D. Y. SHERIKH. TURKISH PETERSBURG. FROM THE HISTORY OF RUSSIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS, MOSCOW: ZAO Tsentrpoligraf Publishing House, 2012, 255 p. (1); MUSTAFA ARMAGHAN. PETERSBURG'DA OSMANLI İZLERİ. KUĞUNUN SON ŞARKISI. İstanbul: Timaş Yayinlan, 2012* (2). 3. Baskt. 265 s.

For many years, researchers of Russian-Turkish relations have been waiting for the appearance of books that are important not only for the general moments of the joint centuries-old history of the Russian and Ottoman Empires, but also for its particular moments. Turkologists and historians in Russia and Turkey have noted that both Russia and Turkey, despite the vast wealth of archives on both sides, have not yet written books about Turkish Moscow, Turkish St. Petersburg, and everyday cultural, trade, and kinship contacts of ordinary people.

In 2003, a book by Mustafa Armagan dedicated to Turkish and Ottoman St. Petersburg was published in Turkey, and in 2012 the baton was continued by the St. Petersburg journalist and historian Dmitry Yuryevich Sherikh, the author of monographs on the history of St. Petersburg and its individual districts, and the gap was partially filled. This review is an attempt to compare the two books.

Turkish book " Traces of the Ottomans in St. Petersburg. The Swan Song" by Mustafa Armagan, was written, as its author notes, quite quickly. One short trip to St. Petersburg was enough for Armagan, which was followed by several years of working with historical literature.

* Armagan, Mustafa. Traces of the Ottomans in St. Petersburg. The Swan song. Istanbul: Timas Jaimlary, 2012. 3rd ed. 265 p.

Unfortunately, the author did not refer to the Ottoman archives. A book that was intended to be scientific or popular science has become almost artistic in the process of being written. It was well received in Turkey, and by the time this review was written, it had already gone through three reprints, but it was practically unknown in Russia until now.

The peer-reviewed third edition consists of eight sections, as well as an introduction, prefaces to several editions, and a conclusion. Two prefaces were written to the first edition. One was written by the author, and the other by a well-known Turkish historian, expert on Russian-Turkish relations, who for many years headed the Topkapi Palace Museum in Istanbul, Professor Ilber Ortayli (s. 13-15). For the second edition in 2006, the author wrote another preface, which was also included in the book we are reviewing (s. 23-26).

The monograph is replete with rich visual material and references to Russian classical and critical literature of the XIX-XX centuries: Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Belinsky, Bakhtin, Mandelstam, Brodsky and others. The author, in order to please the current fashion in cultural studies and literary criticism, did not fail, in my opinion, it is not entirely appropriate, to use the Bakhtin terminology of "carnival culture", describing the culture of the first century of the city's existence (s. 31-33). On pages 34-35, analogies are drawn between the Roman, Byzantine, Ottoman, and Russian Empires. The author (without giving, however, detailed statistical data) discusses the Russian Empire, with which the Ottoman Empire fought in the 242 years that passed from the beginning of the first Russo-Turkish war in 1676 to 1918, only four and a half decades (these "calculations" are not found in the Turkish text, they are found in Sherikh; 2, p. 5-6), not as a long-term important strategic enemy, but as a country related to the Ottoman Empire.

Armagan writes about St. Petersburg everything that is usually told about the city to foreigners, and this can be called a disadvantage of the book on the one hand, and on the other hand, an advantage, because the reader has a chance to look at the city and its history from the outside, through the eyes of a foreigner. However, describing the sights, writing down the text of sightseeing tours almost verbatim, Armagan often misrepresents the names of St. Petersburg's beauties. For example, the Peter and Paul Fortress appears in his text as "Petropavlovsk" (1,8. 177-178).

It is sad to say that the book "Traces of the Ottomans in St. Petersburg" tells practically nothing about the Ottomans. For the most part, the book is a collection of carefully recorded standard stories of guides to tourists about St. Petersburg: it seems that the author walked around the city with a dictaphone, and then transferred everything he heard to paper. The few single references to the Ottomans ' stay in St. Petersburg are limited to two or three episodes concerning the Turks in Leningrad. For example, p. 132 contains a detailed description of two Turkish eateries that worked in St. Petersburg during the author's visit; on p. 149, with reference to the Turkish translation of the monograph of the Russian-born writer Ida Met "The Kronstadt Commune", you can read about the role of Turkish General Ali Fuad Dzhebesoy in suppressing the uprising of the Kronstadt Red Navy on March 17, 1921, and on p. 166-167 we see a detailed description of the monuments of Tsarskoye Selo dedicated to the victories of Russian weapons under Catherine II over the Ottomans.

The book also mentions St. Petersburg Turkologists and employees of the Turkish cultural center, with whom the author met during the visit. In general, the book could be called "My trip to St. Petersburg "rather than" Traces of the Ottomans in St. Petersburg", because in the book an attentive reader can read about anything other than the Ottomans, but mainly about the author's impressions of the streets of St. Petersburg that greeted him cordially. At the same time, the book, according to the original plan, claims to be academic: at the end of the text, an impressive bibliography is given, almost all of which, alas, consists of second and third-order publications.

After reading the Turkish book, D. Y. Sherikh's monograph " Turkish Petersburg. From the history of Russian-Turkish relations " raised concerns: after all, if Turkish historians, who had access to archival materials of the Sultan's residence, Topkapi Palace and Turkey in general, so difficult to access for domestic researchers, completely failed to cope with the task, then what can we expect from a non - Orientalist historian who has never specialized in the study of the history of the Middle East In the East, studying Turkey, and even more so does not know the Turkish language?

Nevertheless, the book by D. Y. Sherih is pleasantly surprising. The author's list of orientalist consultants alone takes up two pages. A huge number of archival materials and publications in Russian, Turkish, Ottoman and European languages have been developed. The book is perfect

illustrated, the author used materials from the collections of the Russian National Library and the Archive of film and photographic documents of St. Petersburg.

The book consists of seventeen chapters that tell the story of "Turkish" St. Petersburg from the foundation of the city to the present day. In conclusion, we do not come across any conclusions, but only read a few pages about the sources. Of course, one could say that the book lacks a direct study of the presence of Ottoman documents in the archives of St. Petersburg, but such a study could rather be part of the task of a separate scientific monograph.

The book is very historical: the first thirteen chapters are devoted to the history of private, cultural and political contacts between tsarist Russia and Sultan's Turkey. Mostly official receptions, delegations, and visits of ambassadors are described. Several stories are devoted to the fate of ordinary citizens. Of course, it was not without a detailed biography of the Kantemir family, the Muruzi family (house on Liteyny, 24) and the history of the Admiral Kolchak family.

The author paid great attention not only to the political, but also to the cultural aspect of the history of Russian-Turkish relations. Back in the early 19th century, the first Russian-Turkish magazine was published in St. Petersburg, called "Konstantinopel und St. Petersburg, der Orient und der Norden". It was published by a Saxon publisher, the magazine was published in German, and a whole team of authors participated in its content. In addition to informative articles about St. Petersburg and Constantinople, poems were published, as well as "Turkish Trivia and Jokes" (pp. 109-110).

From the 14th to the 17th chapter, the book is devoted to the present, namely the post-revolutionary period. The fact that four chapters are devoted to the twentieth century, which is not very rich in events in the sphere of Russian-Turkish relations, as it might seem, indicates the author's meticulous approach to the work. These chapters describe the first contacts of the young Soviet Republic with the young Republic of Turkey - after all, it was the Soviets who first recognized the new Turkish state. These chapters describe the trips of artists and cinematographers from St. Petersburg to shoot and go on a creative trip to Turkey, and the visits of Turkish sports and government delegations, and the visits of Nazim Hikmet to Leningrad, and much more.

I would like to make a few observations related to the lack of certain facts in the book, without which such a thorough selection of facts seems somewhat incomplete.

In the first chapter, which is devoted to the founding of St. Petersburg and the role of captured Turks and Tatars in this process, as well as a description of the Tatar settlement behind the Peter and Paul Fortress opposite Kronverk, where Tatars, Kalmyks and Turks lived, there is a detailed description of the deeds of the Kantemir family, whose role at Peter's court was quite significant. However, it is not mentioned that Maria Dmitrievna Cantemir, the sister of Antiochus, was a favorite of Peter I for a long time and had certain chances to become an empress, at one time competing with the future Empress Catherine I for Peter's heart [Maikov, 1897]. The author also does not mention the treasures of the State Hermitage's Diamond Storeroom: sumptuous chepraks studded-one with diamonds, and the other with French-made diamonds [Kuznetsova, 2009, pp. 297-299]. These are the Ottoman embassy gifts, presented first in honor of the Adrianople Peace Treaty of 1829, and the second after Russia, then the guarantor of stability in Europe, sent N. N. Muravyov's corps to Egypt in 1832 in order to pacify the uprising of the Egyptian governor Mehmed Ali, who rebelled against the Ottoman Sultan Mahmud II. The uprising was suppressed, secession was averted, and the Sultan in gratitude sent magnificent gifts, which can be seen today in the State Hermitage Museum. In general, the fact that the Hermitage collections of Ottoman art are practically not mentioned in the book about Turkish St. Petersburg is puzzling.

I would like to see in the book a more detailed indication of the addresses of the Ottoman embassies, and preferably photos of the interior-albeit modern ones, because in many of these rooms the "Ottoman" elements of the interior are preserved - especially in the building of the current Russian Maritime Register of Shipping (Dvortsovaya Emb., 8).

The book also does not cover cultural contacts in the 1910s and 1920s in sufficient detail. It is known that during the First World War, many artists from the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts traveled to paint war scenes on the territory of the former Ottoman Empire. In the 1920s, a series of writers ' congresses in Moscow was also attended by Turkish writers who had visited Leningrad, and some Soviet writers from Leningrad visited the Republic of Turkey [Lansere, 1925; Seifullina, 1925; Nikulin, 1935; Pavlenko, 1929; Pavlenko, 1930].

The author successfully included the book illustrations from the album of the St. Petersburg-Leningrad artist E. E. Lansere, who posed in Ankara for many political figures of the period

However, in addition to all other references to cultural contacts during and immediately after the First World War, it would be necessary to mention the cultural contacts of Trabzon and St. Petersburg occupied by Russian troops for almost two years - literary and documentary works of Russian officers published in Russian Trebizond are stored in the Russian National Library [Mintslov, 1916 Mintslov, 1917; Kalfogly, 1916].

The episode about the staging of Nazym Hikmet's plays in Leningrad lacks an interview with A. B. Freundlich - after all, it was she who participated in the aforementioned production of Nazym Hikmet's play"The Sword of Damocles".

It seems that the last chapter devoted to Russian-Turkish contacts in St. Petersburg today was written somewhat hastily, based on the scant publications in the St. Petersburg press, which, like the previous one, could have been written with success based on interviews with eyewitnesses of the events mentioned, which would only have enriched the book. Since the interviews were not conducted by the author, some events were not accurately reported, unfortunately.

However, all these considerations are intended only to make the text of the book more complete - perhaps the author uses them for further reprints, and in general they do not detract from the high merits of the text of the book.

list of literature

Kalfogly I. I. Golaya pravda [The Naked Truth]. Refutation of distorting history. On the population of the Trebizond Vilayet. B. M., 1916.

Kuznetsova L. K. Petersburg jewellers. Eighteenth Century, brilliant, Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf Publ., 2009.

Lancer E. E. Summer in Angora. Drawings and notes from the diary of a trip to Anatolia in the summer of 1922, L., 1925.

Maikov L. Knyazhna Maria Kantemirova [Princess Maria Kantemirova]. Russkaya starina, vol. 89, 1897, No. 1.

Mintslov S. R. A few words about fakes of antiquity. Trebizond, 1917.

Mintslov S. R. Statistical sketch of the Trapezondsky district. November 1916. Tranezond, 1916.

Nikulin L. Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir. Moscow, Gospolitizdat, 1935.

Pavlenko P. Asiatic Stories, Moscow: Federation Publ., 1929 (2nd ed. - 1931).

Pavlenko P. Istanbul and Turkey, Moscow: Federation Publ., 1930 (2nd ed. - 1931).

Seifullina L. In the country of outgoing Islam. Trip to Turkey, L., 1925.

Permanent link to this publication: