The third annual meeting of the Research Network Premodern East Slavic Europe promoted communication and knowledge exchange between scholars, who focus on early modern history of Eastern Europe and Eurasia. INGRID SCHIERLE (Tübingen) and JAN KUSBER (Mainz) opened the conference which contributed to the overall aim of the network to pool expertise on the premodern period in Eastern European history. The network strives to strengthen and to increase the visibility of this research area, since it is underrepresented compared to the research on recent history in Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus. The focus of early modern studies is to be broadened by integrating the history of the region into the transnational (or transimperial) and transcultural history of Europe and Eurasia. Ultimately, the development of new research perspectives and projects on the history of Eastern Europe in the premodern period will be facilitated.

The first panel was opened by EGOR GVOZDEV (Mainz) who examined the perception of saints' intercession in the context of warfare in the religious culture of the Moscow Principality from the 14th century to the first half of the 16th century. The aim of the study was to investigate the image of war contained in hymnography. By analyzing services and canons he showed that certain militaristic rhetoric and the corresponding image of war appeared already at the level of liturgy. This way, military actions could be interpreted according to Christian doctrine.

With her contribution, ANNA DIAGILEVA (Halle) presented insights on the everyday life, networks, and spaces for action of Halle pietists in St. Petersburg in the first half of the 18th century. She asked who took part in Pietist networks and what roles they played in them. Furthermore, she explored what influence Pietists took in the development of Russia as an imperial power and of St. Petersburg as its capital. To answer these questions, she used social history and everyday history methods as well as historical social network analysis.

The second panel was opened by ERIKA MONAHAN (Cologne) with a contribution on ice in northern Eurasia as snapshots for a history of climate. She argued that broader research on ice in history can forge longue durée perspectives important in climate history. By the analysis of two maps by the Siberian mapmaker Semen Remezov (circa 1642–post-1720) she showed that early modern maps hold information that can imprecisely facilitate historical reconstruction of Siberian hydrography.

After that, OLEG RUSAKOVSKIY (Yerevan) presented his current work-in-progress. He drew on an archival item uncovering a Polish-Lithuanian spy network allegedly operating in Russia, primarily in Novgorod and Moscow, during the early 1630s. Compromising about 300 sheets, the source stood out as an extraordinarily large investigating file on spying in Russian archives. The study offered an opportunity not only to delve into one intriguing criminal story from 17th-century Russia but also to talk about espionage as a phenomenon in Early Modern Eastern Europe and about intelligence and counterintelligence practices of the time from a broader, comparative perspective considering political, criminal, and social history.

The final contribution to the second panel was given by ALEXANDR OSIPIAN (Leipzig) about violence and brigandage on the steppe routes between the Ottoman Empire, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and Russia. He explored plundering of caravans and envoys in the buffer zone and concluded, that considering the permanent proxy war in the steppe, Cossacks served as an indispensable, effective, and inexpensive military force to defend the borderlands. Brigandage was not only seen as a lesser evil, but also stood under the patronage of the local authorities and the support of networks of assistance. At the same time, the absence of stable central control over the means of violence in the buffer zone rendered preventive measures largely ineffective. The rulers preferred to avoid responsibilities.

The third panel was opened by ANASTASIIA ERMOLAEVA (Mainz) who delved into the exploration of marriage policy of the Moscow Court in the second half of the 15th century to the 16th century. She examined what role the practices of viewing and showing marriage candidates played in the marriage policy of the Moscow court and how they correlated with the self-perception of Moscow rulers. First, she analyzed the different ways of viewing marriage candidates, which varied for foreign marriages and local marriages. Second, she considered examples of marrying off the daughters of the Grand Duke. Most notably, Moscow rulers refused to show their daughter up to the conclusion of the marriage contract.

The second contribution to the panel was given by SIMON FRANZEN (Tromsø) and explored the emergence of a spatial image of Northern Europe in the early modern period with the use of historical maps and other genres of historical sources with spatial reference. Against the background of the concept of Northeastern Europe, he focused on the map Novissima Russiae Tabula by the Dutch cartographer Johannes Janssonius (1588–1664) to analyze how early modern cartographers constructed the greater area in the north and east of the European continent. As a conclusion he stated that the map shows markers of the unity of the Russian Empire and Scandinavia as well as elements of separation. Therefore, the map illustrates that the concept of Northeastern Europe can create a common framework for national border crossing historical research to write a shared spatial history of Northern and Eastern Europe.

At last, SVITLANA POTAPENKO (Kyiv / Frankfurt am Main) explored new visual sources of the old hetmanate by comparing engravings of Kyrylo Rozumovsky from 1750 and 1762 as a contribution to the explorations on the political history of Ukraine and the Russian empire in the mid-18th century and to the studies on the iconography of Ukrainian Cossack rulers. By carefully studying variations of the inscriptions and the presence of the bulava, a mace that represents the hetman’s authority, she observed that the release of the engraving in 1762 was determined by Kyrylo Rozumovsky’s intention to break with the Russian empire or at least to reduce the subordination of the Hetmanate to the Russian throne to the nominal one.

After that, the conference was enriched by the keynote given by VALERIE KIVELSON (Ann Arbor) on the imagination of human diversity in Russian in the 16th and 17th centuries. Following the issue whether Muscovites thought in racial terms, she first defined race as a structural relationship for the articulation and management of human difference, rather than a substantive content. The term race, on one hand, includes perceptions and fantasies of biological, physical, or visible differences. On the other hand, it also includes the thought that characteristics are inheritable, passed in bloodlines and inherent to all members of a group collectively. Kivelson used visual sources to analyze whether there are indications of the outlined understanding of the term race among Muscovites. She found indications of racial thinking in illustrations of Tartars that display phenotypical details which sometimes even resembled the drawings of demons. While visible differences could be identified, she could find no indication that Muscovites believed that characteristics were passed on by bloodlines. The answer to the question of whether characteristics were assigned to all members of a group also remained ambivalent. Considering the divided results, she concluded that Muscovites did not think entirely in racial terms. They did not adopt “the whole package of racism”. However, neither should they be glorified because they also differentiated between ethnic groups.

Finally, JULIA HERZBERG (Leipzig) thanked all contributors for their impulse and gave an overview of the network's future plans. Next year, the annual meeting will take place in Bonn. The topic will be “Dependency and Agency in the Northern Crossroads of Premodern Asia and Europe.”

At a time when the premodern history of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus is used for propaganda myths, the exchange of experts is more important than ever. The conference and the Research Network Premodern East Slavic Europe facilitate academic exchange and dialogue between experts from Eastern and Western Europe and thus make an important contribution to counter the manipulation and falsification of history for political purposes.

Conference Overview:

Introduction: Ingrid Schierle (Tübingen) / Jan Kusber (Mainz)

Panel I: Religion in dialogue

Chair: Olga Trufanova (Regensburg)

Comment: Nataliia Sinkevych (Leipzig)

Egor Gvozdev (Mainz): “Keep your city from godless’s invasions and internecine Strife”: The war discourse in the hymnography (14th–first half of the 16th centuries)

Anna Diagileva (Halle): The Halle pietists in St. Petersburg in the first half of the 18th century. Everyday life, networks, spheres of action

Panel II: Military, spies, and violence in early modern times

Chair: Michel Abeßer (Freiburg)

Comment: Lena Marassinova (Moskau)

Erika Monahan (Cologne): Ice in northern Eurasia: Snapshots for a history of climate?

Oleg Rusakovskiy (Yerevan): Ivan Soldat and others: A spy story from 17th century Russia

Alexandr Osipian (Leipzig): Merchants, diplomats, and cossacks: Violence on the steppe routes between the Ottoman Empire, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and Russia

Panel III: Cultural history of Eastern Europe

Chair: Gleb Kazakov (Gießen)

Comment: Chechesh Kudacinova (Altai Republic)

Anastasiia Ermolaeva (Mainz): Comely in feature, but crippled in step: Appearance as a criterion for a successful marriage candidate at the Moscow court

Simon Franzen (Tromsø): Envisioning the north: The Novissima Russiae Tabula and the creation of an early modern northern European spatial image in the 17th century

Svitlana Potapenko (Kyiv, Frankfurt a. M.): New visual sources on the old Hetmanate: Engravings of Kyrylo Rozumovsky of 1750 and 1762 compared

Keynote:

Chair: Ricarda Vulpius (Münster)

Valerie Kivelson (Ann Arbor): Visual Demography: Imagining human diversity in Russia in the 16th and 17th centuries

Outlook:

Julia Herzberg (Leipzig): Further perspectives of the research network Premodern East Slavic Europe