vermehret. Anno 1705. (Writings / of a noble German officer to the secret council of a high potentate regarding the despicable treatment of foreign officers having been cajoled into serving the Muscovites. Now reprinted for the eighth time / and expanded with new histories and notes).
18. [Neugebauer 1705, 9th ed.]. [Neugebauer M.] Schreiben / Eines Vornehmen Deutschen Officirers, an einen geheimen Rath eines hohen Potentaten wegen der üblen Handthierung der frembden Officirer, so die Moscowiter in ihre Dienste locken. Jetzo Zum Neundten mahl nachgedruckt / und mit unterschiedenen neuen Historien und An-merckungen vermehret. Anno 1705. (Writings / of a noble German officer to the secret council of a high potentate regarding the despicable treatment of foreign officers having been cajoled into serving the Muscovites. Now reprinted for the ninth time / and expanded with new histories and notes. Anno 1705).
19. [Neugebauer M.] Vertrautes Schreiben Eines Vornehmen Teutschen Officirs An eines gewissen Hohen Potentatens Geheimen Rath / Von den Jetzigen Conjuncturen in Moscau, Sonderlich dem sehr harten Verfahren Sr. Czaaris. Maj. An denen frembden
Teutschen Ministern und Officirern. Im Jahr 1705. (The intimate writings of a noble German officer to the secret council of a certain high potentate / on the current events in Moscow, particularly on the very hard methods of the Tsar. May. Adressed to the foreign German Ministers and Officers. In the Year 1705).
20. Petschauer P. In Search of Competent Aides: Heinrich van Huyssen and Peter the Great // Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas. 1978. Bd. 26. P. 481-502.
21. Schneiders W. Die wahre Aufklärung. Zum Selbstverständnis der deutschen Aufklärung. Freiburg i.Br.; München, 1974.
REFERENCES (Articles from Scientific Journals)
1. Almquist H. Paktul och Neugebauer. Rysk värvning och ryssfientlig agitation i Europa 1702-1705. Karolinskaförbundets ärsbok, 1938, pp. 7-83. (In Swedish).
2. Amburger E. Huyssen, Heinrich Freiherr von. Neue Deutsche Biographie, 1974, vol. 10, p. 106 f. Available at: https://www.deutsche-biographie.de/gnd120584638. html#ndbcontent (accessed 17.02.2019). (In German).
3. Haven P. von. Nachrichten von dem Baron von Huyssen. Magazin für die neue Historie und Geographie, 1776, vol. 10, pp. 317-326, 279-364. (Translated from Danish to German).
4. Petschauer P. In Search of Competent Aides: Heinrich van Huyssen and Peter the Great. Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 1978, vol. 26, pp. 481-502. (In English).
(Articles from Proceedings and Collections of Research Papers)
5. Blome A. Die ,Civilisirung' Rußlands durch Peter I. Blome A., Depkat V. (eds.). Von der „Civilisirung" Rußlands und dem „Aufblühen" Nordamerikas im 18. Jahrhundert. Leitmotive der Aufklärung am Beispiel deutscher Rußland- und Amerikabilder. (Series: Presse und Geschichte. Vol. 2). Bremen, 2002, pp. 15-71. (In German).
6. Fundaminski M.I. Resident Johann Friedrich Böttiger und die russische Propaganda in der ersten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts. Donnert E. (ed.). Europa in der Frühen Neuzeit. Festschrift für Günter Mühlpfordt. Vol. 3: Aufbruch zur Moderne. Köln; Weimar; Wien, 1997, pp. 47-60. (In German).
7. Moepps E. Christian Stieffs ,Relation von dem gegenwärtigen zustande des Mo-scowitischen Reichs' und ihr Platz im Umfeld von Presse und Propaganda. Keller M. (ed.). Russen und Rußland aus deutscher Sicht. 18. Jahrhundert: Aufklärung. (Westöstliche Spiegelungen. Russen und Rußland aus deutscher Sicht und Deutsche und Deutschland aus russischer Sicht von den Anfängen bis zum 20. Jahrhundert. Wuppertaler Projekt zur Erforschung der Geschichte deutsch-russischer Fremdenbilder unter der Leitung von Lew Kopelew. Series A, vol. 2). Munich, 1987, pp. 59-83, 84-108. (In German).
(Monographs)
8. Amburger E. Die Anwerbung ausländischer Fachkräfte für die Wirtschaft Rus-
slands vom 15. bis 19. Jahrhundert. Series: Gießener Abhandlungen zur Agrar- und Wirtschaftsforschung des europäischen Ostens. Vol. 42. Wiesbaden 1968. (In German).
9. Blome A. Das deutsche Rußlandbild im frühen 18. Jahrhundert. Untersuchungen zur zeitgenössischen Presseberichterstattung über Rußland unter Peter I. Series: Forschungen zur osteuropäischen Geschichte. Vol. 57. Wiesbaden, 2000. (In German).
10. Doerries H. Rußlands Eindringen in Europa in der Epoche Peters des Großen. Studien zur zeitgenössischen Publizistik und Staatenkunde. Königsberg; Berlin 1939. (In German).
11. Korzun S. Heinrich von Huyssen (1666-1739). Prinzenerzieher, Diplomat und Publizist in den Diensten Zar Peters I., des Großen. Series: Jabloniana. Vol. 3. Wiesbaden, 2013. (In German).
12. Matthes E. Das veränderte Rußland. Studien zum deutschen Rußlandverständnis im 18. Jahrhundert zwischen 1725 und 1762. (Series: Europäische Hochschulschriften 3. Vol. 135). Frankfurt am Main, 1981. (In German).
13. Schneiders W. Die wahre Aufklärung. Zum Selbstverständnis der deutschen Aufklärung. Freiburg in Breisgau; München, 1974. (In German).
Dirk Kemper, Russian State University for the Humanities.
Doctor of Philology, Prof. Dr. Dr., Director of the Thomas Mann Chair for German Philology; Director of the Institute for Russian and German Literature and Cultural Relationships. Research areas: New German literary studies, cultural studies, comparative studies.
E-mail: dirk_kemper@me.com
Кемпер Дирк, Российский государственный гуманитарный университет.
Доктор филологических наук, доктор филологии и культурологии, профессор, заведующий кафедрой немецкой филологии имени Томаса Манна, директор Института русско-немецких литературных и культурных связей. Область научных интересов: история немецкой литературы Нового времени, культурология, сравнительное литературоведение.
E-mail: dirk_kemper@me.com
