• Home
• History
• Membership
• Newsletter
• Publications
• Conferences
• Recent Works by Members
• Links

Note

British Visitors to Russia and the Imperial Court in the 1730s and 1740s

The period between the reigns of Peter I and Catherine II has frequently been characterized as a period of stagnation, one in which frivolous matters dominated over serious-minded, 'progressive', reforms. In cultural terms, however, this period saw a number of important developments for Russia, not least in the gradual emergence of a European-style court structure and the consolidation of its associated social calendar, both of which were refined and extended during subsequent reigns. [1] The commentary provided by the published accounts and other writings of foreign visitors to Russia during this period provide the historian with an important, albeit highly subjective and frequently negative, contemporary source of information on a topic for which there is limited documentary evidence from Russian sources. Nevertheless, given the increased adoption of European fashions and other tastes in this period, these foreigners represent, at least in part, the cultural level that the Russian court elite was striving to emulate.

For the purposes of this brief note, I have restricted my discussion to the British visitors to Russia during this period. In this context, I must acknowledge the contribution of Professor Cross, whose work has been invaluable in identifying and linking many of the individuals to whom I will refer. [2] The British presence in Russia was well established by the middle decades of the eighteenth century. Britain was an important trading partner for Russia and its interests had to be represented by various diplomatic personnel at the court. There was also the 'British Factory' and its associated community, which had moved to St Petersburg from Arkhangel'sk during Peter I's reign. In addition, however, from the 1730s onwards, Russia became a destination for a small number of curious or interested travellers. These various groups provide a number of important sources for a historian looking at this period. As a result, British views of Russian developments in this period can be drawn from both of these groups. On the one hand, there are the official diplomatic dispatches of the various envoys and ambassadors of this period. On the other hand, there are a number of travellers' accounts and other personal writings, both published and privately circulated, which usually reflect the interests of the individual author, be it commercial or personal. For the purposes of this paper, I have chosen to focus on those accounts that have some bearing on the Russian court and its activities.

The dispatches from the various diplomatic British personnel during this period provide some information about the social activities of the Russian court, reflecting the celebrations and entertainments that they were invited to (and, indeed, expected to attend). However, they are not generally the best source of details about these events, since they rarely, if ever, provide more than a broad chronology, which one can easily find in the official court journal entries for this period. For example, the English Minister Plenipotentiary, John Carmichael (3rd Earl of Hyndford), resident in Russia from 1744 until 1749, noted the elaborate preparations for Grand Duke Peter's wedding to the future Catherine II in August 1745 in a number of his dispatches. However, after the event, he provided no details, except that the procession was 'the most magnificent that there ever was known in this country', and instead referred to a description that would soon be available in print. [3] Similarly, Jonas Hanway, an English merchant who was present in St Petersburg for the wedding, although further removed from events than Hyndford by virtue of his status, simply noted that 'it was in general very grand, and elegantly conducted'. He then directed his readers, in a footnote, to the 'periodical memoirs of the time' for more details on the event. [4]

Diplomatic correspondence occasionally mentioned an unusual occurrence at a court event, which has not been recorded elsewhere. Claudius Rondeau (Consul General and later Minister Resident from 1731 until 1739) included an account of the celebrations for the New Year in St Petersburg in 1737 and made specific mention of an accident, which involved a firework breaking one of the palace windows and injuring Grand Duchess Elizabeth. [5] This incident was perhaps unsurprisingly excised from the official record in the Court Chamberlain's journals (Kamer-fure'erskie zhurnaly). Similarly, Hyndford's description of the celebrations for the anniversary of Elizabeth's accession to the throne on 25 November 1745 includes several details that are glossed over in the official court journal entry. Firstly, he notes that the Empress was dressed in the uniform of the Life Guard regiment (joining other contemporaries in admiring how well masculine dress suited her) during the banquet. Secondly, he recorded that he was one of only three ambassadors who dined with the Grand Duke and Duchess in an adjoining room, presumably one of the foreign guests noted by the court journal entry. [6]

By contrast, there is the anecdotal account provided by the 'Letters' of Mrs Jane Vigor (née Goodwin), who travelled to St Petersburg in 1728 as the wife of Thomas Ward, an English merchant. Upon Ward's death in 1731, she subsequently married the aforementioned English Minister Resident, Claudius Rondeau. Her account, written after her return to England after Rondeau's death in 1739, provides quite detailed descriptions of a number of major court events for the duration of her stay, from the engagement ceremony between Peter II and Princess Ekaterina A. Dolgorukova in 1730 to the celebrations for the wedding of Anna Leopoldovna and Prince Anton of Brunswick in 1739. [7] In the latter case, it should be noted that Vigor's account remains the main source for many of the details of the wedding's main stages, the order of the procession and the overall appearance of the court for the two-day celebrations. In addition, there are other court events, such as the grand ball held in St Petersburg to celebrate the taking of Danzig in 1734, for which her accounts provide more detail on the event than the cursory entry in the official court journal. [8] Similarly, the letters written by Charles Cottrell to members of his family during his visit to Russia in 1740 provide a useful description of the funeral of Anna Ivanovna in December. [9] Although these descriptions were often not informed by a knowledge of the precise nature of Russian ceremonial or protocol, they nevertheless provide an important additional source of information on the court's activities in this period.

The other common feature of these British accounts of the Russian court relates to the opinions and judgements that the various observers make about its conduct and appearance. Virtually all of the British visitors refer to the fact that the Russian court is considered one of the most brilliant in Europe. However, in their discussions of the various facets of this 'brilliance', there are a number of perceived shortcomings that they associate with the Russian court and its rulers in this period. In the diplomatic correspondence of this period, as with much of the rest of the eighteenth century, the inclement weather is hardly an unusual topic for those based at the Russian court. However, during this period, these complaints are linked on several occasions with several aspects of Russian court life for the first time. For example, the English diplomat James O'Hara, 2nd Baron Tyrawley (who was present in St Petersburg between 1743 and 1744), commented in July 1744 that:

Since my letter of the 5th inst. I have been extremely out of order occasioned by a violent cold I caught at the festivals for the peace between Russia and Sweden. We had three nights balls, masquerades, operas, &c., where it was so excessive hot at court and so extreme chilled going home in the morning so has almost destroyed me. [10]

The court social calendar during Elizabeth's reign in particular was to come under attack from several other diplomats, who felt it was a hindrance to achieving anything. In July 1743, Cyril Wich (Envoy Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary in Russia from 1741 until 1744) noted Elizabeth's 'strong aversion to all sorts of business and her strong inclination to follow her pleasures without restraint, to which an Empress of Russia is lyable [sic]'. [11] A couple of years later, Tyrawley commented on 'the Empress's inattention to business' and 'this Lady's mortal backwardness to all sorts of business, or any think that requires one moment's thought, or application.' [12] Indeed, exasperated clearly by this experience of the Russian court, Tyrawley suggested that Britain should consider an alliance with Sweden since 'every thing falls here [in St Petersburg] into an entire annihilation and state of lethargy, and nothing is thought of but how to adjust a ball or masquerade'. [13]

This active court social life was not merely time-consuming but expensive, given the clothing and other accessories which were required to participate in not only court ceremonies, but in everyday court social life. Dress and fashion in general merit more discussion in some accounts than others. In particular, the two accounts by women, Mrs Vigor and also Elisabeth Justice, who spent three years in Russia as a governess to the children of a British merchant, include descriptions of the court elite's appearance, with jewellery as an item of particular note for the latter. [14] Similarly, in Charles Cottrell's letter to his brother Robert in late 1740, he includes some discussion of the 'magnificence' of the Russian court, again focussing on clothing as a reflection of this. Despite the fact that his visit coincided with several periods of mourning - for Frederick William I of Prussia in May and Anna Ivanovna in November and December - he is able to observe that court dress is 'rich beyond comparison; a gold stuff is covered with point d'Espagneand network'. [15] However, these descriptions also note that this was a façade that could not disguise the social limitations of the Russian social elite. Both Vigor and Cottrell bemoan the lack of ready conversation at court social gatherings, in part due to the prevalence of card games, but also linked to the reticent nature of most participants, particularly the women. [16]

The expense of the clothing and accessories of the Russian court elite also drew negative comments from several observers, in part reflecting the existing debate in British society about the nature of luxury. Hanway's account is interesting in this regard, since he speculated about the relationship between such expenditure and the elite's dependence on the state as a result, and contrasted Russia with Britain in this respect. He raised the question of sumptuary laws, which he believed would be a benefit to the state, but stated that 'some incident or other still made a pompous appearance necessary, or agreeable to the Sovereign', thereby laying the blame at the feet of the (female) ruler. [17] The failed sumptuary laws to which Hanway referred were introduced during the regency of Anna Leopoldovna and then subsequently confirmed by Elizabeth. [18] They also drew some comment from British observers. From a diplomatic perspective, the chief interest in these measures lay in the fact that they potentially damaged a leading French commercial interest in Russia - namely the luxury textile trade. [19]

One might also speculate about the reactions of British observers to both of the aforementioned trends - the superficiality of social life and the emphasis on expensive clothing - in relation to the fact that Russia had female rulers in this period. For example, Elizabeth's well-known fondness for clothing was noted by a number of observers, such as Hyndford:

I am informed that the Empress is a great lover of [E]nglish stuffs, particularly white and other light colours, with large flowers of gold and silver, or even of colours, and I believe, that, if I had some of them to present before the wedding they would be very graciously accepted of, and although in themselves trifles, might have more weight than things of greater consequence, for when one has to do with ladies, one must have something in the female way. [20]

The rather damning judgement, that such things are 'trifles', might equally be applied to the British diplomatic response to the various distractions of the court social life, which were discussed above. It might also be compared to Hanway's comment that the extravagance shown by the elite during Grand Duke Peter's wedding celebrations was 'demonstrative of a very whimsical turn'. [21]

This leads me to draw some conclusions on this subject. There can be little doubt that the British accounts discussed above provide interesting and often overlooked details on the social life and tastes of the Russian court in this period. The descriptions, personal impressions, and occasionally caustic comments, provide another strand to the description of the court's activities from its own documentation. More seriously, however, their attitudes towards Russia and its elite are also significant because they provide a commentary on the nature of the development of the Russian elite. The forms of social interaction and the amount of money spent on European clothing and other accoutrements both feature repeatedly in British accounts of this period. That these accounts often draw attention to the gendered nature of these developments, in largely pejorative terms, reflects a broadly negative appraisal of the ability of Russia's female rulers during this period. Similarly, most of the accounts note something slightly amiss, either in terms of the cost of the elite lifestyle (both in time and money) or in its forms (the rather crass or overwhelming nature of clothes and accessories). The Russian court, at least in British eyes, was an impressive spectacle during this period and became a source of both fascination and criticism. Russia's rulers and its social elite may have had considerable means, according to these accounts, but usually not the good taste or sense to use them to an appropriate end.

- Paul Keenan, London School of Economics, UK
p.keenan@lse.ac.uk