Yet the suddenness of such reforms and the ruthlessness of their enforcement generated a passionate reaction. From many directions men rose up to defend the greater "glory and beauty" of the old ways. In the same year, 1700, an educated Muscovite publicly proclaimed that'Peter was in fact the Antichrist, and a violent Cossack uprising on the lower Volga had to be crushed by long and bloody fighting.37 Such protest movements continued to plague the "new" Russia and to influence its cultural development. A history of that culture must, therefore, include not only the relatively familiar tale of Peter's modernizing reforms but also the counter-nil ack launched by Old Muscovy.
The soldiers of the new order, Peter's glittering new guards regiments, were, after the total destruction of the streltsy, opposed only by a disorganized guerrilla band of Muscovite loyalists. The guards regiments had all the weapons of a modern, centralized state at their command, but the guerrilla warriors had the advantage of vast terrain, ideological passion, and grass
roots support. Although the ultimate victory of the new order was perhaps inevitable, the defenders of the old were able to wage a more protracted and crippling warfare against modernization than in most other European countries. Within the amorphous army of those opposed to the Petrine solution were three groups of particular importance for the subsequent development of Russian culture: merchant Old Believers, peasant insur-rectionaries, and monastic ascetics. Even in defeat these voices of Old Muscovy were able to force the new state to adopt many of their ideas as it sought to extend and deepen its authority.
Before looking at the counterattack of Moscow, however, one must consider the new legions which Peter called into being and their new cultural citadel, St. Petersburg. This city was the most impressive creation of his turbulent reign: the third and last of Russia's great historic cities and an abiding symbol of its new Westernized culture.
In 1703 Peter began building this new city at the point where the Neva River disgorges the muddy water of Lake Ladoga out through swamps and islands into the eastern Baltic. The way had been cleared for Russian activity in the area by the capture in 1702 of the Swedish fortress city of Noteborg at the other end of the Neva. This was the first turning of the tide of military fortune from Sweden to Russia in northeast Europe, and the vanquished city was appropriately renamed Schliisselburg: "key city." The key made possible the opening of what an Italian visitor soon called g£u£sia^_ "window to Europe."38 In February, 1704, the first of a long line of foreign architects arrived to direct all construction on the new site-assuring thereby that the "window" would be European in style as well as in the direction it faced. Within a decade, St. Petersburg was a city of nearly 35,000 buildings and the capital of all Russia-though it was not fully recognized as such until the Empress Anna permanently transferred her residence from Moscow to St. Petersburg in 1732 and a fire gutted Moscow five years later.
Almost no buildings have survived from the original city, whose bleak appearance bore little resemblance to the elegant city of later periods. The utilitarian structure of early Petersburg reflects the taste and preoccupations of its founder. Originally known by the Djyi^narrie^)f_^nkl_EiteLBojirklL (the abbreviation Piter remaining a familiar term for the city), St. Petersburg was conceived as a kind of Dutch-style naval base and trading center. In partial imitation of Amsterdam, the new city was systematically laid out along canals and islands. The pattern of construction was geometric and the pace rapid. The human cost of building in such a damp, cold climate was probably greater than that involved in building any other major city of Europe. Even more illustrative of Peter's military preoccupations was a
second city founded in 1703 and bearing his name: Petrozavodsk, or "Peter's factory." Built to provide an arms manufacturing center near the metal resources of the north, this dktantcityjjriLake Onega was thrust into an even more cold and inhuman location than Petersburg.
Military expediency and raison d'etat were the abiding considerations of Peter. The practical-minded, shipbuilding countries of the Protestant North were the source of most of his reformatorial ideas and techniques. Sweden (and to a lesser extent Prussia) provided him with quasi-military administrative ideas: a utilitarian "table of ranks" requiring state service on a systematic basis and a new synodal pattern of church administration subject to state control.ltJpHand provided him with the models (and much of the nautical terminology) for the new Russian navyjSaxony and the Baltic German provinces provided most of the teachers for his military training schools and the staff for the new academy of sciences that was set up immediately after his death.39 His efforts to advance Russian learning were almost completely concentrated on scientific, technical, or linguistic matters of direct military or diplomatic value. "To Peter's mind, 'education' and 'vocational training' seem to have been synonymous concepts."40
This practical, technological emphasis is evidenced in the first periodical and the first secular book in Russian history-both of which appeared in 1703, the year of the founding of St. Petersburg. The printed journal, Vedomosti, was largely devoted to technical and order-of-battle information. The book, Leonty Magnitsky's Arithmetic, was more a general handbook of useful knowledge than a systematic arithmetic.41 Though often labeled the first scientific publication in Russian history, the term "science" (nauka), as used in its subtitle, carries the established seventeenth-century Russian meaning of "skilled technique" rather than the more general European meaning of theoretical knowledge.42 Far more general and abstract than Peter's "science" was the lexicon of political and philosophical terms that Peter took over from the Poles. This process of borrowing also continued a seventeenth-century Russian trend, whereby new labels were adopted piecemeal as the practical need for them arose.43
Thus, although Peter met and corresponded with the doctors of the Sorbonne while in Paris, and made the first purchase while in Holland for what was to become a magnificent imperial Rembrandt collection,44 his reign was not one of philosophic or artistic culture. Indeed, from this point of view,|Peter's reign was in many ways a regression from that of Alexis or even Sophia. There was no painting equal to that of Ushakov, no poetry equal to that of Polotsky, no historical writing equal to that of Gizel. The perfunctory dramatic efforts of Jeter's reign represent an aesthetic decline from those of Alexis'; and even the theological disputes between Yavorsky
and Prokopovich came as an anticlimax after the intense controversies that had raged about Nikon, Medvedev, and Kuhlmann.
Peter's celebrated new departures in statecraft also moved along lines laid out by his predecessors. The drive to the Baltic was anticipated by Ivan Ill's establishment of Ivangorod, Ivan IV's attempt to capture Livonia, and Alexis's attempt to capture Riga and build a Baltic fleet. His reliance on Northern European ideas, technicians, and mercenaries continued a trend begun by Ivan IV and expanded by Michael. His ruthless expansion of state control over traditional ecclesiastical and feudal interests was in the spirit of Ivan and Alexis, and his secret chancellery in the spirit of their oprichnina and prikaz of secret affairs, respectively. His program of modernization and reform was anticipated in almost all its major respects by the long series of seventeenth-century proposals for Westernization, extending from Boris Godunov and the False Dmitry to Ordyn-Nashchokin and Golitsyn.