Cartographies of Tsardom: The Land and Its Meanings in Seventeenth-Century Russia, and: Ocherki istorii rossiiskoi simvoliki: Ot tamgi do simvolov gosudarstvennogo suvereniteta (review)

Historians of pre-modern East Slavic history have always employed non-textual sources such as archeology and analyzed the symbolism of visual evidence such as art and architecture. Happily, in part inspired by post-modernism, historians of modern Russian history have now also turned their attention to non-textual sources. The two excellent volumes reviewed here—one on medieval, early modern, and modern history; the other on early modern history—share a focus on such sources, which also, to be sure, contain textual material in the form of inscriptions or legends. Both books are based upon significant archival research, supplement their non-textual evidence with considerable textual material, and place their analyses within the context of broader themes of East Slavic history and a wide comparative framework. In other words, both are impressive models of how to deal with non-textual evidence.

Nadezhda Aleksandrovna Soboleva was trained as an archeologist and completed her dissertation for the degree of kandidat istoricheskikh nauk on medieval Czech seals. She is now a doctor of historical sciences and "leading researcher" (vedushchii nauchnyi sotrudnik) at the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. A specialist on "auxiliary historical disciplines," Soboleva is the author of more than 200 publications.

Ocherki istorii Rossiiskoi simvoliki is an anthology of 12 previously published articles, properly cited, written over the course of 30 years, organized into five chapters. The length of the articles (13 to 114 pages), the number of articles per chapter (1 to 7), and the length of the chapters (25 to 238 pages) are extremely varied. Although all the articles have been reformatted for type font and chapter endnotes, only one has been revised.

Chapter 1, on the beginning of "Russian" (rossiiskii) state symbols, contains two articles totaling 68 pages, mostly about the Riurikid "sign" (znak) or insignia now on the State Seal of Ukraine, arguing that what is variously called a trident was the state symbol of steppe origin of the Rus´ kaganate that only later became a Riurikid clan symbol or tamga. Its closest analogies are to Khazar and to Volga and Danube Bulgar symbols. In Rus´ the "sign" functioned as an archaic magical pagan symbol even after Christianization.

Chapter 2, on the evolution of the state seal, the longest in the anthology, contains nine articles totaling 238 pages. The first article discusses seals in northeast Rus´ during the 14th and 15th centuries, tracing possible Lithuanian, Byzantine, and South Slavic influences.

Two articles address Ivan III's innovative 1497 seal, which displayed a mounted warrior slaying a dragon on one side and a two-headed eagle on the other. Soboleva endorses Gustave Alef's conclusion that the model for the two-headed eagle was the Holy Roman Empire, not Byzantium, and argues further for a northern Italian, probably Venetian, artistic model, even artist.¹ Soboleva dismisses as speculative Andrei L´vovich Iurganov's interpretation that originally the mounted warrior was an apocalyptic representation of the Archangel Michael.² More analysis might have been useful. Soboleva emphasizes that to Russians, the mounted warrior represented the Muscovite ruler, but Soboleva and Iurganov agree that Russians only later identified the image with St. George slaying the dragon. Soboleva notes that to contemporary Europeans, the rider was already St. George, since "secular" Europeans were not troubled by the absence of a nimbus over the warrior's head and ignored the letter "k" for kniaz´ (prince) frequently assigned to the figure.³

Another article discusses Ivan IV's state seal, which Soboleva dates to 1567–78, most likely 1577. She credits Ivan IV's personal participation in decisions on symbolism and criticizes...