Enlightened Metropolis: Constructing Imperial Moscow, 1762-1855 (Oxford Studies in Medieval European History)

Imperial Russia, is was said, had two capital cities because it had two identities: St. Petersburg was Russia's "window to Europe," whereas Moscow preserved the nation's proud historical traditions. __Enlightened Metropolis__ challenges this myth by exploring how the tsarist regime actually tried to turn Moscow into a bridgehead of Europe in the heartland of Russia. Moscow in the eighteenth century was widely scorned as backward and "Asiatic." The tsars thought it a benighted place that endangered their state's internal security and their effort to make Russia European. Beginning with Catherine the Great, they sought to construct a new Moscow, with European buildings and institutions, a Westernized "middle estate", and a new cultural image as an enlightened metropolis. Drawing on the methodologies of urban, social, institutional, cultural, and intellectual history, __Enlightened Metropolis__ asks: How was the urban environment - buildings, institutions, streets, smells - transformed in the nine decades from Catherine's accession to the death of Nicholas I? How were the lives of the inhabitants changed? Did a "middle estate" come into being? How similar was Moscow's modernization to that of Western cities, and how was it affected by the disastrous occupation by Napoleon? Lastly, how were Moscow and its people imagined by writers, artists, and social commentators in Russia and the West from the Enlightenment to the mid-nineteenth century? "It is a cliché that tsarist Russia had two rival capitals: St. Petersburg, Russia's 'window to Europe'; and Moscow, city of palaces and onion domes, the tradition-bound metropolis of the Orthodox heartland. 'Enlightened metropolis' challenges this cultural myth by examining the tsarist regime's efforts to turn Moscow into a European city. In the eighteenth century, Europeans and even some Russians scorned Moscow as part of Asia, and the tsars themselves thought it a benighted place that endangered both their political security and their effort to Westernize their country and gain respect for Russia abroad. Beginning with Catherine the Great, they sought to remake Moscow on the model of St. Petersburg by reconstructing its buildings and institutions, fostering a Westernized "middle estate" and constructing a new image of Moscow as an enlightened metropolis. Drawing on the methodologies of urban, social, institutional, cultural, and intellectual history, 'Enlightened metropolis' asks: How was the city's urban environment - buildings, institutions, streets, smells - transformed in the nine decades from Catherine's accession to the death of Nicholas I? How did these changes affect the everyday lives of the inhabitants, and did a "middle estate" in fact come into being? Did Moscow's urban modernization resemble that of Western cities, and how was it affected by the disastrous occupation by Napoleon in 1812? Lastly, how was Moscow's modernization interpreted by writers, artists, and social commentators in Russia and the West from the Enlightenment to the mid-nineteenth century?"--Provided by publisher It is a cliché that tsarist Russia had two rival capitals: St Petersburg, Russia’s ”window to Europe” and Moscow, the tradition-bound metropolis of the Orthodox heartland. Enlightened Metropolis challenges this myth by examining the tsarist regime’s efforts to turn Moscow into a European city. In the eighteenth century, Europeans scorned Moscow as an ”Asiatic” city, and the tsars thought it a benighted place that endangered their political security and their effort to Westernize their country and gain respect for Russia abroad. Beginning with Catherine the Great, they sought to remake Moscow on the model of St Petersburg by reconstructing its buildings and institutions, fostering a Westernized ”middling sort,” and constructing a new image of Moscow as an enlightened metropolis. Drawing on the methodologies of urban, social, institutional, cultural, and intellectual history, Enlightened Metropolis asks: How was the city’s urban environment—buildings, institutions, streets, smells—transformed in the nine decades from Catherine’s accession to the death of Nicholas I? How did these changes affect the everyday lives of the inhabitants, and did a ”middling sort” in fact come into being? Did Moscow’s urban modernization resemble that of Western cities, and how was it affected by the disastrous occupation by Napoleon in 1812? Lastly, how was Moscow’s modernization interpreted by writers, artists, and social commentators in Russia and the West from the Enlightenment to the mid-nineteenth century? Through Systematic Comparisons With Cities In Western Europe Alexander Martin Situates Moscow In The Context Of The Emergence Of Urban Bourgeois Civilization In The West, And Helps The Reader Understand Both How Moscow Became A Modern City And Why This Successful Modernization Paradoxically Helped Delegitimize The Tsarist Regime. The Enlightened Metropolis And The Imperial Social Project -- Space And Time In The Enlightened Metropolis -- Envisioning The Enlightened Metropolis: Images Of Moscow Under Catherine Ii -- Barbarism, Civility, Luxury: Writing About Moscow In The 1790s-1820s -- Government, Aristocracy, And The Middling Sort -- The 1812 War -- Common Folk In Nicholaevan Moscow -- Complacency And Anxiety: Representations Of Moscow Under Nicholas I. Alexander M. Martin. Includes Bibliographical References (p. [302]-333) And Index. Content: Introduction 1. The Enlightened Metropolis and the Imperial Social Project 2. Space and Time in the Enlightened Metropolis 3. Envisioning the Enlightened Metropolis: Images of Moscow under Catherine II 4. Barbarism, Civility, Luxury: Writing about Moscow in the 1790s-1820s 5. Government, Aristocracy, and the Middling Sort 6. The 1812 War 7. Common Folk in Nicholaevan Moscow 8. Complacency and Anxiety: Representations of Moscow under Nicholas I Conclusion