For the first time in Russian historical writing, the author turns to the history of the French Academy in Rome. Avoiding the chronological approach already elaborated in foreign historiography, the article presents a picture of the life of the Academy from the point of view of a royal pensioner staying within its walls, his daily routine, activities and acquaintances. For a young French artist, studying in Rome was the most important final period of his formation, with significant implications both for his creative self-awareness and for his future career. Thus, the aim of the research is to consider one by one the opportunities that opened up for the royal pensioner and his living conditions. Based on such sources as the charter of the French Academy in Rome, the correspondence of its directors with the Parisian authorities, as well as on an extensive body of foreign literature, the author consistently examines the contingent and background of students, the requirements for their professional skills, behavior, marital status and religion, living conditions in the changing residences of the Academy, educational curriculum. The author goes into detail about such an important function of the French Academy in Rome as the replenishment of the royal collection with copies of the works of Italian masters and about the attitude of students to the need to devote a lot of time to copying. The article raises the question about the pensioners’ trips, the way the opportunity to visit different regions of Italy influenced young artists and even the processes in French art of this period. It also highlights such an important aspect as the relationship of pensioners with academic authorities, their conflicts, and the struggle for their rights. Attention is paid to the entertainment of pensioners, their socialite acquaintances and the first orders carried out contrary to the charter. In conclusion, the importance of an internship in Rome for the education of a young French artist is determined, no matter whether he chose a career at home or abroad. Italian pensionship is characterized as a common experience for the French artistic elite, significant for all French art of the period under study.

Vitaliy Borisovich Vinogradov, graduate of the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of History, Moscow State University, in 1961, enjoyed a bright and fruitful life, signifi cant for society and many people around him. Much has been written about his biography, but there is no comprehensive analysis of Vinogradov’s progress as a professional archaeologist in his student years. The author presents his tribute to the teacher and mentor, who largely determined the life of his disciples. This article examines Vinogradov’s early publications, starting from 1958, numerous abstracts of conference papers, analytical and newspaper articles. Some of them were written in collaboration with his friends, archeologists, participants of the All-Russian archaeological conferences, while Vinogradov was a student in the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of History, MSU. The author attempts at combining scholarly research with a description of the vivid features of Vinogradov’s personality, which were refl ected in his student publications. The study is largely based on Vinogradov’s recollections of his relations with his professors, relatives and friends. His participation in E.I. Krupnov’s archaeological expeditions in the North Caucasus was essential in shaping him as a fi eld archaeologist at an early stage. A notable role in the formation of his professional skills was played by A.V. Artsikhovskiy, B.N. Grakov and K.F. Smirnov’s benign participation in this creative process. As a result, the author concludes that Vinogradov’s development as a researcher was most benefi cially infl uenced by the traditions and unique professorial and teaching staff of those years at the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of History, Moscow State University.

The practical implementation of the new economic policy led to a change in the relations of the Soviet state with the Church and, in 1923, brought about the transition to a new course of religious policy, which combined administrative pressure and repressions against the clergy with a “liberal” attitude towards ordinary believers. This article analyzes the implementation of the “religious NEP” in the south of the country, in particular, in the Kuban–Black Sea region and the Stavropol province, characterizes the contradictions between declaratory official documents and the activities of local authorities, identifies the main forms and methods of carrying out policy towards the Orthodox clergy and laity. Attention is drawn to the role of security authorities in the policy towards the Orthodox Church, including its regional specificity. The problem of “religious NEP” in the regions in question has not been a subject of special historical studies. The new religious course was perceived differently depending on the locality, the authorities did not take into account the need for tactical maneuvers with groups of believers. Thus, in the Kuban region in 1922–1923, administrative support for the Renovationist schism through the closure of churches and the liquidation of the “Tikhon communities” led to the dominance of the Renovationists among the church groups in the region, in defiance of the center’s instructions. This created the prerequisites for the intervention of the Presidium of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee in order to forcibly maintain a balance. At the same time, in the Stavropol province, the intense activity done by the episcopate of the Patriarchal Church and the sluggishness of the local authorities in 1923–1926 significantly reduced the support of Renovationism by the laity and necessitated the repressive actions of the security authorities. Simultaneously with the departure from the tactics of “religious NEP” in 1926, the anti-religious policy intensified, and public trials of the clergy were widely covered in the local press. Thus, the implementation of the policy during the period of the “religious NEP” in the localities was inconsistent and, despite the attempts of the center to achieve uniformity in its making, the party organs and the OGPU did not achieve the goal of destroying the Orthodox Church

The inspection of non-production cells of the RKP(b) in 1924–1925 was de facto purge of the Party, which affected a significant part of its members. It began soon after the end of the all-party discussion, in which L.D. Trotsky’s supporters were defeated, and became a method for fighting the opposition, which found much support in non-production cells. At the same time, the purge also was a kind of examination of qualitative composition of both examinees and their examiners. It revealed attitudes, relationships and progress of the local party work. The 1924–1925 event has not been sufficiently studied. This article aims to reconstruct the general picture of the purge on the basis of the verbatim reports of the plenums of the Central Control Commission of the RKP(b), as well as a number of other sources. The aspect of the struggle against the opposition found its greatest expression during the first stage of the purge in 1924, when “alien” elements were harshly excluded from the Party. Later, while this focus was retained, phenomena contrary to “party ethics” came to the fore, that is, drunkenness, embezzlement, performance of religious rites, moral decay, “passivity”, etc. The documents demonstrate the peculiarity of “centre-local” relations, when the local “check-up troikas”, disoriented by the ambiguity of instructions from the “centre”, tried to expel as many as possible members from the Party, while the higher bodies and the Central Control Commission were readmitting former Communists to the ranks of the RKP(b). The purge took place in an atmosphere of fear and often took on the character of a punitive action. It exposed the low level of political literacy of the majority of Party members, the heterogeneous social composition of the RKP(b), the impact of the New Economic Policy on the Communists, etc. The “check-up troikas” received a “mass of reports” on the party members, and during their “shocking” inspection work troikas did not always subject these allegations to thorough scrutiny, and in many cases dismissals were unfair. The inspection proved to be a kind of “mirror” of the party in the NEP period, and also revealed the serious problems which the party was inevitably going to have to face later.

The plague epidemic in Manchuria and the Chinese Eastern Railway right-of-way in 1910–1911 has for many years been a subject of study by scholars in various fields. At the same time, the views of Chinese researchers on the causes of the spread and course of the epidemic, and on the participation of Chinese medics in its localization, were poorly presented in the Russian literature. Public opinion, which was reflected in the Russian press and sessions of the State Duma, is also not fully covered in studies. In order to fill the historiographic gap, the authors examine medical reports of the early twentieth century, documents of the Russian State Historical Archive, stenographic reports of the State Duma, periodicals and memoirs of the Chinese physician, “fighter against plague”, Wu Lienteh. They conclude that the plague epidemic in 1910–1911, which took the lives of more than 100,000 people in northeast China and Chinese Eastern Railway area, was not unexpected for Russian medical experts, who had recorded local outbreaks of plague before. However, what occurred in the autumn of 1910 took the administration at all levels, both in Russia and China, by surprise. The absence of a system of anti-plague organizational measures and trained medical personnel resulted in the rapid spread of plague from Russian Transbaikalia to the southern provinces of China. Calls from a Siberian group of deputies to the State Duma to fight against the plague all together were met with little enthusiasm. The Russian press also tried to focus on this urgent problem. Thousands of deaths in Manchuria were announced regularly on the pages of newspapers at the turn of 1910–1911. It was due to the tremendous effort on the part of medical workers and substantial financial resources, mainly Russian, that the epidemic was finally brought to a halt. The plague did not penetrate into Russian territory.

The article examines Nicholas II’s participation in Russian government during suppression of the Moscow armed uprising in 1905 and his contribution to this process. In historiography, this topic, despite the eff orts of a number of scholars, has not been comprehensively studied. For the first time, on the basis of clerical documents (staff reports) and personal sources (diaries, memoirs, letters), the author attempts at determining the degree of the emperor’s awareness of the events in Moscow and the factors on which it depended. Nicholas II’s major contribution to the defeat of the uprising was the decision to send reinforcements to Moscow on 13 (26) December 1905. The author concludes that the information regarding the progress of the armed uprising, which the emperor received, was of a specific nature. While being well informed about the main events of the “revolt”, the emperor had an exaggerated idea of the number of police officers and soldiers in the first capital and the number of revolutionaries opposing them. This was due to the crisis of administrative and military power in Moscow, which often resulted in getting unreliable information by the city’s government. It was also determined by the desire of this government to present the situation in Moscow to St. Petersburg authorities in a favorable light for themselves and by the relocation of the armed forces (the sending of combatready soldiers to the Far East due to the lack of trained reserves, etc.). Perhaps court intrigues also played a role. The decision making was also affected by such a feature of Nicholas II’s administrative style, as entrusting specific tasks to those in charge and retaining the overall control of the process for himself. As a result, the emperor did not send the troops to Moscow during the insurrection in the Rostov regiment on 2–4 (15–17) December, which might prevent the uprising, and decided to employ the Semenovsky regiment when its peak had passed and many Muscovites had been dead.

The history of mixed marriages in Russia officially dates back to 1721. The subject of this study is the structure of marriages among foreigners who joined the ranks of Moscow guild merchants in the period from the middle of the 18th to the middle of the 19th century. Entering into marriage with representatives of the local Orthodox population could serve as a factor contributing to the russification of former foreign subjects. At the same time, marriages within an ethno-confessional milieu were supposed to counteract processes of ethnic consolidation and ensure the preservation of national identity in subsequent generations. The article aims to determine which of the trends prevailed among the various national groups represented in the Moscow merchant class. These trends are considered independently for each national group and studied in comparison. The author introduces into scientific circulation a body of archival materials, which are sources on population statistics (data of revisions), office records (cases of admission to the Moscow merchant class) and sources of ecclesiastical nature (metric books of non-Orthodox churches). As the concept of “mixed marriage” encompasses not only the national aspect (the marriage of people of different nationalities), but also the confessional one (that is, marriage where both spouses were parishioners of different churches), the article analyzes the marriage structure in both aspects. On the basis of the studied sources, it is concluded that among merchants of foreign origin, marriages within the ethno-confessional milieu prevailed, although by the middle of the 19th century, the trend of marriages with representatives of the local Orthodox population had increased. At the same time, adherence to Orthodox religion of some national groups (such as, for example, the gypsies) was not a factor that contributed to the growth of marriages with representatives of this group in the milieu of the Moscow merchant class. Among merchants of French origin, national self-consciousness prevailed over religious self-consciousness, which was also reflected in the fact that cases of their marriage with Italians and Poles representing the same denomination were rare .

The New England colonies are consistently perceived in American national consciousness and historical memory as the birthplace of the statehood and culture of the future United States. Coexistence with Indians has been an important component of life for English colonists since the foundation of settlements in New England. The cultures of the peoples of New England gradually integrated and one of them took a dominant position. G.V. Alexandrov’s monograph “Saints” and “Savages”: The Relationship between Colonists and the Indigenous Population of New England in the Seventeenth Century significantly contributes to understanding the nature and dynamics of ethno-cultural processes and interactions in the early history of the New England region. The novelty of contemporary research approaches implies the study of cooperation rather than conflict, the mutual economic, political and cultural influence of colonists and Indians on each other. Coexistence between Europeans and Indians during this period seems to have been much closer than our sources’ authors were willing to admit. During this time the Indians developed several mechanisms in an attempt to integrate themselves into the colonial community and to maintain at least part of their territorial, political and cultural independence from the British. In the early colonial decades, relations of the colonies with the Indians were almost equal. The causes and background of the two main colonial wars fought by English colonists with the New England Indians in the 17th century — the Pequot War and King Philip’s War — are presented in an entirely new light. The motives of the participants in the Pequot War were quite complex, involving political, economic and cultural aspects. Above all, contradictions between different Indian tribes and groups played a significant role in the development of the conflict, and the positions of many Indian groups might temporarily overlap with those of Europeans. King Philip’s war of 1675–1676, although anti-colonial in nature, stemmed more from the conflict between Indian tribes and changes in the regional economic system.

The author analyses the diplomatic correspondence of the British ambassadors at the court of the Russian Empress Anna Ioannovna and examines, in addition to their professional activities, their living conditions and life at court (attending receptions, balls, masquerades in the imperial palace, participation in social life and various amusements at court was the responsibility of all ambassadors). This issue has not previously been the subject of special study, although it is relevant in the light of two recent trends in historical science — imagology (which explores intercultural communications between diff erent countries, and also individuals) and the history of everyday life. The article discusses the living conditions of the ambassadors, as well as their attitude to entertainment and participation in court life. One of the ambassadors’ wives expressed admiration at court balls and the guests’ outfits, but the diplomats themselves more oft en demonstrated a critical perception of entertainment events and practices at the court of the Empress. The ambassadors were indignant at the extravagance and luxury of the court, as well as at the expensive outfits that were necessary for the participation in the courtly pastimes for the courtiers, the Russian noblemen, and themselves as well. Diplomats were also dissatisfied with the high cost of living in the capital, which made them turn to their government for financial support. It can be concluded that, in general, the living conditions of the British ambassadors at the court of Anna Ioannovna were quite satisfactory. Nevertheless, residents most often spoke critically about their stay in Russia, as well as about Russian people, mainly about those who belonged to the upper strata of society. Researching the daily life of the ambassadors at the imperial court, on the basis of their correspondence with the Secretary of State, enriches our knowledge not only about foreign diplomats who worked in Russia, but also about the life and practices at the court of Empress Anna Ioannovna, and about her reign.

April 6, 2022 marked the 100th anniversary of Yuri Aleksandrovich Moshkov, PhD Candidate in History, Honored Lecturer of Moscow University, Associate Professor of the Department of Source Studies of Russian and Soviet History, Faculty of History, Lomonosov Moscow State University. He is one of the oldest lecturers of the university, his working life has almost entirely been devoted to the Faculty of History. His life and career are inseparable from the history of our country. A veteran of the Great Patriotic War, he traversed the arduous roads of war and has government awards. For many years he has been chairman of the Council of War and Labor Veterans of the History Faculty of Lomonosov Moscow State University, and has always actively participated in the patriotic upbringing of young people. Moshkov is an extremely peace-loving person, and when he talks about his military path and recalls the students and fellows of the history department who participated in the Patriotic War, he always expresses the hope that such a war will never happen again. In this article, his colleagues pay tribute to Yuri Aleksandrovich as a veteran, personality and patriot, and trace his path as a professional historian, author of a large number of scientific papers. He is a well-known specialist in the agrarian history of the Soviet period and regular participant in conferences, symposiums and scientific discussions on this issue. He is one of the architects of the development of quantitative methods used for solving a number of problems in historical research. Moshkov is a highly qualified lecturer, author of textbooks, study guides and teaching aids. Under his scientific guidance, about a hundred theses have been prepared, almost two dozen PhD theses have been defended. Through many years of work at the faculty, he has given lecture courses and conducted seminars on the historiography of national history and quantitative methods in historical research, taught students a large number of special courses on the history of the Soviet village, partisans of the Great Patriotic War, etc. On behalf of all the fellows of the university, the contributors of the present article wish our colleague, who is both wise and young at heart, to enjoy good health and to continue to have professional success.