1. For a detailed analysis in English (with references to Russian sources of data) of the transformation of Petersburg's built environment after 1860, see James H. Bater, St. Petersburg: Industrialization and Change (Montreal, 1976), especially pp. 321-53. In addition Elena A. Borisova's Russkaia arkhitektura vtoroi poloviny XIX veka (Moscow, 1979) refers frequently to the relation between capitalist development and architectural practice, especially in chapters 3 ("Obraz goroda vtoroi poloviny XIX v.") and 4 ("Razvitie novykh tipov sooruzhenii i ego vliianie na arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennyi protsess").

2. A sense of professional cohesion in architecture led to the formation of two major architectural associations: the Moscow Architectural Society (1867) and the Petersburg Society of Architects (1870). The founder and first president of the Moscow group was Mikhail Bykovskii (1801-1885), a noted architect whose work during four decades ranged from church and palace architecture to commercial structures. He was also the father of Konstantin Bykovskii, president of the Moscow society from 1894 to 1903 and one of its most active spokesmen. For a detailed study of the elder Bykovskii's work, see Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, Mikhail Bykovskii (Moscow, 1988).

The first president of the Petersburg society was Aleksandr Rezanov, a prominent architect and, from 1871, rector of the Imperial Academy of Arts. In 1872 the Petersburg society initiated the journal Zodchii (Architect). For forty-five years, until the end of 1917, this publication not only served as a record of the architectural profession throughout Russia but also provided a conduit for technical information and ideas developed in Russia, as well as in Europe and the United States. For information on the founding of the societies and of various architectural journals, see Iu. S. Iaralov, ed., 100 let obshchestvennykh arkhitekturnykh organizatsii v SSSR, 1867-1967 (Moscow, 1967). See also V. Shreter, "K istorii S-Peterburgskogo Obshcestva Arkhitektorov," Zodchii , 1894, no. 5:35-37; and L. N. Benois and M. F. Geisler, "25-letie osnovaniia S-Peterburgskogo Obshchestva Arkhitektorov," Zodchii , 1895, no. 11:82-90.

3. See Joan Bassin, Architectural Competitions in Nineteenth-Century England (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1984), pp. 4-12, for a discussion of the professionalization of English architecture during the nineteenth century. Although English economic and social structures differ greatly from the Russian, a professional identity among architects developed similarly in the two countries—in both cases because of rapid economic and industrial growth. See also Barrington Kaye, The Development of the Architectural Profession in Britain: A Sociological Study (London, 1960).

4. Robert Macleod notes this (sometimes creative) confusion in nineteenth-century British architecture in Style and Society: Architectural Ideology in Britain, 1835-1914 (London, 1971). His interpretation of the effects of professionalism and a market economy on architecture in Britain amplifies that of Bassin (see pp. 123-26). See also Bassin, pp. 6-7, on the patronage of "corporate groups" in the expansion of architectural opportunity.

5. Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 168-72, discusses the interrelation of social change and architectural development in Russia during the latter half of the century. For a study of the impact of industrial development on the urban setting, see James H. Bater, "The Industrialization of Moscow and St. Petersburg" in Studies in Russian Historical Geography , ed. James H. Bater and R. A. French (London, 1983), pp. 279-303.

6. For a detailed survey of developments in Russian construction technology during the nineteenth century, see M. A. Kozlovskaia, "Razvitie nauchno-tekhnicheskoi bazy arkhitektury i stroitel'stva" in Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma v russkom zodchestve XIX-nachala XX vv. , ed. Iu. C. Lebedev (Moscow, 1977), pp. 12-40. The 1872 Moscow Polytechnical Exhibition, presented as part of the bicentennial observance of Peter the Great's birth, is a landmark in Russian cultural history, with ramifications for both the arts and technology. Its sponsor, the Society of Lovers of the Natural Sciences, Anthropology, and Ethnography, arranged for some twelve thousand exhibits at sites throughout Moscow, many of which became the basis of collections continue

at the Polytechnical Museum and the Historical Museum in Moscow. In the architectural section, sponsored by the Moscow Architectural Society, models of major monuments and architectural documents from both Petersburg and Moscow were displayed. In addition, the exhibition also featured new construction technology. See Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 155-57; and Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, Moskva na rubezhe dvukh stoletii (Moscow, 1977), p. 26. For a detailed contemporary account, see V. Kuroedov, "Obzor arkhitekturnoi chasti politekhnicheskoi vystavki v Moskve," Zodchii , 1872, no. 7:105-12; and no. 8:139-42.

7. In Russia the symbol of the progressive union of technology and architecture was Joseph Paxton's Crystal Palace. Although the enormous glass and iron hall, built in 1851 for London's Great Exhibition, was for Dostoevskii during the 1860s the emblem of a soulless, dehumanized modern society, Vladimir Stasov, one of the most influential Russian cultural critics, praised the structure (and the country that produced it) for breaking courageously with the lifeless principles of the classical Renaissance style and for asserting the primacy of architecture among the arts in the modern age. Stasov expressed these views, at varying length, in a number of articles, culminating in the section on architecture in his survey of nineteenth-century European art Iskusstvo XIX veka , first published in a special issue of the journal Niva in 1901 and subsequently expanded before his death in 1906. See V. V. Stasov, Izbrannye sochineniia v trekh tomakh (Moscow, 1952), 3:499-502. Evgeniia I. Kirichenko appraises Stasov's architectural criticism in the latter part of the nineteenth century in Russkaia arkhitektura 1830-1910-kh godov (Moscow, 1978), pp. 124-25.

8. Iu. S. Iaralov, ed., 100 let , p. 12; and Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 309-10.

9. The connections with German schools were most closely developed. Two prominent architects teaching at the Academy of Arts in Petersburg were educated in Germany: Ludwig Bonstedt (1822-1885) at the Bauakademie and the Berlin Academy of Arts; and Harold Bosse (1812-1894) in Darmstadt. Although born in Petersburg, Bonstedt left Russia for Germany in 1863, after five years as a professor at the Petersburg Academy of Arts. In 1872 he won first prize in the competition for the design of the Reichstag, but his design was not built. See the biographical sketch by V. S. Shreter in Zodchii , 1872, no. 5:112-14; and the obituary, also by Shreter, in Zodchii , 1886, no. 1:1-3. A contemporary gives a brief account of Bosse's work in Zodchii , 1894, no. 12:91; see also. V. Andreev," G. E. Bosse—arkhitektornovator," Arkhitektura SSSR , 1988, no. 1:88-95.

10. An excellent Soviet study of nineteenth-century industrial architecture is A. L. Punin's Arkhitekturnye pamiatniki Peterburga: Vtoraia polovina XIX veka (Leningrad, 1981), particularly pp. 63-92; the impact of Joseph Paxton's Crystal Palace is noted on p. 75. See also two essays in Lebedev, Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma : N. A. Smurova, "Inzhenernye sooruzheniia i ikh vliianie na razvitie russkoi khudozhestvennoi kul'tury" (with particular emphasis on the work of Vladimir Shukhov), pp. 60-93; and Iu. P. Volchok, "Stanovlenie novykh tektonicheskikh sistem v promyshlennoi arkhitekture," pp. 94-126.

11. See B. M. Kochakov, ed., Ocherki istorii Leningrada , vol. 2, Period kapitalizma (Moscow-Leningrad, 1957), p. 173, for precise data and sources.

12. For examples of the poverty and overcrowding in Moscow, see Joseph Bradley, Muzhik and Muscovite: Urbanization in Late Imperial Russia (Berkeley, 1985), pp. 55-60 passim. See also James H. Bater, "Modernization and Municipality: Moscow and St. Petersburg on the Eve of the Great War," in Bater and French, 2:305-27.

13. Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar ' (Petersburg, 1900), s.v. "Sankt-Peterburg."

14. For a contemporary report on the palace, including a cost analysis, see "Dom E. I. V. Velikogo Kniazia Vladimira Aleksandrovicha," Zodchii , no. 3:41-42; nos. 4-5:63-64; and nos. 7-8:89-90. Zodchii also included detailed drawings and plans of the structure (which the editors call a house) in the volumes for 1875 and 1878.

15. Punin, Arkhitekturnye pamiatniki Peterburga , p. 166.

16. Ibid., p. 169. For a biography of Karl Rachau (1830-1880) and illustrations of several of his buildings, see "K. K. Rachau," Zodchii , 1882, no. 1:12-13.

15. Punin, Arkhitekturnye pamiatniki Peterburga , p. 166.

16. Ibid., p. 169. For a biography of Karl Rachau (1830-1880) and illustrations of several of his buildings, see "K. K. Rachau," Zodchii , 1882, no. 1:12-13.

17. F. M. Dostoevskii, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh (Leningrad, 1980), 21:106.

18. Ibid., p. 107.

17. F. M. Dostoevskii, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh (Leningrad, 1980), 21:106.

18. Ibid., p. 107.

19. Borisova places the origins of this relation between public opinion and architecture to the period 1830-1850, during which the periodical press in Russia (above all, the newspapers) increasingly scrutinized the built environment, both descriptively and prescriptively. See Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 15.

20. Before the publication of Zodchii in 1872, the most frequent and detailed commentary on architecture in Russia appeared in Khudozhestvennnia gazeta (Art gazette), founded in 1836. The issues from the early 1840s help to pinpoint the beginnings of the speculative building rush in Petersburg, although the activity of that period was modest in comparison with the boom of the 1860s and subsequent decades.

21. I. Merts, "Iz Pamiatnoi knizhki" Zodchii , 1875, no. 2:20.

22. "Dom F. L. Guna v S-Peterburge," Zodchii , 1875, nos. 7-8:91.

23. From "Khronika," Zodchii , 1875, no. 10:118.

24. This passage appeared in the introduction to "Nasha arkhitektura," the third section in Stasov's four-part survey of the arts in Russia during the reign of Alexander II, "Dvadtsat' piat' let russkogo iskusstva," first published dur- soft

ing 1882 and 1883 in the journal Vestnik Evropy . Quoted from Stasov, Izbrannye sochineniia v trekh tomakh , 2:499. In the same article Stasov writes approvingly of attempts to create a Russian national style in architecture, even though such attempts were a part of the eclecticism that he criticized.

25. "Khronika," Zodchii , 1875, no. 10:119.

26. V. Kuroedov, "Berlinskaia arkhitektura. Putevye zametki," Zodchii , 1876, no. 7:79.

27. Population figures are from Akademiia Nauk SSSR, Institut Istorii, Istoriia Moskvy , vol. 4, Period promyshlennogo kapitalizma (Moscow, 1954), p. 227. The same volume also has extensive information on the economic growth of Moscow during the latter part of the nineteenth century.

28. For a description of the Porokhovshchikov house, see D. Liushin, "Dereviannyi dom g-na Porokhovshchikova," Zodchii , 1872, no. 2:16. This volume also contains a plan and architectural drawings of the structure.

29. On the involvement of Moscow's merchants in PanSlavism (with specific reference to Porokhovshchikov), see Thomas Owen, Capitalism and Politics in Russia: A Social History of the Moscow Merchants, 1855-1905 (New York, 1981), pp. 89-93.

30. "Moskovskie zametki," Golos , 1875, no. 235:1 (quoted in Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 294).

31. For a detailed analysis of the competition process for the design of the Historical Museum, see E. I. Kirichenko, Moskva na rubezhe , pp. 36-39, and "The Historical Museum: A Moscow Design Competition, 1875-83," in Uses of Tradition in Russian and Soviet Architecture , ed. Catherine Cooke (London, 1987), pp. 24-26. In their programmatic statement The Sense and Meaning of the [Historical] Museum (1873), A. S. Uvarov and I. E. Zabelin noted: "The path that neglects history has never led to good. . . . A people wishing to achieve greatness must know its history, under the pain of ceasing to be a great people. . . . Museums are one of the most powerful means for the achievement of a people's self-awareness—the highest goal of history." Quoted in E. I. Kirichenko, "Arkhitektor V. O. Shervud i ego teoreticheskikh vozzreniia," Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo 22 (1974): 4.

32. Lev Dahl's views on Russian architecture, in particular, his belief that a revived Russian style would be compatible with the demands of "rational architecture," are summarized in T. A. Slavina, Issledovateli russkogo zodchestva (Leningrad, 1983), pp. 102-4.

33. For excerpts from Shervud's notebooks, see V. Voropaev, "'Menia ochen' zanimal Gogol' . . . ': Iz 'Zapisok' V. O. Shervuda," Literaturnaia gazeta , 9 April 1986, p. 6. The notebooks are in the Manuscript Division of the Lenin Library in Moscow. In her article on Shervud, Evgeniia I. Kirichenko gives a detailed analysis of his effort to establish a scientific basis for a Russian architectural style, exemplified by the design of the Historical Museum. To rise above historically based decorative detail in forming a national style proved difficult, if not impossible. In a letter of May 1874 to the historian Ivan Zabelin, Shervud complained that his preliminary designs for the museum produced only "nice architectural houses for a wealthy client or, even more, for provincial city halls" ("Arkhitektor V. O. Shervud i ego teoreticheskie vozzreniia," pp. 3-7).

34. Ropet's work and his view of the role of historical interpretation in architecture are discussed in Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, "Arkhitektor I. P. Ropet," Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo 20 (1972): 85-93. Despite Ropet's attempt to incorporate stylistic features of Russian vernacular architecture into his work, Kirichenko notes that his use of the "Russian style" was not antithetical to eclecticism but rather another eclectic manifestation (p. 87). Reproductions of the designs of both Hartman and Ropet were included in a series of illustrated volumes entitled Motivy russkoi arkhitektury (Petersburg, n.d. [apparently 1890s]). See particularly vol. 2, for the year 1875.

35. See Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, "Istorizm myshleniia i tip muzeinogo zdaniia v russkoi arkhitekture serediny i vtoroi poloviny XIX v.," in Vzaimosviaz' iskusstv v khudozhestvennom razvitii Rossii vtoroi poloviny XIX v. , ed. G. Iu. Sternin (Moscow, 1982), pp. 135-42.

36. On the competition for the Polytechnic Museum project, see Kirichenko, Moskva na rubezhe , p. 48. Although Nikolai Shokhin (1819-1895), who graduated from the architectural school attached to the Kremlin Court Office, had extensive experience in restoring medieval Russian monuments in the Kremlin and elsewhere in Moscow, his original design for the museum was Italianate. Monighetti redesigned the facades in the Russian style.

37. V. Shreter, "Dom V. F. Shtrausa v S-Peterburge," Zodchii , 1874, no. 12:145-47, with illustrations.

38. V. Shreter, "Obyvatel'skii dom i fabrika shelkovykh izdelii A. I. Nissena," Zodchii , 1873, no. 2:139.

39. I. S. Kitner, "Kirpichnaia arkhitektura," Zodchii , 1872, no. 6:84. For the role of Ieronim Kitner and of his sons Maksim and Richard in the architectural profession in Petersburg, see Iu. I. Kitner, "Dinastiia arkhitektorov," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1978, no. 4:24-25.

40. V. P. Kuroedov, "Berlinskaia arkhitektura. Putevye zametki," Zodchii , 1876, no. 7:79.

41. A. Krasovskii, Grazhdanskaia arkhitektura (Petersburg, 1886), pp. 5, 12. For further work on Krasovskii, see A. L. Punin, "Idei ratsionalizma v russkoi arkhitekture vtoroi poloviny XIX veka," Arkhitektura SSSR , 1962, no. 11:55-58. An assessment of Krasovskii's work by his contemporaries is contained in his obituary in Zodchii , 1875, no. 9:102-3.

42. Krasovskii, Grazhdanskaia arkhitektura , pp. 27-29.

43. N. V. Sultanov, "Odna iz zadach stroitel'nogo uchilishche," Zodchii , 1882, no. 5:71. break

44. Krasovskii, Grazhdanskaia arkhitektura , p. 11. Sultanov's debt to Krasovskii on this issue is discussed in Slavina, Issledovateli russkogo zodchestva , p. 145.

45. S. Zosimovskii, "Po povodu rechi grazhdanskogo inzhenera Sultanova 'Odna iz zadach stroitel'nogo uchilishcha'," Zodchii , 1882, no. 6:85.

46. Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar ' (St. Petersburg, 1890), s.v. "Akademiia Iskusstv."

47. Valerii G. Isachenko, et al., Arkhitektory-stroiteli Peterburga-Petrograda nachala XX veka (Leningrad, 1982), pp. 4-5. For a more detailed description of the architecture program at the Academy of Arts, see K. N. Afanas'ev, A. V. Shchusev (Moscow, 1978), pp. 181-82.

48. Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar ' (Petersburg, 1894), s.v. "Institut grazhdanskikh inzhenerov imp Nikolaia I." For a recent Soviet account of the institute, see Nina Smurova, "Arkhitekturnaia shkola Instituta grazhdanskikh inzhenerov," in Problemy istorii sovetskoi arkhitektury , ed. A. A. Strigaleva (Moscow, 1985), pp. 31-41.

49. Institutional affiliations are derived from the listing of architects in V. G. Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli .

50. Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 308.

51. N. A. Dmitrieva, Moskovskoe uchilishche zhivopisi, vaianiia, i zodchestva (Moscow, 1951).

52. For comments on the professional function of the competition system in British architecture, see Bassin, Architectural Competitions in Nineteenth-Century England , pp. 9, 13-16. The parallel phenomenon in Russia is examined by Nina Smurova, "Organizatsiia konkursnogo dela v Rossii," in Problemy istorii sovetskoi arkhitektury (Moscow, 1983), pp. 14-21.

53. The career of Leontii Benois (1856-1928) as both architect and pedagogue is surveyed in V. G. Lisovskii and L. A. Iudina, "Zamechatel'nyi zodchii i pedagog," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1979, no. 2:35-38.

54. See Kirichenko, Moskva na rubezhe , pp. 41-42, with references to archival sources on the design competition for the Upper Trading Rows.

55. A brief sketch of the architectural evolution of the passage in Petersburg is presented in Punin, Arkhitekturnye pamiatniki Peterburga , pp. 97-100; see also Lebedev, Kontruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma , pp. 143-57. For the larger context of iron and glass galleries and halls in Britain and France, see Bassin, Architectural Competitions in Nineteenth-Century England , pp. 65-66.

56. Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 306. Detailed photographs of the old trading rows, as well as a history of the construction of the new building for the Upper Trading Rows appeared in the album Torgovye riady na Krasnoi ploshchadi v Mokve (Kiev, 1893).

57. I. P. Mashkov, ed., Putevoditel' po Moskve (Moscow, 1913), pp. 259-62. A description and detailed plan of the Upper Trading Rows are also contained in A. I. Komech, ed., Pamiatniki arkhitektury Moskvy , 2d ed. (Moscow, 1983), pp. 404-5.

58. The Bavarian Otto Krel's contributions to the development of technical resources for Russian architecture and civil engineering are chronicled in his obituary in Zodchii , 1914, no. 14:165-66.

59. For an account of Shukhov's trip to the United States, see G. M. Kovelman's biographical study Tvorchestvo pochetnogo akademika inzhenera Vladimira Grigorevicha Shukhova (Moscow, 1961), pp. 16-19. The growing Russian interest in American architecture and construction technology is exemplified by Sergei Kuleshov's extensive travel account "Eskizy amerikanskoi arkhitektury i tekhniki," Zodchii , 1877, no. 4:32-34; nos. 5-6:48-56; nos. 11-12:100-105; (1878), no. 1:1-8. See also William Craft Brumfield, "Russian Perceptions of American Architecture, 1870-1917," in Architecture and the New Urban Environment: Western Influences on Modernism in Russia and the USSR (Washington, D. C., 1988), pp. 54-57. Shukhov's work at the 1896 Nizhni Novgorod exhibition is illustrated in Vidy robot proizvedennykh stroitel'noi firmy Bari na vserossiiskoi vystavke 1896 v N. Novgorode (Moscow, 1896). See also Nina Smurova, "Arkhitekturno-stroitel'nye dostizheniia Vserossiiskoi vystavki 1896 g. i ee rol' v razvitii otechestvennoi arkhitektury," in Problemy istorii sovetskoi arkhitektury (Moscow, 1976), 2:14-19.

60. Fedor Shekhtel and Karl Shmidt are among the apprentice architects who, according to various sources, worked on the Upper Trading Rows project.

61. Smirnova surveys Klein's life and work in the chapter "R. Klein," in Zodchie Moskvy: XV-XIX vv. , ed. Iu. S. Iaralov and S. M. Zemtsov (Moscow: 1981), pp. 288-300.

62. A photograph of the Vikula Morozov building, designed by Aleksandr Ivanov, appeared in Zodchii , 1899, plate 21. The Khludov emporium, designed in a similar Beaux-Arts style by Lev Kekushev, appeared in Arkhitekturnye motivy , 1899, no. 1, plate 1.

63. Rezanov's article "Proekt zdanii gorodskoi dumy v Moskve," Zodchii , 1876, nos. 8-9:93-94, summarizes his original design for the Duma. Although Rezanov's project was not chosen in the final competition, his design for the facade was more original than that in Chichagov's final proposal. Rezanov's drawing of the main facade appeared in Zodchii , 1876, plate 36 (plate 18 shows the ground plan); his revised version of the facade—co-designed with Andrei Gun—was published in Zodchii , 1888, plate 58.

64. Kirichenko, Moskva na rubezhe , p. 47.

65. The 1882 volume of Zodchii contains excellent illustrations of competition designs (four prizes and one honorable mention by architects including Kitner and Gun, Leontii continue

Benois, Shreter, and Ivan Bogomolov), none of which resemble the Russian style eventually chosen.

66. Parland's detailed self-justifying account of the design and construction of the Church of the Resurrection appeared in Zodchii , 1907, no. 35:374-78, with illustrations. The church was also the subject of a lavishly produced brochure, with plans and architectural drawings: Kratkii otchet o postroike Khrama Voskreseniia Khristova sooruzhennogo na meste smertel'nogo poraneniia v Boze pochivshiego Imperatora Alekandra II (Petersburg, 1907).

67. A report on the mosaic work of A. A. Frolov (including the Church of the Resurrection) is contained in Nedelia stroitelia (Builders' weekly, the supplement to Zodchii ), 1900, no. 29:180-82. Frolov also did designs for secular structures, including mosaic panels for the Upper Trading Rows. A partial listing of these projects is contained in the obituary "A. A. Frolov," Stroitel' , 1897, nos. 13-14:539-40.

68. For a commentary on Mamontov's transformation of Abramtsevo, see G. Iu. Sternin, "Abramtsevo: ot 'usad'by' k 'dacha'," in Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura vtoroi poloviny XIX-nachala XX veka (Moscow, 1984), pp. 187-88. See also E. R. Arenzon, "Ot Kireeva do Abramtseva: K biografii Savvy Ivanovicha Mamontova, 1841-1918," Panorama iskusstv 6 (1986):359-82.

69. Sternin, "Abramtsevo," p. 198; Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 256-57. Natalia Polenova's account is presented in her Abramtsevo: vospominaniia (Moscow, 1922), pp. 30-43.

70. Reproductions of project sketches by Polenov and Vasnetsov appear in Polenova, pp. 33, 35, and 36. Polenov's drawing reflects the Church of the Savior on the Nereditsa in the nineteenth century, when it looked different (particularly in the roofline) from the present church, which is based on a turn-of-the-century reconstruction.

71. For a detailed account of the design of the Abramtsevo church, see N. V. Masalina, "Tserkov' v Abramtseve," in Iz istorii russkogo iskusstva vtoroi poloviny XIX-nachala XX veka , ed. Elena A. Borisova (Moscow, 1978), pp. 47-58.

72. For a history of the subsequent development of the Abramtsevo ceramics workshop into a commercial enterprise located in Moscow, see E. R. Arenzon, "'Abramtsevo' v Moskve. K istorii khudozhestvenno-keramicheskogo predpriiatiia S. I. Mamontova," in Muzei 10 , ed. A. S. Loginova (Moscow, 1989), pp. 95-103.

73. In a letter to Elena Polenova, 4 January 1895. See V. V. Stasov, Pis'ma k deiateliam russkoi kul'tury (Moscow, 1967), 2:58-59. A subsequent, and more favorable, assessment of the Abramtsevo church appeared in Stasov's article "Viktor Mikhailovich Vasnetsov i ego raboty," Iskusstvo i khudozhestvennaia promyshlennost ', 1898, nos. 1-2:65-97; and no. 3:137-83 (see particularly p. 165).

74. Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 1 (1906), pp. 15 (exterior) and 110 (interior).

75. Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 264.

76. Pavel Siuzor, in Trudy I s"ezda russkikh zodchikh , p. xii. For a detailed commentary on the prerevolutionary architectural congresses (albeit with a Marxist critical bias), see N. I. Sokolova, "Arkhitekturnye s"ezdy v Rossii," Akademiia arkhitektury 3 (1935): 63-71.

77. Robert Gedike, "Rech' predsedatelia 1-go otdela," in Trudy I , pp. 1-2.

78. Konstantin Bykovskii, "O znachenii izucheniia drevnikh pamiatnikov dlia sovremennogo zodchestva," in Trudy I , p. 5.

79. Ibid., pp. 13-14.

78. Konstantin Bykovskii, "O znachenii izucheniia drevnikh pamiatnikov dlia sovremennogo zodchestva," in Trudy I , p. 5.

79. Ibid., pp. 13-14.

80. Ieronim Kitner, "O ponizhenii tarifa na provoz estestvennogo kamnia po vsem russkim zheleznym dorogam," in Trudy I , p. 248.

81. V. O. Shervud, Opyt issledovaniia zakonov iskusstva: Zhivopis', skul'ptura, arkhitektura, i ornamentika (Moscow, 1895), pp. 129-30. For a detailed analysis of Shervud's treatise in its intellectual and historiographic context, see E. I. Kirichenko, "Arkhitektor, V. O. Shervud i ego teoreticheskie vozzreniia," Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo 22 (1974):7-18.

82. Shervud, Opyt issledovaniia zakonov iskusstva , p. 126.

83. Eugène Viollet-le-Duc, Russkoe iskusstvo: Ego istochniki, ego sostavnye elementy, ego vyshee razvitie, ego budushchee (Moscow, 1879), p. 187. For an analysis of Viollet-le-Duc's influence in Russia, see Robin Middleton, "Viollet-le-Ducsky?" Architectural Design , February 1970:76-78; and Catherine Cooke, "Russian Perspectives," in Eugène Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc, 1814-1879 (London, 1980), pp. 60-63.

84. N. V. Sultanov, "Russkoe zodchestvo v zapadnoi otsenke. V," Zodchii , 1880, no. 12:104-6. See also Slavina, Issledovateli russkogo zodchestva , p. 79.

85. The English notion of a revived indigenous architecture from medieval sources is exemplified by the following comments of George Gilbert Scott, from Remarks on Domestic and Secular Architecture, Present and Future (London, 1857), p. 111:

I want . . . to show the public that we aim not at a dead antiquarian revival, but at developing upon the basis of the indigenous architecture of our own country, a style which will be pre-eminently that of our own age, and will naturally, readily, and with right good will and heartiness, meet all its requirements, and embrace all its arts, improvements, and inventions.

Macleod quotes this passage in Style and Society , pp. 18-19, which has numerous references to the broader question of continue

architecture and national identity in nineteenth-century Britain.

86. Konstantin Bykovskii, "Zadachi arkhitektury XIX veka," in Trudy II s"ezda russkikh arkhitektorov , p. 18.

87. Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 259. For a concise, lucid discussion of the relation between eclectic architecture and other semiotic systems, see her "Znak stilia," Arkhitektura SSSR , 1984, no. 1:21-22.

88. Bykovskii, "Zadachi arkhitektury XIX veka," in Trudy II , p. 18.

89. The convoluted German prose of this passage, printed entirely in capitals in the original, reads "Dieser Neustil, die Moderne, wird, um uns und unsere Zeit zu repräsentieren, eine deutliche Änderung des bisherigen Empfindens, den beinahe volligen Niedergang der Romantik und das fast alles usurpierende Hervortreten der Zweckerfullung bei allen unseren Werken deutlich zum Ausdrucke bringen müssen." From Die Baukunst unserer Zeit (Vienna, 1914), p. 41. Despite the change in title, this work is the fourth printing of Die moderne Architektur , with a new foreword.

90. See Heinz Geretsegger and Max Peintner, Otto Wagner, 1841-1918 (Salzburg, 1964), pp. 11-14.

91. "Als grober Fehler wird es immer zu bezeichnen sein, einem favorisierten Aussenmotiv die verlangte Innenstruktur anzupassen oder gar diesbezüglich Opfer zu bringen. Die Lüge ist dann unvermeidlich and widrig wie diese wirkt die daraus resultierende Form" (Otto Wagner, Die moderne Architektur , 3d ed. [Vienna, 1902]).

1. Detailed publication data on Zodchii and other architectural journals of the period can be found in the four volumes of L. N. Beliaeva, ed., Bibliografiia periodicheskikh izdanii Rossii, 1901-1916 (Leningrad, 1961).

2. The practical emphasis of Stroitel ' is indicated by its subtitle: "Messenger of Architecture, Homeowning, and Sanitary Building." Although Zodchii devoted some attention to the problem of workers' housing toward the end of the nineteenth century, Stroitel ' was the first Russian journal to show a sustained concern, with its surveys (in 1895 and 1896) of solutions in more advanced industrial countries and its extensive report on the project competition for workers' housing at the Petersburg factory of the Russian-American Rubber Company. See "Koloniia rabochikh pri fabrike t-va Rossiisko-Amenkanskoi resinovoi manufaktury, v S.-Peterburge," Stroitel ', 1897, nos. 9-10:321-54.

3. Arkhitekturnye motivy , no. 6 (February-March 1901):18, advertising supplement.

4. For a discussion of the term "style moderne" as applied to design and architecture in Europe at the turn of the century, see Stephan Tschudi Madsen, Sources of Art Nouveau (rpt. New York, 1976), pp. 76-82. During the same period the term was also used in the visual arts by Russian critics such as Igor Grabar'. The development of the style moderne in France and its relation to the late nineteenth-century political alliance between France and Russia are examined in Debora L. Silverman, Art Nouveau in Fin-de-Siècle France: Politics, Psychology, and Style (Berkeley, 1989), pp. 159-85.

5. The most comprehensive history of the journal is N. P. Lapshina, " Mir iskusstva " (Moscow, 1976), copiously documented with the reminiscences—from published and unpublished sources—by associates of the World of Art movement. Of particular significance are the two volumes of memoirs by Aleksandr Benois, Zhizn' khudozhnika: Vospominaniia (New York, 1955). The World of Art movement and the journal are also the subjects of extensive monographs by two Western scholars: Janet Kennedy, The "Mir iskusstva Group and Russian Art, 1898-1912 (New York, 1977); and John E. Bowlt, The Silver Age: Russian Art of the Early Twentieth Century and the "World of Art" Group , 2d ed. (Newtonville, Mass., 1982).

6. A notice of the first meeting of the Society of Architect-Artists appeared in Zodchii , 1904, no. 2:11.

7. G. Ravich, "Besedy stroitelia," Stroitel ', 1899, nos. 11-12:411-46.

8. Ibid., pp. 435-46.

7. G. Ravich, "Besedy stroitelia," Stroitel ', 1899, nos. 11-12:411-46.

8. Ibid., pp. 435-46.

9. "Novye veianiia v arkhitekture," Nedelia stroitelia, 1899 , no. 42:303.

10. Signed "O. E-i," "Eshche raz po povodu novykh veiianii v arkhitekture," Nedelia stroitelia , 1899, no. 45:319-20.

11. V. Shmor, "V bor'be za iskusstvo," Zodchii , 1900, no. 3:30-33; no. 4:46-47.

12. "Premirovannyi proekt universiteta v Berkli Kaliforniia," Zodchii , 1900, no. 4:37-38.

13. A. G. Uspenskii, "Neskol'ko slov ob angliiskoi narodnoi arkhitekture," Zodchii , 1900, no. 4:47-52. The article was taken from a lecture delivered to the Petersburg Society of Architects on 1 February 1900.

14. P[avel] Marseru, "Prikladnye khudozhestva na vsemirnoi vystavke 1900 goda," Zodchii , 1901, no. 8:104-14; no. 9:116-24; no. 10:127-33.

15. "Novyi stil' i dekadentstvo," Zodchii , 1902, no. 6:65-70; no. 8:89-92; no. 9:101-5. The passage quoted appears on page 66. The series of articles was signed "P. M-v," but the author's identity is clear from information provided in the entry on Pavel Makarov in Valern G. Isachenko, et al., Arkhitektory-stroiteli Peterburga-Petrograda nachala XX veka (Leningrad, 1982), p. 91.

16. Zodchii , 1902, no. 8:89-92.

17. Zodchii , 1902, no. 9:101-5.

18. Ibid., p. 105. break

19. Ibid.

17. Zodchii , 1902, no. 9:101-5.

18. Ibid., p. 105. break

19. Ibid.

17. Zodchii , 1902, no. 9:101-5.

18. Ibid., p. 105. break

19. Ibid.

20. Pavel Makarov, "Novye obshchestvennye zdaniia v Londone," Zodchii , 1902, no. 14:169-71.

21. Aleksandr Benois, "Zhivopisnyi Peterburg," Mir iskusstva , 1902, no. 1:1-5.

22. Pavel Makarov, "Arkhitekturnye mechtaniia," Zodchii , 1902, no. 13:161. Benois responded with further statements on the relevance of Petersburg's architectural past to the needs of the present in "Arkhitektura Peterburga," Mir iskusstva , 1902, no. 4:82-85; and "Krasota Peterburga," Mir iskusstva , 1902, no. 8:138-42. It has been noted, however, that even Benois was not consistently negative in his approach to modern European design. See Lapshina, " Mir iskusstva ," pp. 70-71.

23. "Novoe v iskusstve," Zodchii , 1902, no. 18:213-15. The article is signed "E. S."

24. See, for example, A. Dmitriev, "Iz inostrannykh arkhitekturnykh zhurnalov," Zodchii , 1902, no. 12:143-45, for a report on the contents and editorial direction of Architektonische Rundschau and Berliner Architekturwelt .

25. "Arkhitektor i dekorator Iosif Gofman," Zodchii , 1902, no. 23:263-64.

26. "Darmstadtskaia vystavka 1901 goda," Zodchii , 1902, no. 33:371-74; no. 34:379-82.

27. Evgenii Baumgarten, "Sovremennaia arkhitektura," Zodchii , 1902, no. 48:543-47; no. 49:556-60; no. 50:567-71. The passage quoted appears on p. 545.

28. Ibid., p. 558. Wagner's phrase "Etwas unpraktisches kann nicht schön sein" appears in Die moderne Architektur , 3d ed. (Vienna, 1902), p. 70.

27. Evgenii Baumgarten, "Sovremennaia arkhitektura," Zodchii , 1902, no. 48:543-47; no. 49:556-60; no. 50:567-71. The passage quoted appears on p. 545.

28. Ibid., p. 558. Wagner's phrase "Etwas unpraktisches kann nicht schön sein" appears in Die moderne Architektur , 3d ed. (Vienna, 1902), p. 70.

29. Baumgarten, "Sovremennaia arkhitektura," p. 571.

30. Ivan Volodikhin, "Zadachi arkhitekturnoi estetiki," Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1902, no. 1:2-3; no. 3:23. The passage quoted appears on p. 3.

31. Ibid., p. 23. Noting that the conclusion to Volodikhin's article was never published, "for reasons not dependent on the editorial board," Kazhdan suggests that Volodikhin's revolutionary rhetoric may have been cut by the censor (Tatiana P. Kazhdan, "Arkhitektura i arkhitekturnaia zhizn' Rossii kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka," in Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka , 1895-1907, ed. A. D. Alekseeva [Moscow, 1969], 2:275, n. 1) .

30. Ivan Volodikhin, "Zadachi arkhitekturnoi estetiki," Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1902, no. 1:2-3; no. 3:23. The passage quoted appears on p. 3.

31. Ibid., p. 23. Noting that the conclusion to Volodikhin's article was never published, "for reasons not dependent on the editorial board," Kazhdan suggests that Volodikhin's revolutionary rhetoric may have been cut by the censor (Tatiana P. Kazhdan, "Arkhitektura i arkhitekturnaia zhizn' Rossii kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka," in Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka , 1895-1907, ed. A. D. Alekseeva [Moscow, 1969], 2:275, n. 1) .

32. Obshchestvo i khudozhestvennaia arkhitektura," Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1902, no. 3:24-25, no. 4:33-34, no. 5:43-45; no. 6:54-57. The reference to Ruskin is on p. 24.

33. "Novyi stil'," Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1903, no. 2:25-28; no. 3:45-47. The passage quoted is from p. 28. The first issue of this journal contained an essay on William Morris, "The Rebirth of Decorative Art," by Zinaida Vengerova; the second issue contained a report on Scottish artists, the MacDonald sisters; and the third, final, issue informed readers about the latest Arts and Crafts exhibit in London.

34. Ibid., pp. 45-47.

33. "Novyi stil'," Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1903, no. 2:25-28; no. 3:45-47. The passage quoted is from p. 28. The first issue of this journal contained an essay on William Morris, "The Rebirth of Decorative Art," by Zinaida Vengerova; the second issue contained a report on Scottish artists, the MacDonald sisters; and the third, final, issue informed readers about the latest Arts and Crafts exhibit in London.

34. Ibid., pp. 45-47.

35. S[ergei] Diagilev, "Vystavki arkhitekturnaia i '36-ti,'" Mir iskusstva , 1903, no. 1:8-10.

36. The photographs of the Moscow exhibit appeared in Mir iskusstva , 1903, no. 3. Windyhill, a house built by Mackintosh in 1899-1901, was featured in a series of photographs reproduced from a 1902 issue of Die Kunst . See Mir iskusstva , 1903, no. 12.

37. A. Mikhailov, author of "Ist zu wienerisch," wrote that Fomin's interior design represented the "caprice of a strange artist who interprets the dining room of a wealthy home as a place for torturing raving lunatics" ( Iskusstvo stroitel'noe i dekorativnoe , 1903, no. 3:20; quoted in Elena A. Borisova and Tatiana P. Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka [Moscow, 1971], p. 228, n. 4).

38. Vladislav Karpovich, "Arkhitektura i khudozhestvenno-promyshlennaia vystavka v Moskve," Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1903, no. 2:31-32.

39. Aleksandr Dmitriev, "Vpechatleniia ot vystavki 'arkhitektury i khudozhestvennoi promyshlennosti novogo stilia v Moskve'," Zodchii , 1903, no. 9:113-15. Dmitriev noted chattily, "The participation of Olbrich is explained, in all probability, primarily by the sponsorship of the exhibit by Grand Princess Elizaveta Fedorovna, a native of Darmstadt." See also N. Filianskii, "Po povodu Moskovskoi vystavki," Zodchii , 1903, no. 9:115-18.

40. For a more detailed account of the "Contemporary Art" enterprise and its sponsors, Prince Sergei Shcherbatov and V. V. von Mekk, see Lapshina, " Mir Iskusstva ," pp. 152-61. See also Sergei Shcherbatov, Khudozhnik v ushedshei Rossii (New York, 1955), pp. 148-78. One of the few orders for the atelier furniture displayed at the exhibit came from Shcherbatov himself, who eventually placed the dining room set in his Moscow apartment house, designed by A. Tamanov.

41. Sergei Diagilev, "Sovremennoe iskusstvo," Mir iskusstva , 1903, no. 3:22-24; Evgenii Baumgarten, "Sovremennoe iskusstvo," Zodchii , 1903, no. 16:211-13.

42. The 1904 Moscow exhibit is described briefly in the "Khronika" column of Zodchii , 1904, no. 15:181, with an interesting reference to a carved iconostasis by Fedor Shekhtel.

43. "Khudozhestvenno-arkhitekturnaia vystavka v Akademii Nauk," Zodchii , 1905, no. 10:125-26.

44. Pavel Makarov, "Finliandskoe dekorativnoe iskusstvo," Zodchii , 1903, no. 14:183-87.

45. Aleksandr Dmitriev, "Sovremennoe dekorativnoe iskusstvo," Zodchii , 1903, no. 39:543-57; no. 40:469-71. References to Tiffany and the American crafts appear on p. 455. break

46. "Postroika mnogoetazhnikh domov v Sev. Amerike," Zodchii , 1903, no. 51:605-8.

47. Aleksandr Dmitriev, "Aliuminievyi portal redaktsii 'Die Zeit,'" Zodchii , 1903, no. 29:353.

48. Ivonne d'Axe [pseud.], "Sovremennaia Moskva," Zodchii , 1904, no. 15:177-80; no. 16:189-92; no. 17:201-3; no. 18:213-15. The foreword appears on pp. 177-78. The obvious fiction of "Ivonne d'Axe" has recently been discussed in a brief essay by E. G. Kozlova, "Ocherk Ivon D'Aks 'Sovremennaia Moskva' i ego avtor," F. O. Shekhtel' i problemy istorii russkoi arkhitektury kontsa XIX-nachala XX vekov: Sbornik (Moscow, 1988), pp. 111-14. According to Kozlova, the author must have been closely associated not only with the editorial board of Zodchii in Petersburg but also with Ivan Fomin personally, because his published design sketch for a modern house was later destroyed. Kozlova's candidate is Boris Nikolaev, a prominent Petersburg critic and a participant in the Moscow exhibit of modern design that had been co-organized by Fomin in December 1902. Another possibility is Ivan Apyshkov, also a well-known critic and architect in Petersburg, whose views on Moscow modernism are similar to those expressed in the Zodchii series. (Both Apyshkov's and Nikolaev's writings are discussed later in this chapter. I am grateful to Catherine Cooke for providing the Kozlova article in response to my query). The importance of the Zodchii essays is indicated by their republication a year later as a separate volume Sovremennaia Moskva: Arkhitekturno-kriticheskie ocherki (Petersburg, 1905).

49. d'Axe, "Sovremennaia Moskva," p. 179.

50. Ibid., pp. 189-92, for a survey of the work of Viktor Vasnetsov in Moscow. Kekushev and Walcot are discussed on pp. 201-3.

51. Ibid., p. 215.

49. d'Axe, "Sovremennaia Moskva," p. 179.

50. Ibid., pp. 189-92, for a survey of the work of Viktor Vasnetsov in Moscow. Kekushev and Walcot are discussed on pp. 201-3.

51. Ibid., p. 215.

49. d'Axe, "Sovremennaia Moskva," p. 179.

50. Ibid., pp. 189-92, for a survey of the work of Viktor Vasnetsov in Moscow. Kekushev and Walcot are discussed on pp. 201-3.

51. Ibid., p. 215.

52. Vladimir Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture (Petersburg 1905). On the title page, Apyshkov is identified as a "repetitor" (tutor) at the Nikolaevskii Engineering Academy, and his essay is defined as a "trial lecture for the position of instructor at the academy."

53. Ibid., p. 11.

54. Ibid., pp. 39-42. Apyshkov notes: "The slogan of that artist [Wagner] is the 'transformation of the useful into the beautiful.' It is precisely this direction that A. Krasovskii points to as the true one for architecture" (p. 42). Although Apyshkov stretches the point, in effect he juxtaposes Europe's most prominent spokesman for a rational architecture with a venerated figure in the Russian rationalist tradition.

55. Ibid., p. 54.

56. Ibid., p. 56. In mentioning Bauer, Apyshkov no doubt refers to Bauer's praise of the Eiffel Tower and the bicycle as examples of the perfect union of material and form, and therefore more satisfying aesthetically than the Basilica of St. Peter. According to Apyshkov, Bauer's views are derived from Gottfried Semper, Der stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künster, oder praktische Aesthetik (Munich, 1860-1863).

52. Vladimir Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture (Petersburg 1905). On the title page, Apyshkov is identified as a "repetitor" (tutor) at the Nikolaevskii Engineering Academy, and his essay is defined as a "trial lecture for the position of instructor at the academy."

53. Ibid., p. 11.

54. Ibid., pp. 39-42. Apyshkov notes: "The slogan of that artist [Wagner] is the 'transformation of the useful into the beautiful.' It is precisely this direction that A. Krasovskii points to as the true one for architecture" (p. 42). Although Apyshkov stretches the point, in effect he juxtaposes Europe's most prominent spokesman for a rational architecture with a venerated figure in the Russian rationalist tradition.

55. Ibid., p. 54.

56. Ibid., p. 56. In mentioning Bauer, Apyshkov no doubt refers to Bauer's praise of the Eiffel Tower and the bicycle as examples of the perfect union of material and form, and therefore more satisfying aesthetically than the Basilica of St. Peter. According to Apyshkov, Bauer's views are derived from Gottfried Semper, Der stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künster, oder praktische Aesthetik (Munich, 1860-1863).

52. Vladimir Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture (Petersburg 1905). On the title page, Apyshkov is identified as a "repetitor" (tutor) at the Nikolaevskii Engineering Academy, and his essay is defined as a "trial lecture for the position of instructor at the academy."

53. Ibid., p. 11.

54. Ibid., pp. 39-42. Apyshkov notes: "The slogan of that artist [Wagner] is the 'transformation of the useful into the beautiful.' It is precisely this direction that A. Krasovskii points to as the true one for architecture" (p. 42). Although Apyshkov stretches the point, in effect he juxtaposes Europe's most prominent spokesman for a rational architecture with a venerated figure in the Russian rationalist tradition.

55. Ibid., p. 54.

56. Ibid., p. 56. In mentioning Bauer, Apyshkov no doubt refers to Bauer's praise of the Eiffel Tower and the bicycle as examples of the perfect union of material and form, and therefore more satisfying aesthetically than the Basilica of St. Peter. According to Apyshkov, Bauer's views are derived from Gottfried Semper, Der stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künster, oder praktische Aesthetik (Munich, 1860-1863).

52. Vladimir Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture (Petersburg 1905). On the title page, Apyshkov is identified as a "repetitor" (tutor) at the Nikolaevskii Engineering Academy, and his essay is defined as a "trial lecture for the position of instructor at the academy."

53. Ibid., p. 11.

54. Ibid., pp. 39-42. Apyshkov notes: "The slogan of that artist [Wagner] is the 'transformation of the useful into the beautiful.' It is precisely this direction that A. Krasovskii points to as the true one for architecture" (p. 42). Although Apyshkov stretches the point, in effect he juxtaposes Europe's most prominent spokesman for a rational architecture with a venerated figure in the Russian rationalist tradition.

55. Ibid., p. 54.

56. Ibid., p. 56. In mentioning Bauer, Apyshkov no doubt refers to Bauer's praise of the Eiffel Tower and the bicycle as examples of the perfect union of material and form, and therefore more satisfying aesthetically than the Basilica of St. Peter. According to Apyshkov, Bauer's views are derived from Gottfried Semper, Der stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künster, oder praktische Aesthetik (Munich, 1860-1863).

52. Vladimir Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture (Petersburg 1905). On the title page, Apyshkov is identified as a "repetitor" (tutor) at the Nikolaevskii Engineering Academy, and his essay is defined as a "trial lecture for the position of instructor at the academy."

53. Ibid., p. 11.

54. Ibid., pp. 39-42. Apyshkov notes: "The slogan of that artist [Wagner] is the 'transformation of the useful into the beautiful.' It is precisely this direction that A. Krasovskii points to as the true one for architecture" (p. 42). Although Apyshkov stretches the point, in effect he juxtaposes Europe's most prominent spokesman for a rational architecture with a venerated figure in the Russian rationalist tradition.

55. Ibid., p. 54.

56. Ibid., p. 56. In mentioning Bauer, Apyshkov no doubt refers to Bauer's praise of the Eiffel Tower and the bicycle as examples of the perfect union of material and form, and therefore more satisfying aesthetically than the Basilica of St. Peter. According to Apyshkov, Bauer's views are derived from Gottfried Semper, Der stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künster, oder praktische Aesthetik (Munich, 1860-1863).

57. Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture , p. 58.

58. Ibid., p. 62.

59. Ibid., p. 65.

60. Ibid.

57. Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture , p. 58.

58. Ibid., p. 62.

59. Ibid., p. 65.

60. Ibid.

57. Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture , p. 58.

58. Ibid., p. 62.

59. Ibid., p. 65.

60. Ibid.

57. Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture , p. 58.

58. Ibid., p. 62.

59. Ibid., p. 65.

60. Ibid.

61. Mikhail Syrkin, "Novyi stil'," Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1903, no. 2:27.

62. Boris Nikolaev, "K voprosu ob arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennom obrazovanii," Zodchii , 1905, no. 1:9.

63. Ibid., pp. 11-12.

64. Ibid., p. 11.

62. Boris Nikolaev, "K voprosu ob arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennom obrazovanii," Zodchii , 1905, no. 1:9.

63. Ibid., pp. 11-12.

64. Ibid., p. 11.

62. Boris Nikolaev, "K voprosu ob arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennom obrazovanii," Zodchii , 1905, no. 1:9.

63. Ibid., pp. 11-12.

64. Ibid., p. 11.

65. Boris Nikolaev, Fizicheskie nachala arkhitekturnykh form (Petersburg, 1905), p. 148. (This passage also appeared in his article of the same title in Zodchii , 1906, no. 8:66.)

66. Nikolaev, Fizicheskie nachala arkhitekturnykh form , p. 149.

67. A critical response to Nikolaev's initial article on architectural education appeared the following month: A. Netyska, "Neskol'ko slov po povodu stat'i B. N. Nikolaeva 'K voprosu ob arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennom obrazovanii,'" Zodchii , 1905, no. 8:95-96.

68. Pavel Strakhov, Esteticheskie zadachi tekhniki (Moscow, 1906). For a detailed summary of Strakhov's book, see Vladimir V. Kirillov, Arkhitektura russkogo moderna (Moscow, 1979), p. 35.

69. V. Dadonov, Sotisializm bez politiki: Goroda-sady budushchego v nastoiashchem (Petersburg, 1912).

70. Nikolai Dmitriev, "Zhelezo-beton v primenenii k vysokim sooruzheniiam," Zodchii , 1903, no. 31:369-71.

71. The relation between technology and construction at the turn of the century in Russia is examined in Iu. S. Lebedev, ed., Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma v russkom zodchestve XIX-nachala XX vv (Moscow, 1977), whose bibliography lists numerous prerevolutionary publications on the topic (pp. 170-73). For a survey of articles on American technology and architecture in the Russian press (primarily Zodchii ), see William Craft Brumfield, "Russian Perceptions of American Architecture, 1870-1917," in Architecture and the New Urban Environment: Western Influences on Modernism in Russia and the USSR (Washington, D.C., 1988), pp. 51-70.

72. Aleksei Shchusev, "Mysli o svobode tvorchestva v religioznoi arkhitekture," Zodchii , 1905, no. 11:132-33. break

1. The only reference to medieval monuments at the third congress occurred in Nikolai Sultanov's plea to preserve Russia's ancient architectural heritage: "O neobkhodimosti sokhraneniia nashikh drevnikh pamiatnikov," Trudy III s"ezda russkikh zodchikh (Petersburg, 1905), I:58. The Artistic Section, whose issues had occupied the center of debate in earlier congresses, was represented by only six papers, of which one dealt with Schopenhauer's views on architecture.

2. Alexander Bernardazzi, "Narodnyi muzei budushchego" (The folk museum of the future), Trudy III s"ezda , I:59-62. At the same time that Bernardazzi advocated a union of technology and a new style he was also expressing democratic aspirations by creating for public use great buildings (people's museums) whose scale and function would reinvigorate architecture. The speech was first published at the time of the congress in Zodchii , 1900, no. 8:107.

3. A photograph of the Gausvald dacha appeared in Zodchii , 1900, plate 56. Vladimir Apyshkov mentioned the house as one of the few worthy Russian examples of the new style in his Rational'noe v noveishei arkhitekture (Petersburg, 1905), p. 52.

4. The A. A. Morozov house was photographed frequently as one of Moscow's marvels (see Arkhitckturnye motivy , 1900, no. 3, plate 58). Leo Tolstoi responded to it in a perceptive passage on the economics of conspicuous architectural display in his novel Resurrection (completed in December 1899). At the beginning of part 1, chapter 12, the novel's protagonist, Nekhliudov, rides past it and muses on the absurdity of this "stupid, unnecessary house for some stupid, unnecessary person" who exploits the very workers swarming over the scaffolding. Nekhliudov's cabby objects—"If they're building it, someone must need it"—and observes, unassailably, that the peasants pouring into Moscow from the impoverished villages must have work. The scene is based on Tolstoi's thorough knowledge of the economic dislocation in Russia during the 1890s and its impact on Moscow.

5. Nedelia stroitelia , 1899, no. 28:208-9; see also the supplement of plates on the Metropole in Zodchii of the same year. Interest in the project was so intense that the publisher of Arkhitekturnye motivy , Vladimir Berner, announced the sale of a special album containing the sketches for seven competing designs; by some insight the sketch he chose for his advertisement in the journal (1899, no. 3) was that of Walcot, submitted under the logo "Female Head." Further details of the construction history of the Metropole are provided in V. M. Chekmarev, "Obnovlenie gostinitsy 'Metropol,'" Arkhitektura i stroitel'stvo Moskvy , 1987, no. 6:22-25; and by the same author, "Mir khudozhestvennykh obrazov gostinitsy 'Metropol,'" in Muzei 10 , ed. A. S. Loginova, pp. 35-47.

6. For a discussion of the Walcot houses, see Ivonne d'Axe, "Sovremennaia Moskva" (Contemporary Moscow), Zodchii , 1904, no. 17:201. A survey of Walcot's education and career in Russia is contained in Sergei Romaniuk, "Vil'iam Val'kot (1874-1943)," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Moskvy , 1986, no. 6:24-27.

7. Aleksandr Golovin's designs for the Metropole panels were published in Mir iskusstva , 1901, no. 11-12:151-56. Vrubel's sketch for the panel The Princess of Dreams , originally displayed at the 1896 Nizhni Novgorod exposition, appeared in Mir iskusstva , 1903, no. 10-11, after p. 158. The ceramic work for the Metropole, as for a number of other major architectural projects, was implemented by Savva Mamontov's "Abramtsevo" factory in Moscow, under the supervision of the noted craftsman P. K. Vaulin. One of the more curious features of the Metropole decoration was a ceramic strip at mid-level with a Nietzschean inscription (part of which is still visible): "The same old story: when you have built a house, you notice that you have learned something." Apart from the specific meaning of this cryptic aphorism, the form of the Metropole exemplifies the aestheticization of reality associated with Nietzsche's philosophy.

8. The most authoritative history of the gallery is D. Ia. Bezrukova, Tretiakov i istoriia sozdaniia ego galerei (Moscow, 1970). There are numerous other accounts of the gallery's founding, including, in English, Beverly Kean, All the Empty Palaces (New York, 1983), pp. 66-69.

9. Vasnetsov's work on the facade in 1903 is mentioned in Zodchii , 1903, no. 36:427 ("Khronika"). A photograph of the completed building appeared in the 1906 issue of Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , pp. 16-17. For a discussion of the gallery in relation to other work by Vasnetsov, see Tatiana P. Kazhdan, "Arkhitektura i arkhitekturnaia zhizn' Rossii kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka," in Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka , 1895-1907 , ed. A. D. Alekseeva (Moscow, 1969), 2:305-8.

10. Russia witnessed a flurry of museum construction at the turn of the century, and most of the major buildings—particularly those that housed art collections—followed some variant of the classical temple (Roman Klein's museum of fine arts is discussed in chapter 6).

11. The Proskurin design is analyzed in detail in Elena Volkhovitskaia and Aleksei Tarkhanov, "Dom 'Rossiia,'" Dekorativnoe iskusstvo , 1986, no. 7:34-38. See also Zodchii , 1905, plates 23-25.

12. A brief description of the building and subsequent modifications appears in Iurii Fedosiuk, Moskva v kol'tse sadovykh (Moscow, 1983), p. 376.

13. For a drawing of the Sokol apartment house as originally projected, see Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, Russkaia arkhitektura 1830-1910-kh godov (Moscow, 1978), p. 236. Mashkov's continue

career, including his work for Sokol, is surveyed in B. Brandenburg and Ia. Tatarzhinskaia, "I. P. Mashkov," Arkhitektura SSSR , 1984, no. 2:86-93.

14. Photographs of the Isakov apartment house and other buildings by Kekushev appeared in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 2 (1910-1911), p. 57.

15. See the photographs in ibid., pp. 47-48.

16. Quoted in Fedosiuk, Moskva v kol'tse sadovykh , p. 79.

17. Photographs of the Levin apartment house appeared in Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 1 (1912), pp. 32-34. Soviet sources make scant reference to German's work, although an album by Evgeniia I. Kirichenko (with text in English) contains photographs of the Levin building, including the stairwell: Moscow: Architectural Monuments of the 1830-1910s (Moscow, 1977), pp. 234-37.

18. Maliutin is the subject of a brief but informative article by Sergei Diagilev: "Neskol'ko slov o S. V. Maliutine," in Mir iskusstva , 1903, no. 4:173-75. The article is accompanied by excellent photographs of Maliutin's work, primarily at Talashkino.

19. See William Craft Brumfield, "The Decorative Arts in Russian Architecture, 1900-1907," Journal of Decorative and Propaganda Arts 5 (1987): 12-27.

20. Grigorii Iu. Sternin, ed., Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura vtoroi poloviny XIX-nachala XX veka (Moscow, 1984), p. 179.

21. Many Russian artists elaborated upon the teremok theme—in art, architecture, and stage design. An early example is Ivan Ropet's teremok bathhouse at Abramtsevo (discussed in chapter 1). By the beginning of the century, both Viktor and Apollonarii Vasnetsov, as well as Aleksandr Golovin and Maliutin, had published or displayed (in some cases, built) variants on the teremok . Diagilev ecstatically praised Maliutin's teremok at Talashkino as the expression of a genuinely national, non-Western, architectural form. In Diagilev's view, Maliutin, together with the Finnish painter and designer Gallén-Kallela, had established in northern Europe the basis for a "second rinascimento" that would eventually lead to a "new aesthetic, a new Florence" ("Neskol'ko slov o S. V. Maliutine," pp. 159-60).

22. Written some five years before the completion of the Pertsov building, Igor Grabar's critical analysis of Russian folk motifs applied to contemporary furniture design and the decorative arts seems particularly relevant to the interior of the Pertsov apartment. Although pleased with the success of the Russian pavilion—based on the arts and crafts revival—at the 1900 Paris Exposition, Grabar was concerned about the deliberate crudity with which Russian artists such as Golovin and Polenova incorporated folk art as part of modern design. Acknowledging the aesthetic pleasures of genuine folk art, Grabar nonetheless feared that the excessive imitation, rather than creative reworking, of these motifs leads to cliché—and to furniture that is "hellishly uncomfortable." He noted that "one wants to eat and rest in comfort, without having to face endless lines and colors crawling at you from the wall." His own solution was not to modernize folk art but to revive Russia's Empire furniture designs of the turn of the nineteenth century—thus anticipating the revival of neoclassicism in both architecture and interior design toward 1910. "Neskol'ko myslei o sovremennom prikladnom iskusstve v Rossii," Mir iskusstva , 1902, no. 3:51-56. The artist and photographer Ivan Bilibin, one of the most dedicated students of the traditional art and architecture of the Russian north, also criticized the modern "Russian style" for its superficiality and tendency toward a stereotyped representation of the past: "Narodnoe tvorchestvo severa," Mir iskusstva , 1904, no. 11:303-18 (accompanied by seventy of Bilibin's photographs of folk handicrafts and wooden architecture, primarily churches in the far north).

23. The Pertsov building was the main subject of a laudatory illustrated essay (unsigned) on the neo-Russian style: "Mastera russkogo stilia," Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 2 (1912), pp. 43-49. Elena Borisova presents a sympathetic analysis of Maliutin's design for the Pertsov building in her chapter on the neo-Russian style in Elena A. Bonsova and Tatiana P. Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka (Moscow, 1971), pp. 162-63. For an illuminating theoretical discussion of the neo-Russian variant of the style moderne and its theatrical quality, see Bonsova, "Neorusskii stil' v russkoi arkhitekture predrevoliutsionnykh let," in Iz istorii russkogo iskusstva vtoroi poloviny XIX-nachala XX veka (Moscow, 1978), pp. 59-71. An early expression of support for theatricality in the design of apartment houses appeared in P. Sokolov, "Krasota arkhitekturnykh form," Zodchii , 1912, no. 49:490.

24. Illustrations of Vashkov's work for the Olovianishnikov firm appeared frequently in the architectural annuals, which also contained elaborately designed advertisements for the same firm. See, for example, Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 1 (1909), p. 19. Photographs of the apartment house appeared in the same issue. V. P. Vygolov refers to Vashkov's work at the Trinity Church apartments in "Inter'er," in A. D. Alekseeva, Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka, 1908-1917 (Moscow, 1980), 4:369, 371.

25. Little has been written on Kurdiukov's work, although Borisova offers a perceptive commentary on this building in Borisova and Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 154. See also "Mastera russkogo stilia," pp. 46, 48.

26. Cf. Paul Thompson's comments on "the ousting of stucco by brick" in London during the latter part of the century and Webb's influence on the transition, in Peter Kidson, Peter Murray, and Paul Thompson, A History of English Architecture (Harmondsworth, 1969), pp. 284-85. For a more detailed reference to housing sponsored by the London County Council, see Alastair Service, Edwardian Architecture (New York, 1977), pp. 100-101. In 1913-1914 Kur- soft

diukov built a large apartment house for the School of Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture in a functional brick style.

27. S. Ia. Timokhovich, in a lecture delivered to the Second Congress of Russian Architects and published in Trudy II s"ezda russkikh zodchikh v Moskve (Moscow, 1899), pp. 179-85, admitted that architects could do little about housing in Russian cities. The lecture, "Proekt blagoustroennikh kvartir v gigienicheskom i sanitarnom otnosheniiakh," assessed the need for "well-organized apartments from a hygienic and sanitary point of view" in four categories of housing: (1) luxury apartments, (2) mid-level ( srednei ruki ) apartment houses, (3) cheap apartments and furnished rooms, and (4) attics, basements, and flophouses. Only in the second category could architects offer immediate improvements in design; Timokhovich dismissed the lower categories as beyond the capabilities of architecture. The Soviet scholars P. Gol'denberg and B. Gol'denberg examine the disparity between housing levels at the beginning of the century in Planirovka zhilogo kvartala Moskvy (Moscow, 1935); pp. 126-78.

28. Vladimir V. Kirillov analyzes in detail the arrangement of apartment space typical in fashionable buildings of the period in Arkhitektura russkogo moderna (Moscow, 1979), pp. 90-93. A more general survey can be found in Gol'denberg and Gol'denberg pp. 136-39. For a discussion of the design of apartment houses in major European cities during this period, see Donald J. Olsen, The City as a Work of Art: London, Paris, Vienna (New Haven, 1986). The well-pre-served interior of a style moderne apartment designed around 1910 on Moscow's Tverskaia (now Gorkii) Street is described in O. B. Strugova, "Unikal'nyi moskovskii inter'er epokhi moderna," in Musei 10 , ed. A. S. Loginova, pp. 48-56.

29. For a discussion of spatial arrangements in Moscow's neoclassical homes, see L. V. Tydman's article "Ob" emnoprostranstvennaia kompozitsiia domov-dvortsov XVIII v." In Pamiatniki russkoi arkhitektury i monumental'nogo iskusstva , ed. V. P. Vygolov (Moscow, 1985), pp. 127-47. Cf. also Evgenii Nikolaev, Klassicheskaia Moskva (Moscow, 1975), pp. 184-210.

30. The railway building designs appeared in the illustrated supplement to Zodchii in 1896. No monographic study of Kekushev has been published in the Soviet Union.

31. "Amerikanskii dom," Zodchii , 1903, no. 14:187-88 (text, with photograph and plan).

32. An excellent photograph of the List house (since modified) appeared in Arkhitekturnye motivy , 1900, no. 1:2. Kekushev's own report on the house was published as "Dom O. A. Lista v Moskve," Zodchii , 1901, no. 4:48. The cost of construction was listed at 100,000 rubles.

33. Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 1 (1906), advertising supplement, p. xxxviii.

34. Although the Russian architectural press gave less attention to American than to continental architects, Aleksandr Dmitriv included H. H. Richardson's work in his extensive account of a trip through America, published in several issues of Zodchii for 1905, beginning with no. 27:313-14. See William Craft Brumfield, "Russian Perceptions of American Architecture, 1870-1917," in Architecture and the New Urban Environment (Washington, D.C., 1988), pp. 63-64.

35. For photographs of the Nosikov dacha, see Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 2 (1910-1911), pp. 85-86. Although there is no specific information on Simov and Vesnin's division of labor in designing the dacha, Simov's share in the work is suggested by his prominence and innovations as a set designer in Moscow at the beginning of the century; he had a number of major productions at the Moscow Art Theater to his credit. See M. V. Davydov, "Teatral'no-dekorativnoe iskusstvo" in Alekseeva, Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka, 1895-1907 (Moscow, 1969), 2:222-29.

36. Photographs of suburban houses designed by Aleksandr Kuznetsov appeared in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 4 (1914-1916), pp. 54-57.

37. Apart from the Islamic elements, the Vesnin sketch resembles the early work of the French architect Rob Mallet-Stevens. See Jean-Francois Pinchon, ed., Rob Mallet-Stevens: Architecture, Furniture, Interior Design (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1989).

38. For a view of the Gostorg building, see William Craft Brumfield, Gold in Azure: One Thousand Years of Russian Architecture (Boston, 1983), p. 351. Most of Velikovskii's work before the revolution belongs to a stripped classical style that prefigures his Constructivist work. For example, see his apartment buildings in Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 3 (1914), pp. 68-69.

39. Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 3 (1914), pp. 55-59.

40. Ibid., pp. 51-54. For a study of log homes in the Adirondacks during the same period, see Harvey Kaiser, Great Camps of the Adirondacks (Boston, 1982).

39. Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 3 (1914), pp. 55-59.

40. Ibid., pp. 51-54. For a study of log homes in the Adirondacks during the same period, see Harvey Kaiser, Great Camps of the Adirondacks (Boston, 1982).

41. See Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 3 (1914), p. 76.

42. The first installment of "Sovremennaia Moskva" appeared in Zodchii , 1904, no. 15:177-80. See chapter 2, n. 48.

43. "Sovremennaia Moskva," Zodchii , 1904, no. 15:179.

44. "Darmshtadtskaia vystavka 1901 goda," Zodchii , 1902, no. 33:371-74; no. 34:379-82.

45. See particularly Zinaida Vengerova's article on William Morris, "Vozrozhdenie dekorativnogo iskusstva" (The rebirth of decorative art) in Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1903, no. 1:1-9.

46. Mikhail Syrkin, "Novyi stil'" (The new style), Arkhitekturnyi muzei , 1903, no. 2:25-28; no. 3:45-47. break

47. A. G. Uspenskii, "Neskol'ko slov ob angliiskoi narodnoi arkhitekture" (A few words about English folk architecture), Zodchii , 1900, no. 4:47-52.

48. Makarov was the most visible of those who linked the style moderne with the social values of Russia's nascent bourgeoisie. For example, the third part of his survey of the new architecture associates architectural innovation with a general principle of social evolution in the history of civilization. See "Novyi stil' i dekadenstvo" (The new style and decadence), Zodchii , 1902, no. 9:105. Makarov's "Arkhitekturnye mechtaniia" (Architectural musings), Zodchii , 1902, no. 13:161, makes the connection between the new style and the bourgeoisie even more explicit. His encomium to Uspenskii appeared as "Aleksandr Globefish Uspenskii, kak zodchii i khudozhnik," Izvestiia obshchestva grazhdanskikh inzhenerov , 1907, no. 4:110-11.

49. Two essays in the December 1973 issue of Apollo give information on Old Believer families' prominent support of the new art: John E. Bowlt, "Nikolai Ryabushinsky: Playboy of the Eastern world," pp. 486-93; and Michael Ginsberg, "Art Collectors of Old Russia: The Morozovs and the Shchukins," pp. 470-77. See also Beverly Kean, All the Empty Palaces ; and Jo Ann Ruckman, The Moscow Business Elite (De Kalb, Ill., 1984), pp. 68-69. Although the dedication to work and enterprise that characterized the Old Believer community cannot directly explain a particular style of architecture in Old Believer churches, their relatively austere design seems to express a sense of frugality and responsibility to the church community ( obshchina ).

50. "Khram Staroobriadtsev Pomorskogo soglasiia v Moskve," Zodchii , 1908, no. 48:440. See also I. P. Mashkov, Putevoditel' po Moskve (Moscow, 1913), pp. 205-6. Mashkov places the cost of the church at 150,000 rubles.

51. Mashkov, p. 206. According to Mashkov the Church of the Intercession cost "about 140,000 rubles."

52. Ibid. (cost: 70,000 rubles).

51. Mashkov, p. 206. According to Mashkov the Church of the Intercession cost "about 140,000 rubles."

52. Ibid. (cost: 70,000 rubles).

53. See the description, reprinted from a prerevolutionary source, in Moskva zlatoglavaia (Paris, 1980), p. 72.

54. Aleksei Shchusev, "Mysli o svobode tvorchestva v religioznoi arkhitekture," Zodchii , 1905, no. 11:132. Shchusev went considerably beyond church architecture to the role of tradition in architecture. In his view the new emphasis on rationality in construction must not deny traditional nonfunctional elements that are significant in the perception of structure. For an analysis of this principle in the neoRussian variant of the style moderne, with particular reference to Shchusev's churches, see Borisova, "Neorusskii stil'," pp. 61, 65-66. For a more detailed description of Shchusev's church projects, see K. N. Afanasev, A. V. Shchusev (Moscow, 1978), pp. 15-36.

55. Shchusev, "Mysli o svobode tvorchestve v religioznoi arkhitekture," p. 132.

56. Shchusev's sketch for the first variant of the khrampamiatnik appeared in the Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 1 (1906), p. 128. The revised project appeared in no. 6 (1911), p. 147. For a photograph of the project as completed (after the revolution) see A. M. Zhuravlev, A. V. Ikonnikov, and A. G. Rochegov, Arkhitektura Sovetskoi Rossii (Moscow, 1987), p. 41.

57. Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchetva , no. 3 (1912-1913), pp. 135-47. See the description of the Pochaev cathedral in N. L. Zharikov, ed., Pamiatniki gradostroitel'stva i arkhitektury Ukrainskoi SSR v chetyrekh tomakh (Kiev, 1986), 4:78-80. For the Novgorod cathedrals, see Brumfield, Gold in Azure , pp. 42-46. Nikolai Roerich's collaboration with Shchusev in the decoration of the Trinity Cathedral (as well as other churches by Shchusev and Vladimir Pokorvskii) is discussed in L. V. Korotkina, "Rabota N. K. Rerikha s arkhitektorami A. V. Shchusevym i V. A. Pokrovskim," in Muzei 10 , ed. A. S. Loginova, pp. 156-61.

58. See Zharikov, Pamiatniki , 4:113-14; also Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 10 (1915), pp. 153-59.

59. Zharikov, 2:153-54.

60. See Mashkov, Putevoditel' po Moskve , p. 194; also Moskva zlatoglavaia , p. 65.

61. Borisova and Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 256-57.

62. Mashkov, Putevoditel' po Moskve , p. 178. A view of the iconostasis of the Church of the Resurrection was published in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 4 (1914-1916), p. 82.

63. For a list of church designs by the Vesnin brothers, see K. I. Murashkov, ed., Vesniny: Katalog-putevoditel' po fondam muzeia (Moscow, 1981), pp. 79-83.

64. For the technical aspects of combined construction methods, see Iu. S. Lebedev, ed., Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma v russkom zodchestve XIX-nachala XX vv . (Moscow, 1977), pp. 19-24, 128-39.

65. Erikhson's mansion for Shchukin joined an earlier "house-museum" built by Boris Freudenberg in 1893-1895. See Mashkov, Putevoditel' po Moskve , pp. 233, 235-36.

66. For a history of the Sytin Printing Works and the subsequent fate of the building, see R. E. Krupnova and V. A. Rezvin, Ulitsa Gor'kogo, 18 (Moscow, 1984), pp. 14-17.

67. During the 1930s the brick facing was removed from the first floor and replaced with stucco rusticated in imitation of stone. During the same period the original interior underwent a complete modification.

68. A description of work on the north wing of the Polytechnical Museum was published in Zodchii , 1903, no. 37:143. For an analysis and plan of the museum, see A. I. continue

Komech, ed., Pamiatniki arkhitektury Moskvy , 2d ed. (Moscow, 1983), p. 489.

69. Lebedev, Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma , pp. 155-56.

70. For comments on Klein's eclectic approach and the "timid" design of the store's main hall, see Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, Moskva na rubezhe dvukh stoletii (Moscow, 1977), p. 102.

71. Zodchii , 1904, no. 18:215.

1. Published biographical sources on Shekhtel include Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ' (Moscow, 1973); Catherine Cooke, "Fedor Shekhtel: An Architect and His Clients in Turn-of-Century Moscow," Architectural Association Files (London) 5-6 (1984): 5-31; Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, "F. O. Shekhtel'," in Zodchie Moskvy XV-XIX vv , ed. Iu. S. Iaralov and S. M. Zemtsov, pp. 276-87 (Moscow, 1981); M. P. Chekhov, Vokrug Chekhova (Moscow, 1964), pp. 276-87; and Kirichenko, Bol'shaia Sadovaia ulitsa, 4 (Moscow, 1989).

2. For information on Shekhtel's early interest in the theater and his work with Lentovskii, sec M. P. Chekhov, pp. 279, 323; Kirichenko, "F. O. Shekhtel'," p. 278, and "Fedor Shekhtel: K 125-letiiu so dnia rozhdeniia," Arkhitektura SSSR , 1984, no. 3:86. Previously unpublished sketches by Shekhtel for theater and set designs in the 1880s are discussed within the context of his early work for the theater in E. I. Kirichenko, "Teatral'nye raboty F. O. Shekhtelia 1880-kh godov v muzeiakh Moskvy," in Muzei 10 , ed. A. S. Loginova, pp. 162-73. The sketches prefigure much in his mature architectural work, particularly the design of the Stepan Riabushinskii house.

3. For a recent account of Shekhtel's architectural apprenticeship, see Kirichenko, Bol'shaia Sadovaia ulitsa , 4, pp. 13-18.

4. Iubileinyi spravochnik Imperatorskoi Akademii khudozhestv , 1864-1914 (Petersburg, 1915), 2:395. Kirichenko, in "F. O. Shekhtel," suggests that Shekhtel designed the exterior of the Paradise Theater (277).

5. M. P. Chekhov, Vokrug Chekhova , pp. 278-79.

6. Kirichenko describes Shekhtel's formal attestation as a builder in Fedor Shekhtel , p. 10, citing documents in the Central State Archive of Literature and Art (TsGALI); she also lists Shekhtel's work before 1893 (138).

7. Ibid., pp. 10, 19-23. Kirichenko analyzes the plan of the Zinaida Morozova house as an early example of Shekhtel's emphasis on centrality in "O Printsipakh organizatsii prostranstvennoi sredy intererov osobniakov F. O. Shekhtelia, rubezh XIX-XX vv.," Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo 34 (1986): 246-48. The Morozov house was the first of Shekhtel's buildings to be widely publicized in the architectural press ( Zodchii , 1899, plate 33; and Arkhitekturnye motivy , 1899, no. 1, plates 5, 6).

6. Kirichenko describes Shekhtel's formal attestation as a builder in Fedor Shekhtel , p. 10, citing documents in the Central State Archive of Literature and Art (TsGALI); she also lists Shekhtel's work before 1893 (138).

7. Ibid., pp. 10, 19-23. Kirichenko analyzes the plan of the Zinaida Morozova house as an early example of Shekhtel's emphasis on centrality in "O Printsipakh organizatsii prostranstvennoi sredy intererov osobniakov F. O. Shekhtelia, rubezh XIX-XX vv.," Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo 34 (1986): 246-48. The Morozov house was the first of Shekhtel's buildings to be widely publicized in the architectural press ( Zodchii , 1899, plate 33; and Arkhitekturnye motivy , 1899, no. 1, plates 5, 6).

8. According to Ilia Bondarenko, Mikhail Vrubel painted two panels for the A. V. Morozov house: one was Faust and Disciple ; the other depicted the flight of Mephistopheles and Faust over the city at night. See "Vospominaniia I. E. Bondarenko o F. O. Shekhtele," Arkhiektura SSSR , 1984, no. 3:93. Vrubel's glass panel for the house of Savva Morozov is illustrated in V. A. Tikhanova, ed., Russkoe dekorativnoe iskusstvo (Moscow, 1965), 3:361, 364. Two of Vrubel's designs for glass windows (including one belonging to Shekhtel) were published in Mir iskusstva , 1903, no. 10-11:157-58. They depict scenes of medieval knights in armor, surrounded by damsels.

9. As was frequently the case in Moscow, the wife held legal title to the house. The de facto owner was M. S. Kuznetsov, a porcelain manufacturer (see n. 12).

10. The text of Chekhov's letter to Shekhtel (13 April 1896) appears in A. P. Chekhov, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem: Pis'ma (Moscow, 1978), 6:140-42; Shekhtel's reply is quoted on page 476 of the same volume. According to an 1897 item in the journal Stroitel ', "A society for promoting entertainment accessible to all is being formed among representatives of Moscow's intelligentsia and capitalists, and it will begin its activity with the construction of a colossal 'people's palace' or 'people's house,'" to provide enlightened entertainment not just for the elite but also for the general public. The architect was identified as a Mr. Sh[ekhtel] ( Stroitel ', 1897, no. 6:227-28).

11. Shekhtel's plan for this new version of the People's House was published in Zodchii , 1902, no. 14:172; a sketch of the building was reproduced in Zodchii that same year, plate 16.

12. For the role of M. S. Kuznetsov in porcelain manufacturing and design in the new style, see L. V. Andreev, "Farforovaia promyshlennost'," in Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka, 1895-1907 , ed. A. D. Alekseeva (Moscow, 1969), 2:363-67. Cf. also L. V. Andreev, Sovetskii farfor. 1920-1930-e gody (Moscow, 1975), pp. 7-15.

13. For a discussion of this structural form, see M. A. Kozlovskaia, "Konstruktivnye struktury i arkhitkturnye formy grazhdanskikh zdanii," in Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma v russkom zodchestve XIX-nachala XX vv , ed. Iu. S. Lebedev (Moscow, 1977), pp. 128-42 and, with reference to the Kuznetsov building, p. 136.

14. Typical of gigantomania in church construction during the late nineteenth century, the structure would have dwarfed its modest surroundings (cf. photograph of the extant sixteenth-century monastery church in William Craft Brumfield, Gold in Azure [Boston, 1983], p. 152). break

15. The chapel, consecrated in 1902, is listed in M. Aleksandrovskii, Ukazatel' moskovskikh tserkvei (Moscow, 1915), p. 75. Although this project and others are omitted from the list in Fedor Shekhtel' , pp. 138-40, Kirichenko provides the most thorough published inventory of the architect's work.

16. In 1900 Shekhtel also built a dacha for Levenson, thus maintaining a practice of designing domestic and commercial projects for the same client.

17. The Vienna firm of Gebruder Thonet, which specialized in bentwood furniture, had licensed outlets and factories in Russia, as did the firm of Jacob and Joseph Kohn (also of Vienna). No Russian architect is known to have designed for them, but furniture from the Kohns' Moscow factory was included in the exhibit of the "new style" at the end of 1902 in Moscow. See Olga Strugova, "Gnutaia mebel' Toneta," Dekorativnoe iskusstvo , 1986, no. 6:48.

18. Printers were among the most highly skilled and best remunerated workers in Russia. Their professional publication, Naborshchik (Compositor), had as its motto a quotation from Ruskin, which read in the Russian translation: "Life without labor is thievery; labor without art is barbarism." Mark Steinberg analyzes the rapid development of the Russian printing industry at the turn of the century in "Consciousness and Conflict in a Russian Industry: The Printers of St. Petersburg and Moscow, 1855-1905" (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1987); references to the Levenson firm are on pp. 123, 174, and 208-9. Levenson's paternalistic system is described in Tovarishchestvo A. A. Levenson, Istoricheskii ocherk i opisanie masterskikh, 1881-1903 (Moscow, 1903).

19. The most detailed source on the Riabushinskii family and the growth of the firm is contained in Torgovoe i promyshlennoe delo Riabushinskikh (Moscow, 1913). See also P. A. Buryshkin, Moskva kupecheskaia (New York, 1954), pp. 189-93. Western sources with extensive information on the Riabushinskii family and the Moscow merchant milieu include Jo Ann Ruckman, The Moscow Business Elite (De Kalb, Ill., 1984); and Alfred Rieber, Merchants and Entrepreneurs in Imperial Russia (Chapel Hill, N. C., 1982).

20. Walcot's work appeared frequently in Zodchii at the turn of the century, and in Arkhitekturnye motivy (see his sketch for a private house in the latter journal, 1899, no. 4, plate 32).

21. Ian Latham, Joseph Maria Olbrich (New York, 1980), p. 149.

22. The interior of the house is well preserved, although some changes occurred after Maksim Gorkii and his family moved there in 1931. The association of the building with Gorkii has guaranteed its proper maintenance. See M. B. Kozmin, ed., V dome na Maloi Nikitskoi (Moscow, 1968).

23. This connection is supported by Shekhtel's possession of an 1899 sketch by Mikhail Vrubel for a ceramic dish on the theme of Sadko, one to which Vrubel, who had worked with Shekhtel in decorating the interior of various Morozov houses, frequently turned. This particular sketch was intended for production by the M. S. Kuznetsov firm (another Shekhtel client). See E. P. Gomberg-Berzhbinskaia, ed., Vrubel': Perepiska: Vospominaniia o khudozhnike (Leningrad, 1976), pp. 257, 354. For a reproduction of the design, see Mikhail Guerman, Mikhail Vrubel ' (Leningrad, 1985), pp. 136, 239-40.

24. Zodchii , 1904, no. 15:181. The decorative tendril pattern mentioned in the following paragraph appears in the interior of Shekhtel's Church of the Savior at Ivanovo-Voznesensk (1898). See Zodchii , 1905, no. 5:49.

25. The Riabushinskii attempt to forge a new political coalition representing the interests of a Russian bourgeoisie is set forth in James West, "The Riabushinskii Circle: Russian Industrialists in Search of a Bourgeoisie, 1909-1914," Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas 32 (1984): 358-77.

26. John Bowlt, "Nikolai Ryabushinsky, Playboy of the Eastern World," Apollo , December 1983:486-93.

27. See Ivonne d'Axe, "Sovremennaia Moskva," Zodchii , 1904, no. 18:213; and Vladimir Apyshkov, Ratsional'noe v noveishei arkhitekture (Petersburg, 1905), p. 54.

28. For a sampling of opinion on Shekhtel's pavilions in the British architectural press (in the Studio, Builder, Architectural Review , and Art Journal ), see Cooke, "Fedor Shekhtel," pp. 5-6. For a more detailed account of the pavilions, see her "Shekhtel in Kelvingrove and Mackintosh on the Petrovka," Scottish Slavonic Review 10 (1988): 177-205.

29. A sketch of the Kharitonenko design appeared in Zodchii , 1899, no. 5:55, and a photograph of the triumphal gates in 1899, no. 4:43.

30. Zodchii , 1902, no. 1:14

31. Quoted in Cooke, "Fedor Shekhtel," p. 5.

32. Cooke states that Shekhtel spent four months in Glasgow (ibid.), but Zodchii , 1902, no. 1, mentions only four supervisory visits.

33. Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel' , p. 49.

34. Ibid., p. 72.

33. Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel' , p. 49.

34. Ibid., p. 72.

35. One is reminded of the Viennese approach to comprehensive design, particularly in the collaboration between Josef Hoffmann, Kolo Moser, and others associated with the Wiener Werkstätte. See Eduard Sekler, Josef Hoffmann (Princeton, 1985), p. 33, with Hermann Bahr's dictum from 1898 that "everything in a room must be like an instrument in an orchestra."

36. Kirichenko analyzes the Derozhinskaia hall as an element comparable to core space in previous work by Shekhtel (the Morozova and Riabushinskii houses) in "O printsipakh continue

organizatsii prostranstvennoi sredy intererov osobniakov F. O. Shekhtelia (rubezh XIX-XX vv.), Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo 34 (1986): 250-51, 253.

37. Constantin Stanislavsky, My Life in Art (Boston, 1924), pp. 388-89.

38. For references to Chichagov's theater construction, see Elena A. Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura vtoroi poloviny XIX veka (Moscow, 1979), p. 309; and Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', pp. 78-79.

39. Each of these works by Mackintosh is discussed and illustrated in Robert Macleod, Charles Rennie Mackintosh (London, 1983), pp. 79-85 and 65-67.

40. Stanislavsky, My Life in Art , p. 388.

41. Ibid., p. 386.

40. Stanislavsky, My Life in Art , p. 388.

41. Ibid., p. 386.

42. See M. Kopshitser, Savva Mamontov (Moscow, 1972), pp. 218-23; and Beverly Kean, All the Empty Palaces (New York, 1983), pp. 91-93.

43. Shekhtel's use of motifs from the Russian north evolved from an adaptation of traditional forms in nineteenth-century exhibition architecture, from the 1872 Polytechnical Exhibition to the 1896 Nizhni Novgorod fair. See Elena A. Borisova, "Neorusskii stil' v russkoi arkhitekture predrevoliutsionnykh let," in Iz istorii russkogo iskusstva vtoroi poloviny XIX-nachala XX veka (Moscow, 1978), pp. 63-64.

44. Zodchii , 1905, no. 1:13-14.

45. For the cultural significance of the Nizhni Novgorod exposition of 1896 and Mamontov's involvement (together with that of the Abramtsevo community) in the Pavilion of the Far North, see Borisova, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 262-66.

46. From a letter to Vasnetsov, 22 October 1902. See Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', p. 49.

47. See Fumio Hashimoto, Architecture in the Shoin Style (Tokyo, 1981), pp. 132-33, 233.

48. Macleod, Charles Rennie Mackintosh , pp. 25, 57-59. See also references to Japanese art in Europe at the turn of the century in Stephan Tschudi Madsen, Sources of Art Nouveau (New York, 1976), pp. 188ff.

49. Photographs of the original station interior are published in Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', pp. 59-60.

50. Zodchii , 1905, no. 1:14.

51. Kozlovskaia, "Konstruktivnye struktury," p. 137.

52. Evgeniia Kirichenko discusses the relations between Shekhtel's design for Boiars' Court and the Kitai Gorod wall in Moskva na rubezhe dvukh stoletii (Moscow, 1977), p. 99.

53. Despite claims in some Soviet sources that Shekhtel and other architects at the beginning of the century designed skeletal structures, Kozlovskaia insists that skeletal frames in the strict technical sense were rare in Russian architecture. See "Konstruktivnye struktury," p. 139, for a reference to the Riabushinskii bank and p. 155 for a general discussion of the "carcass" system.

54. Ludwig Munz and Gustav Kunstler, Adolf Loos: Pioneer of Modern Architecture (New York, 1966), pp. 111-15.

55. Kirichenko briefly notes subsequent modifications to the building in Fedor Shekhtel ', p. 97.

56. The commercial use of the ground floor of apartment buildings had become common by the end of the century in Moscow; it is closely related to developments in construction technology. See Kozlovskaia, "Konstruktivnye struktury," p. 129.

57. Shekhtel designed several other apartment buildings between 1911 and 1917, but none were built. See Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', p. 140.

58. The plan of the building was by the architect I. S. Blagoveshchenskii. Shamshin, dissatisfied with the original design, commissioned Shekhtel to redo the exterior (Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', p. 110).

59. See Rayner Banham, Theory and Design in the First Machine Age (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1980), pp. 151-52. Russia had nothing comparable to the Werkbund aesthetic in Germany at this time, although certain major industrial structures in Petersburg emulated contemporary German design.

60. Buryshkin, Moskva kupecheskaia , pp. 288-92; and West, "The Riabushinskii Circle," pp. 362-63.

61. Iu. P. Volchok, "Stanovlenie novykh tektonicheskikh sistem v promyshlennoi arkhitekture," in Lebedev, Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma , pp. 109-26.

62. Kozlovskaia, "Konstruktivnye struktury," p. 155.

63. For a comparison of the buildings by Shekhtel and the Barkhin brothers, see Brumfield, Gold in Azure , pp. 343-44.

64. See Kirichenko's list in Fedor Shekhtel ', p. 140.

65. For 1905-1906 Kirichenko lists only one Shekhtel project, cryptically identified as the "Shekhtel dacha at Odintsovo" (presumably Odintsovo-Arkhangelskoe). Savva Morozov purchased an estate there in 1892, and the main house was one of Shekhtel's earliest projects. See E. N. Podiapol'skaia, ed., Pamiatniki arkhitektury moskovskoi oblasti (Moscow, 1975), I:119.

66. See the plan and illustrations in Marika Hausen, et al., Saarinen in Finland (Helsinki, 1984), pp. 28-33.

67. Kirichenko, "O printsipakh organizatsii prostranstvennoi sredy," p. 253.

68. Although Shekhtel's house may have paid tribute to timeless classical forms, it also served as a meeting place of the artistic avant-garde. Shekhtel's son, Lev Zhegin (who continue

took the last name of his mother), opened the house to his friends, including futurists and other artists such as Mikhail Larionov, Vladimir Maiakovskii, Natalia Goncharova, and Vasilii Chekrygin. In 1912 the main hall of the house was used as an exhibition space for the artists. See Kirichenko, "Fedor Shekhtel'," p. 92, and Bol'shaia Sadovaia ulitsa , 4, pp. 44-62; and Evgenii Kovtun, "Experiments in Book Design by Russian Artists," Journal of Decorative and Propaganda Arts 5 (1987): 46-47.

69. "Itogi let," Zodchii , 1911, no. 11:120.

70. Kirichenko analyzes the proportional system of the plan in relation to exterior detail in "O printsipakh organizatsii prostranstvennoi sredy," pp. 253-54.

71. An elevation, a section, and plans of the Ice Palace are included in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 3 (1912-1913), pp. 102-4.

72. For plans, the facade, and an elevation of the exhibition hall, see Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', pp. 128-29.

73. The Rukavishnikov building is illustrated and described in S. L. Agafonov, Gor'kii, Balakhna, Makarev (Moscow, 1987), pp. 204, 206, 214-15.

74. See Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 2 (1910-1911), pp. 100-102. The winner of the Nizhni Novgorod state bank competition was Vladimir Pokrovskii, whose design—dedicated to the tercentenary of the Romanov dynasty—lavishly used seventeenth-century decorative and iconographic motifs. The interior of the structure, which has been preserved, is painted throughout in the mannered way of early seventeenth-century painting according to designs by the artist Ivan Bilibin. See Agafonov, pp. 216-23.

75. See Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no.4 (1914-1916), pp. 85-87.

76. Shekhtel's design sketches for the Kazan Railway Station were published in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 2 (1910-1911), pp. 98-99. Shchusev's winning entry in the competition was the subject of detailed reports in Arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennyi ezhenedel'nik , 1914, no. 4:46-48; 1915, no. 19:217-19.

77. Between 1910 and 1917 Shekhtel designed four churches, of which three were built. His secular projects during this period remained unbuilt, except for certain modifications to existing buildings. One might assume that he was excluded from active architectural work as completely as Mackintosh was in Great Britain during the same period, but Shekhtel remained a guiding presence in the Moscow Architectural Society.

78. A description and project sketch of Shekhtel's church at Balakovo appeared in Zodchii , 1911, no. 51:541, and plate 60. For a detailed analysis of medieval tower churches in Russia, see M. A. Ilin, Russkoe shatrovoe zodchestvo: Pamiatniki serediny XVI veka (Moscow, 1980).

79. The church is listed in Aleksandrovskii, Ukazatel' moskovskikh tserkvei (Moscow, 1919), p. 52. (This is an updated, typescript version of the 1915 list cited in n. 16.) According to Aleksandrovskii the church was consecrated on 20 July 1916. In a caption to a photograph in the 1914-1916 issue of Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva it is identified as the Church of the Tula Druzhina, presumably the patriotic organization that sponsored the construction. The church is also frequently identified by its location near Solomennaia Storozhka.

80. Quoted in Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', p. 125, with reference to archival material in TsGALI.

81. Podiapol'skaia, Pamiatniki , 1:305.

82. From the list of Shekhtel's work in Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', p. 140.

83. "Vospominaniia I. E. Bondarenko o F. O. Shekhtele," p. 93. See also Kirichenko, Bol'shaia Sadovaia ulitsa, 4 , p. 62.

84. See Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', pp. 116, 118.

85. "Fedor (Frants) Osipovich Shekhtel," in M. G. Barkhin et al., eds., Mastera sovetskoi arkhitektury ob arkhitekture (Moscow, 1975), I:7. See also Kirichenko, "F. O. Shekhtel'," p. 286.

86. For a survey of the post-revolutionary work, see Kirichenko, Fedor Shekhtel ', pp. 127-30. Critical assessment of Shekhtel's work during this period has undergone numerous changes, particularly on the question of functionalism versus historicism. His project for the Dnieper Hydroelectric Station (GES) was misleadingly linked with Oskar Munts's design for the Volkhov GES and was characterized as "fantastic forms of the Gothic" by V. E. Khazanova in her pioneering work Sovetskaia arkhitektura pervykh let oktiabria, 1917-1925 gg . (Moscow, 1970), p. 15. In her 1973 monograph on Shekhtel, E. I. Kirichenko noted that "his work of the 1920s remained outside the main path being developed by the young Soviet architecture" (p. 130). In 1981, however, Kirichenko made the following observation:

This neoromantic position is typical [of Shekhtel]; it is peculiar to the moderne and absolutely alien to Constructivism, which determined the direction of Soviet architecture in the 1920s. All of this compels one to think: was not the anachronism of Shekhtel's projects a conscious protest against "anti-aestheticism," against the negation of the value of beauty and art that was so prevalent in the 1920s? ("F. O. Shekhtel'," p. 287)

And in 1984 the same author wrote that although Shekhtel could turn to a historical style in the 1920s when the situation demanded, he avoided "historical prototypes" in cases where a functional approach was necessary—as in the Dnieper GES—in contrast to O. Munts at the Volkhov GES. Kirichenko notes that Shekhtel's projects of the 1920s are central "for an understanding of the course of development of Soviet architecture" ("Fedor Shekhtel'," p. 92). break

87. "Skazka o trekh sestrakh: zhivopisi, arkhitekture, skulpture," first published in Barkhin, Mastera sovetskoi arkhitektury , pp. 14-22.

88. Commenting on architectural ceramics in Persian monuments, Shekhtel distinguishes it from "that polychromy which covers masonry and destroys the valuable exterior of the material" (ibid., p. 15). He clearly emphasizes the structural and material integrity evident in the polychromatic decoration of the Riabushinskii house.

89. Ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid. Shekhtel notes that the sketches for the Derozhinskaia panels were acquired by the Tretiakov Gallery, which has yet to publish information on them.

91. Ibid.

88. Commenting on architectural ceramics in Persian monuments, Shekhtel distinguishes it from "that polychromy which covers masonry and destroys the valuable exterior of the material" (ibid., p. 15). He clearly emphasizes the structural and material integrity evident in the polychromatic decoration of the Riabushinskii house.

89. Ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid. Shekhtel notes that the sketches for the Derozhinskaia panels were acquired by the Tretiakov Gallery, which has yet to publish information on them.

91. Ibid.

88. Commenting on architectural ceramics in Persian monuments, Shekhtel distinguishes it from "that polychromy which covers masonry and destroys the valuable exterior of the material" (ibid., p. 15). He clearly emphasizes the structural and material integrity evident in the polychromatic decoration of the Riabushinskii house.

89. Ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid. Shekhtel notes that the sketches for the Derozhinskaia panels were acquired by the Tretiakov Gallery, which has yet to publish information on them.

91. Ibid.

88. Commenting on architectural ceramics in Persian monuments, Shekhtel distinguishes it from "that polychromy which covers masonry and destroys the valuable exterior of the material" (ibid., p. 15). He clearly emphasizes the structural and material integrity evident in the polychromatic decoration of the Riabushinskii house.

89. Ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid. Shekhtel notes that the sketches for the Derozhinskaia panels were acquired by the Tretiakov Gallery, which has yet to publish information on them.

91. Ibid.

92. In explaining that a building must develop logically from interior to exterior, Shekhtel notes:

A true impression of spatiality in a building is conditioned by the form and color of the surfaces defining it. Having perceived these already prepared surfaces, we must contend with the imperfect optics of our eye; to receive the appropriate impression, we must struggle with this optical deception, by painting [the exterior] in a suitable color.

He goes on to give examples of the use of color to enhance the perception of space (ibid., p. 21). Shekhtel writes of what his work had already demonstrated: the concept of total design, from furnishings to the color of the exterior.

93. See Moisei Ginzburg's comments on the style moderne as a superficial aesthetic that "originated in the minds of a few highly cultivated and refined architects" ( Style and Epoch , trans. Anatole Senkevitch [Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1982], p. 42).

94. "Itogi let," Zodchii , 1911, no. 11:120.

1. For the development of Petersburg's eighteenth-century plan, see Iu. A. Egorov, Ansambl' v gradostroitel'stve SSSR: Ocherki (Moscow, 1961), pp. 33-72.

2. "Dom A. Ia. Baryshnikova," Zodchii , 1900, no. 3:25-26, with an illustration of the original facade design by Shaub. As was frequently the case in Zodchii , the architect—in this case Baryshnikov himself—described the project, which contained twenty-one rental apartments, each with all the basic conveniences as well as facilities for storage in the basement. There were four shops on the ground floor and a large apartment for the architect-owner. The total cost of the structure was 280,000 rubles.

3. See, for example, Zodchii , 1900, no. 1:12; also Nedelia stroitelia , 1900, no. 30:190, 194.

4. "Novye veianiia v arkhitekture," Nedelia stroitelia , 1899, no. 42:303.

5. Pavel Makarov, "Novye obshchestvennye zdaniia v Londone," Zodchii , 1902, no. 14:170.

6. For an exhaustive list of buildings in the new style constructed between 1897 and 1915 (grouped by region in Leningrad), see B. M. Kirikov, "Peterburgskii modern," Panorama iskusstv 10 (1978): 99-148, with its informative introductory essay. Although the twenty-seven-page list includes several hundred undistinguished buildings and excludes some major structures because they cannot be classified as part of the Petersburg moderne, it is still a useful guide to the city's architectural development.

7. The career of Leontii Benois, whose work was frequently featured in Zodchii , is summarized in V. G. Lisovskii and L. A. Iudina, "Zamechatel'nyi zodchii i pedagog," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1979, no. 2:35-38. Benois's students, in addition to Lidval, included Aleksei Shchusev, Nikolai Vasilev, Marian Lialevich, Vasilii Shchuko, Marian Peretiatkovich, Andrei Belogrud, Ivan Fomin, Vladimir Pokrovskii, Oskar Munts, and many other architects.

8. Lidval's career is surveyed by V. G. Lisovskii in "Master Peterburgskogo moderna," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1980, no. 1:34-38. The most extensive appreciation of his work was provided by his protégé Andrei Ohl, an architect, in the monograph F. Lidval (Petersburg, 1914).

9. For an analysis of the factors affecting the development of the outlying areas of Petersburg, see James H. Bater, St. Petersburg: Industrialization and Change (Montreal, 1976), pp. 317, 323-33. See also B. M. Kochakov, ed., Ocherki istorii Leningrada , vol. 3, Period imperializma i burzhuazno-demokraticheskikh revoliutsii (Moscow-Leningrad, 1956), pp. 906-8, 914-15, 920.

10. A list of Pretro's work in Petersburg is contained in Valerii G. Isachenko, ed., Arkhitektory-stroiteli Peterburga-Petrograda nachala XX veka (Leningrad, 1982), pp. 111-12.

11. Pavel Makarov, "Finliandskoe dekorativnoe iskusstvo," Zodchii , 1903, no. 14:183-87. See also chapter 2, p. 000. The Putilova building shows a number of similarities to the Olofsborg apartment house designed by Gesellius, Lindgren, and Saarinen in Helsinki (1900-1902). See Marika Hausen, "From the National to the International," in Marika Hausen et al., Saarinen in Finland (Helsinki, 1984), p. 36. The most detailed and comprehensive survey of Helsinki's architecture in the new style appears in Jonathan Moorhouse, Michael Carapetian, and Leena Ahtola-Moorhouse, Helsinki Jugendstil Architecture, 1895-1915 (Helsinki, 1987).

12. Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , p. 97.

13. Project sketches by Bubyr appeared in Zodchii in the years 1903-1907 and 1910. Bubyr's work in Petersburg is listed in Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , pp. 28-29.

14. For a discussion of Bubyr's engineering achievements, see Valerii G. Isachenko, "Pobornik novogo stilia: Stranitsy continue

tvorcheskoi biografii A. F. Bubyria," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1978, no. 3:44-47.

15. In 1907 Zodchii included Bubyr and Vasilev's project for the Drama Theater (plate 31); and in the following year, a notice of the jury decision (no first prize) appeared in no. 40:376.

16. In 1911-1912 Saarinen built the National Bank (Estobank) in Revel (illustrated in Hausen, "From the National to the International, p. 70), and in 1911 he assumed responsibility for designing a plan for the same city. See Kirmo Mikkola, "The Roots of Eliel Saarinen's Town Plans," in Marika Hausen et al., Saarinen in Finland (Helsinki, 1984), pp. 98-101. The Revel town plan—completed in 1913 but never implemented—is also discussed in Albert Christ Janer, Eliel Saarinen (Chicago, 1979), pp. 42-43, 46-47. For the influence of Finnish architects such as Saarinen and Lars Sonck on the architecture of Riga (particularly in the romantic nationalism phase), see Ianis A. Krastin'sh, Stil' modern v arkhitekture Rigi (Moscow, 1988). Although Riga, as the capital of Latvia, lies beyond the scope of a study of Russian architecture, the style moderne there has much in common with that in Petersburg as well as in Helsinki and Tallinn. Indeed, the moderne remained dominant throughout the prerevolutionary construction boom in Riga, one of the Russian empire's most heavily industrialized cities. Prominent Western architects who built in the city included Peter Behrens (the Union electric factory) and Henry van de Velde (the parsonage, not extant, of the Lutheran Church of St. Peter).

17. For a list of buildings designed by Vasilev and his partners in Petersburg, see Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , pp. 30-31.

18. Bubyr published a description of the apartment house on Stremiannyi Street in Zodchii , 1906, no. 49:522-23, with the project sketch reproduced in plate 54.

19. V. G. Lisovskii summarizes Vasilev's large apartment projects in "Master shkoly natsional'nogo romantizma," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1975, no. 4:44. Sketches of the design by Vasilev and Aleksandr Dmitriev for an apartment project on Kamennoostrovskii Prospekt, underwritten by the First Russian Insurance Society, appeared in Zodchii , 1911, plates 5-6, with the jury response in 1911, no. 9:98.

20. Vasilev's design for the Palace of Soviets is reproduced in Lisovskii, "Master shkoly," p. 44.

21. See Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , p. 73.

22. M. A. Kozlovskaia provides a succinct analysis, with plans, of the technical structure of the apartment house by Baldi in Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma v russkom zodchestve XIX-nachala XX vv ., ed. Iu. S. Lebedev (Moscow, 1977), pp. 133-35.

23. The Marks project is included in Valerii G. Isachenko's survey of Nikolai Dmitriev's career, "Trud otdannyi narodu," Leningradskaia panorama , 1982, no. 3:30-33.

24. N. V. Dmitriev, Bor'ba s zhilishchnoi nuzhdoi (Petersburg, 1903).

25. A detailed description of the workers' village is contained in a review of the completed project presented to the Petersburg Society of Architects on 10 December 1906 and published shortly thereafter in Zodchii , 1906, no. 52:523-24.

26. A summary of Dikanskii's lecture on 23 January and of the ensuing discussion was published in Zodchii , 1907, no. 4:29-31. The lecture was subsequently published in its entirety as "Zhilishchnaia nuzhda" in Zodchii , 1907, no. 22:221-24; no. 23:233-40; no. 24:253-61; no. 28:285-98; no. 31:321-24; no. 32:333-39; no. 34:357-66; no. 36:381-90. Dikanskii's extensive account of measures dealing with the workers' housing crisis in Western Europe, particularly Great Britain and Germany, appeared in book form as Kvartirnyi vopros i sotsial'nye opyty resheniia (The apartment question and social attempts for a solution) (Petersburg, 1908).

27. Zodchii , 1907, no. 4:30. The Society for the Construction and Improvement of Housing for the Needy Population, renamed the Society for the Struggle with the Housing Need, was one of a few voluntary agencies formed to invest in subsidized housing for the needy. Dikanskii discussed the efforts of these organizations and the woeful inadequacy of their resources in Zodchii , no. 36:387-88.

28. Zodchii , 1907, no. 4:30.

29. Ibid.

28. Zodchii , 1907, no. 4:30.

29. Ibid.

30. The most recent discussion of Russian society before the revolution is Teodor Shanin, The Roots of Otherness: Russia's Turn of the Century , 2 vols. (New Haven, 1986). For a recent Soviet view of the final prewar struggle for political power among factions representing the bourgeoisie and the landowning nobility, see V. S. Diakin, Burzhuaziia, dvorianstvo i tsarizm v 1911-1914 gg. Razlozhenie tret'eiiunskoi sistemy (Leningrad, 1988).

31. Zodchii , 1907, no. 36:388.

32. See p. 307n27.

33. See I. G. Tokareva, "V poiskakh 'novogo stilia,'" Leningradskaia panorama , 1987, no. 8:33-35.

34. Russian interest in the development of high-quality brick resulted in a number of publications, including Logachevskii, "Kirpich XX stoletiia," Zodchii , 1902, no. 38:438-39.

35. K. Shmidt, "Dom-osobniak P. P. Forostovskogo v S.-Peterburge," Zodchii , 1901, no. 6:77.

36. Ibid.

35. K. Shmidt, "Dom-osobniak P. P. Forostovskogo v S.-Peterburge," Zodchii , 1901, no. 6:77.

36. Ibid.

37. Gogen, who graduated from the Academy of Arts in 1879, built throughout the Russian empire (including Port Arthur) and enjoyed the patronage of the highest levels of continue

the imperial court. His career is summarized in his obituary, by Viktor Evald, in Zodchii , 1914, no. 12:143-44.

38. See the sketch and elevation of the Kshesinskaia mansion in Zodchii , 1905, plates 43-45. In 1910 photographs of the house (no longer identified by the owner's name but by address) appeared in Zodchii , plates 1 and 24. For a favorable description, see B. M. Kirikov, "Obrazets stilia modern: Novye materialy ob inter'erakh pamiatnika arkhitektury," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1976, no. 6:38-41.

39. The Kshesinskaia bedroom is behind the two smaller rooms on the front facade, one with a balcony, that are identified as children's rooms.

40. Zodchii , 1914, no. 12:143.

41. Elena A. Borisova and Tatiana P. Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka (Moscow, 1971), p. 93.

42. Two accounts in English of the mansion as Bolshevik headquarters are Edmund Wilson, To the Finland Station (New York, 1940), pp. 473-74; and Adam Ulam, The Bolsheviks (New York, 1965), p. 323, n. 9. See also the description in A. N. Petrov, ed., Pamiatniki arkhitektury Leningrada (Leningrad, 1971), pp. 335, 337; and "V stenakh shtaba bol'shevikov," Leningradskaia panorama , 1987, no. 11:4-6. Kshesinskaia's own indulgent description of the house appears in her memoirs: Mathilde Kschessinska, Dancing in Petersburg , trans. Arnold Haskell (Garden City, N. Y., 1961), p. 104. The vicissitudes of both the owner and the house in 1917 are also described (163, 167-171).

43. Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , p. 8.

44. Zodchii , 1908, no. 48:440-41.

45. Ibid.

44. Zodchii , 1908, no. 48:440-41.

45. Ibid.

46. For a detailed analysis, with photographs and plans, of the Melnikov house (1929), see S. Frederick Starr, Melnikov: Solo Architect in a Mass Society (Princeton, N. J., 1978), pp. 117-25.

47. Zodchii , 1908, no. 48:441.

48. Photographs of both the front and back of the house (including one in color by Sergei Prokudin-Gorskii) appeared in Zodchii , 1908, plates 50-51.

49. A general survey, well illustrated and annotated, of the development of the islands north of the mouth of the Neva River is provided by V. A. Vitiazeva, Nevskie ostrova , Leningrad, 1986. A more detailed description of Stone Island appears in the same author's Kamennyi Ostrov (Leningrad, 1975).

50. Vitiazeva, Kamennyi Ostrova , pp. 102-3. An illustration of the Gausvald dacha appeared in Zodchii , 1900, plate 56.

51. See the laudatory essay by A. G. Uspenskii, "Neskol'ko slov ob angliiskoi narodnoi arkhitekture," Zodchii , 1900, no. 4:47-52, especially the discussion of Voysey (with illustrations of three of his houses) on pp. 50-52. Uspenskii notes that he drew material for the article—based on a lecture he gave before the Society of Architects in February 1900—from German articles in Dekorative Kunst in 1898 and 1899.

52. The influence of Baillie Scott, in particular, on the design of Olbrich's own house at Matildenhöhe is suggested by Ian Latham, Joseph Maria Olbrich (New York, 1980), p. 58. The Keller house is described and illustrated on pp. 86-89.

53. Recent photographs of the Gau dacha and service buildings are included in Vitiazeva, Kamennyi Ostrov , pp. 106-7.

54. Ibid., pp. 112-21.

53. Recent photographs of the Gau dacha and service buildings are included in Vitiazeva, Kamennyi Ostrov , pp. 106-7.

54. Ibid., pp. 112-21.

55. For a list of Meltser's work in Petersburg (including the redecorating of the Winter Palace), see Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , pp. 94-95. M. V. Iogansen questions some of the attributions to Meltser of remodeled Winter Palace interiors in Ermitazh: Istoriia i arkhitektura zdanii , ed. V. I. Piliavskii (Leningrad, 1974), pp. 179-81. For additional information on the Meltser factory, see "Iubilei R. F. Mel'tsera," Zodchii , 1903, no. 45:555-56.

56. See William Brumfield, "The Decorative Arts in Russian Architecture, 1900-1907," Journal of Decorative and Propaganda Arts 5 (1987): 17, 19.

57. The carriage house is visible at the right in Fig. 219.

58. For a detailed analysis of the Andreev house, with comments on the interior by Andreev's visitors, see G. D. Bykova's excellent monograph, Andrei Ol' (Leningrad, 1976), pp. 14-20. The Andreev house (no longer extant) was extensively photographed; see Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , 1909, pp. 97-99.

59. In fact, the term "Gothicized premoderne" is used in Tokareva, "V poiskakh 'novogo stilia,'" p. 33. M. A. Kozlovskaia gives a concise analysis of the Fabergé building in "Konstruktivnye struktury," p. 132.

60. Gavriil Baranovskii's work in Petersburg is listed in Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , pp. 12-13. Three archival photographs of his interior design for the Eliseev house on Gagarin Quay are reproduced in Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, Russkaia arkhitektura 1830-1910-kh godov (Moscow, 1982), pp. 94-95. For a sketch of the Eliseev enterprise and the turbulent domestic life of the firm's last patriarch, Grigorii Grigor'evich Eliseev, see Daniil Granin, "Brat'ia Eliseevy," Ogonek , 1989, no. 23:20-23.

61. See M. A. Kozlovskaia's analysis of the relation between structure and facade in "Konstruktivnye struktury," pp. 149-50.

62. Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , pp. 124-27.

63. The exceptionally important role of Siuzor's apartment houses in the Leningrad ensemble is discussed in Valerii G. Isachenko, "V shirokom diapazone," Leningradskaia panorama , 1985, no. 10:28-31. break

64. For comments on American skyscrapers in the Russian architectural press, see William Craft Brumfield, "Russian Perceptions of American Architecture, 1870-1917," in Architecture and the New Urban Environment . A detailed description with photographs of the Singer Building in Petersburg appeared in Zodchii , 1906, no. 39:390-91; plates 41-43.

65. Zodchii , 1906, no. 39:391.

66. Ibid., p. 390.

67. Ibid.

65. Zodchii , 1906, no. 39:391.

66. Ibid., p. 390.

67. Ibid.

65. Zodchii , 1906, no. 39:391.

66. Ibid., p. 390.

67. Ibid.

68. For a listing of the technical consultants and contractors in the Singer project, see ibid., p. 391.

69. Isachenko, Arkhitektory-stroiteli , p. 117.

70. Kirichenko illustrates the original appearance of the building in an archival photograph ( Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 222).

71. The Building of the Guards' Economic Society was described and illustrated in Zodchii , 1910, no. 478:471-73, and plates 48-50. The cost of the structure was listed as 1.2 million rubles.

72. Petrov, Pamiatniki arkhitektury Leningrada , pp. 385-87.

73. Vasilev described the passage in Zodchii , 1913, no. 10:119, and plate 5.

74. Illustrations of both projects, with other competition entries, were published in Zodchii , 1912, plates 18 and 23. The project for the Noblemen's Assembly went to the Kosiakov brothers, who are discussed at the end of this chapter.

75. A. V. Erofeev provides information on Ia. V. Roll (a real estate developer from Kharkov) and his project for the Sretenskii shopping passage and cinema (Moscow) in "Vydaiushchiesia sovetskie arkhitektory brat'ia L. A., V. A. i A. A. Vesniny," in Problemy istorii sovetskoi arkhitekturnogo , ed. A. A. Strigaleva (Moscow, 1985), pp. 112-13. The project sketches appeared in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 4 (1914-1916), pp. 36-37.

76. The design of Behrens's house at Matildenhöhe was featured in Pavel Makarov's report on the 1901 Darmstadt exhibition, Zodchii , 1902, no. 33:372-73.

77. Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1913, p. 107. See also Marian Lialevich, "Dom germanskogo posol'stva," Peterburgskaia gazeta , 1913, no. 19. A detailed critique of the embassy—with favorable commentary on Behrens's rough-hewn interpretation of neoclassicism, but with no mention of his name—appeared in an article signed "G." ("Dom germanskogo posol'stva," Arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennyi ezhenedel'nik , 1914, no. 2:5-7). After the beginning of the war, another article in the same journal showed a predictable nationalist reaction against the embassy building and its symbolic projection of German might. See Martell, "Razgadannyi rebus," Arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennyi ezhenedel'nik , 1914, no. 26:253-55.

78. Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 4 (1915), p. 120, with accompanying photograph. The Vyborg station (1904-1913) was destroyed during the Second World War. See Saarinen in Finland , p. 48.

79. For a detailed survey of Lishnevskii's career, see S. G. Fedorov, "I obraz, i funktsiia," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1980, no. 6:31-35.

80. See Valerii G. Isachenko, "Tvorchestvo brat'ev Kosiakovykh," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1981, no. 6:34-37. This summary of work by the Kosiakov brothers includes exterior photographs of a number of churches by Vasilii Kosiakov.

81. For archival photographs of the interior of the Naval Cathedral, see E. I. Kirichenko, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 376-77.

82. "Molitvennyi dom staroobriadtsev," Zodchii , 1908, no. 45:418-19. The church was also extensively illustrated in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 2 (1907), pp. 54-55; no. 3 (1908), pp. 51-55; no. 4 (1909), pp. 51-53.

83. The project for the mosque was commented on several times in Zodchii , including a critique of the competition entries, 1908, no. 15:135-36. See also Petrov, Pamiatniki arkhitektury Leningrada , pp. 405-7.

84. Ibid., p. 405.

83. The project for the mosque was commented on several times in Zodchii , including a critique of the competition entries, 1908, no. 15:135-36. See also Petrov, Pamiatniki arkhitektury Leningrada , pp. 405-7.

84. Ibid., p. 405.

85. Project sketches and photographs of the synagogue appeared in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 3 (1908), p. 31; no. 6 (1911), pp. 26-29; no. 7 (1912), p. 33.

86. See Borisova and Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura , pp. 113, 130-31. A history of various projects to rebuild the Sytnyi Market is contained in Marina Orlova, "Sytnyi, Mytnyi, i drugie," Leningradskaia panorama , 1989, no. 5:25-27.

87. 'M. G. Strakun,' Novyi stil': Fasady gorodskikh domov (Petrograd, 1917). Strakun in fact published three volumes of facades under the title Novyi stil' (New style). I am indebted to John Bowlt for bringing this material to my attention.

1. "Arkhitekturnaia letopis'." Apollon , 1911, no. 11:38.

2. During this same period in Europe, the moderne in its various manifestations (Secession, art nouveau, etc.) had begun to wane, particularly after the Turin Decorative Art exhibition of 1902. For a summary of responses to the decline, see Eduard F. Sekler, Josef Hoffman (Princeton, 1985), pp. 108-9. break

3. V. G. Lisovskii, I. A. Fomin , (Leningrad, 1979), pp. 10-11.

4. Catherine Cooke, "Shekhtel in Kelvingrove and Mackintosh on the Petrovka," Scottish Slavonic Review 10 (1988): 196; and William Craft Brumfield, "The Decorative Arts in Russian Architecture, 1900-1907," Journal of Decorative and Propaganda Arts 5 (1987): 20-22.

5. "Moskovskii klassitsizm," Mir iskusstva , 1904, no. 7: 187.

6. The title of the journal ( Starye gody ) itself indicates retrospective, elegiac sympathies; it published primarily historical articles and memoirs of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Until its demise in 1904, Mir iskusstva showed sympathy to both the new style and the aesthetic revival of neoclassicism.

7. "Istoricheskaia vystavka arkhitektury v S-Peterburge," Starye gody , July-September 1908:578.

8. Istoriia russkogo iskusstva , vol. 3 (Petersburg, 1909). For comment on the exhibit and its legacy, see Lisovskii, I. A. Fomin , pp. 38-39. The lavishly illustrated volume published in conjunction with the exhibit contained an introduction by Aleksandr Benois, a historical survey by L. V. Rudnitskii, and biographical entries on the architects by Fomin: Istoricheskaia vystavka arkhitektury (Petersburg, 1911).

9. Elena A. Borisova and Tatiana P. Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka (Moscow, 1971), p. 169.

10. Photographs, including details of Kuznetsov's sculpture, were published in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 4 (1909), pp. 66-73.

11. Iurii Rokh [Georgii Lukomskii], "Novoe stroitel'stvo v S.-Peterburge," Apollon , 1909, no. 1:14. That the indefatigable Lukomskii wrote both under a pseudonym and under his own name in Apollon gave the impression that the major Russian cultural journal had two architectural critics, in addition to guest commentators—an indication of the significance placed on architecture in the classical aesthetic revival. Lukomskii acknowledged his authorship of the Rokh articles (in the first three issues of Apollon for 1909) in a note at the conclusion of his article "Novyi Peterburg," Apollon , 1913, no. 2:38.

12. [Georgii Lukomskii], "Novoe stroitel'stvo v S.-Peterburge," p. 17.

13. Ibid.

12. [Georgii Lukomskii], "Novoe stroitel'stvo v S.-Peterburge," p. 17.

13. Ibid.

14. E. E. Kruze analyzes the growth of Petersburg's banks at the turn of the century in "Transport, torgovlia, kredit," in B. M. Kochakov, ed., Ocherki istorii Leningrada , vol. 3, Period imperializma i burzhuazno-demokraticheskikh revoliutsii (Moscow-Leningrad, 1956), pp. 89-97. In English see Alfred Rieber, Merchants and Entrepreneurs in Imperial Russia (Chapel Hill, N. C., 1982), pp. 364-69. For a recent overview of the development of Petersburg in this period, see Karl Schlogel, Jenseits des Grossen Oktober: Das Laboratorium der moderne Petersburg, 1909-1921 (Berlin, 1988), with particular reference to bank construction, pp. 55, 181.

15. See the photographs of the Siberian Trade Bank in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 5 (1910), pp. 44-48.

16. For a brief survey of the career of Peretiatkovich, see B. M. Kirikov, "Mar'ian Mar'ianovich Peretiatkovich," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1973, no. 1:30-31. See also the obituary by G. Kosmachevskii in Zodchii , 1916, no. 23:219-20.

17. Vasilii Kurbatov, "O stile i o lozhnikh stiliakh," Zodchii , 1908, no. 14:124.

18. "Eshche o stile," Zodchii , 1908, no. 15:134.

19. Ibid.

18. "Eshche o stile," Zodchii , 1908, no. 15:134.

19. Ibid.

20. Information on the planning of the New Petersburg project is drawn from a technical report by the noted Petersburg civil engineer Aleksandr Montag: "Izmenenie plana ostrova Golodaia," in Zodchii , 1915, no. 49:510; and from Georgii Lukomskii, "O postroika Novogo Peterburga," Zodchii , 1912, no. 52:519-21.

21. Kurbatov, "O stile i o lozhnikh stiliakh," p. 125.

22. Lukomskii, "O postroika Novogo Peterburga," pp. 520-21.

23. Ibid., p. 521.

24. Ibid.

22. Lukomskii, "O postroika Novogo Peterburga," pp. 520-21.

23. Ibid., p. 521.

24. Ibid.

22. Lukomskii, "O postroika Novogo Peterburga," pp. 520-21.

23. Ibid., p. 521.

24. Ibid.

25. Ivan Fomin, "Proekt zastroiki territorii Tuchkova buiana," Arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennyi ezhenedelnik , 1915, no. 49:469-74.

26. Competition announcement for the First Russian Insurance Company apartment building on Kamennoostrovskii Prospekt, Zodchii , 1910, no. 30:318.

27. "Dom Pervogo Rossiiskogo strakhovogo obshchestva," Zodchii , 1913, no. 14:167.

28. Ibid.

27. "Dom Pervogo Rossiiskogo strakhovogo obshchestva," Zodchii , 1913, no. 14:167.

28. Ibid.

29. A number of Shchuko's sketches appeared in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 2 (1907), pp. 142-45, as well as in other issues of this annual. Although Shchuko's Italian exhibition pavilions had less effect on his domestic work than Shekhtel's Glasgow pavilions did on his, they were among the most finely conceived of Shchuko's neoclassical revival projects. Lukomskii noted that the Rome pavilion "beautifully and calmly expresses the majesty of Russia and reveals our 'Europeanism'" ("Po Italii: Arkhitekturnye vpechatleniia," Zodchii , 1911, no. 37:385). Not all Russian opinion was favorable, however; see A. D. Alekseeva, ed., Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka, 1908-1917 , (Moscow, 1980), 4:342-43. The standard monograph on continue

Shchuko is Tatiana Slavina, Vladimir Shchuko (Leningrad, 1978).

30. Georgii Lukomskii, "Novyi Peterburg: Mysli o sovremennom stroitel'stve," Apollon , 1913, no. 2:24.

31. Georgii Lukomskii, "Neo-klasitsizm v arkhitekture Peterburga," Apollon , 1914, no. 5:10.

32. Lukomskii, "Novyi Peterburg," p. 25.

33. Vasilii Kurbatov, "Upadok ili smert'?" Zodchii , 1910, no. 49:486.

34. Georgii Lukomskii, "Arkhitekturnye vkusy sovremennosti," Trudy IV s"ezda russkikh zodchikh (Petersburg, 1911), p. 28. A similar attack against "excessive" individualism appeared in Lukomskii's "Novyi Peterburg," p. 9.

35. Lukomskii, "Arkhitekturnye vkusy sovremennosti," p. 32.

36. Tamanov's design for the Shcherbatov apartment house, located on a segment of the Garden Ring, was extensively photographed in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 7 (1912), pp. 123-27. The neoclassical interior design for Prince Shcherbatov's own apartment within the building was the focus of an even more lavish photographic display in the same annual, no. 9 (1914), pp. 140-49. The Velikovskii design appeared in Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , no. 1, (1912), p. 5.

37. Lukomskii, "Arkhitekturnye vkusy sovremennosti," p. 31.

38. Ibid., p. 34.

37. Lukomskii, "Arkhitekturnye vkusy sovremennosti," p. 31.

38. Ibid., p. 34.

39. For a description of the Rozenshtein project, see E. K. Ivanova and I. Z. Maseev, "Proekty, sozvuchnye vremeni," Stroitel'stvo i arkhitektura Leningrada , 1981, no. 5:35.

40. The apartments were designed by Rozenshtein with all the latest conveniences, including gas stoves, central heating, and a garage for automobiles. See Ivanova and Maseev, p. 36. Belogrud at the time was employed by the E. I. Gontskevich firm of contractors, which built the Rozenshtein buildings as well as other apartment houses in the area of Bolshoi Prospekt. See S. F. Leont'eva, "Romanticheskie iskaniia: Zametki o tvorchestve A. E. Belogruda," Leningradskaia panorama , 1986, no. 2:35.

41. No. 77 Bolshoi Prospekt originally had a seventh, "penthouse," floor that used the attic arcade as a form of loggia. See the detailed photographs following p. 18 of Lukomskii's "Neo-klasitsizm v arkhitekture Peterburga." Rozenshtein's solid engineering enabled the building to survive a bomb explosion nearby during the siege of Leningrad, and as a result of restoration work—supervised by Rozenshtein himself—the top floor was eliminated, and the arcade and statuary were supported from behind by metal braces. Indeed, to judge by the facade sketch published in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 8 (1911), p. 52, this open arcade corresponds to the architect's original intention.

42. See Belogrud's later project sketches in Leont'eva, "Romanticheskie iskaniia," p. 35.

43. Lukomskii, "Neo-klasitsizm v arkhitekture Peterburga," p. 19.

44. Lukomskii, "Novyi Peterburg," p. 22.

45. For a survey of this work, see Lisovskii, I. A. Fomin , pp. 43-47. All these projects were photographed for Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov : the Shakhovskaia interior in no. 6 (1911), pp. 106-10; the Obolenskii house in no. 8 (1913), pp. 196-99; the Gagarin estate in no. 9 (1914), pp. 151-54.

46. Shmidt's work on the original design and his subsequent replacement by Fomin are noted in I. G. Tokareva, "V poiskakh 'novogo stilia,'" Leningradskaia panorama , 1987, no. 8:35.

47. For a description of the interior decoration, see V. A. Vitiazeva, Kamennyi Ostrov (Leningrad, 1975), pp. 147-49. The importance of the Polovtsev mansion as the summa of the neoclassical revival is indicated by its extensive photographic coverage in the major journals. Lukomskii's "Novyi Peterburg" (in Apollon ) included four photographs of the house; fourteen more, including many views of the interior, appeared in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 11 (1916), pp. 95-109; and Zodchii published a lyrical view in the illustrated supplement to its 1916 volume.

48. V. A. Vitiazeva, Nevskie ostrova (Leningrad, 1986), p. 118.

49. For a detailed analysis of the design and decoration of the Abamalek-Lazarev house, see Lisovskii, I. A. Fomin , pp. 53-60. Several photographs appeared in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 11 (1916), pp. 110-16.

50. Lisovskii, I. A. Fomin , pp. 61-68. Photographs of Fomin's designs for these projects appeared, as usual, in major architectural publications, particularly Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov .

51. Lukomskii, "Novyi Peterburg," pp. 26-27.

52. After Ohl traveled to Italy in 1914, he too turned to Renaissance interpretations of classical themes. Although the example of other Petersburg Renaissance stylists was clearly in evidence, Ohl's neoclassical work before 1914 derived from the Empire style—or from Petrine classicism. For a discussion of the Belozerskii house in the context of Ohl's other work of the period, see G. D. Bykova, Andrei Ol ' (Leningrad, 1976), pp. 31-37.

53. Vitiazeva, Kamennyi Ostrov , pp. 137-38.

54. Borisova and Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 177. break

55. For a view of the Tarasovs by a close acquaintance of the family, see Pavel A. Buryshkin, Moskva kupecheskaia (New York, 1954), pp. 200-202.

56. Ibid., p. 201. Zholtovskii altered the Palladian model by treating the second story in a lighter (rather than heavier) manner and by using a system of proportional relations derived from the Palace of the Doges, which he had measured during his trip to Italy. See "I. V. Zholtovskii," in Zodchie Moskvy: XX vek , ed. M. I. Astaf'eva-Dlugach and Iu. P. Volshok (Moscow, 1988), p. 50.

55. For a view of the Tarasovs by a close acquaintance of the family, see Pavel A. Buryshkin, Moskva kupecheskaia (New York, 1954), pp. 200-202.

56. Ibid., p. 201. Zholtovskii altered the Palladian model by treating the second story in a lighter (rather than heavier) manner and by using a system of proportional relations derived from the Palace of the Doges, which he had measured during his trip to Italy. See "I. V. Zholtovskii," in Zodchie Moskvy: XX vek , ed. M. I. Astaf'eva-Dlugach and Iu. P. Volshok (Moscow, 1988), p. 50.

57. Evgenii Lanceray was affiliated with the World of Art movement, while Nivinskii acquired a reputation as Moscow's leading "architectural" painter. Like Fomin's houses in Petersburg, the Tarasov mansion was extensively photographed in the architectural press, and a series of exterior and interior views was included in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , no. 8 (1913), pp. 83-91. The house was also the subject of a richly illustrated article "Ital'ianskii palatstso v Moskve," in Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1912, no. 1:85-88.

58. Georgii Lukomskii, "Novosti arkhitekturnoi zhizni," Zodchii , 1910, no. 6:56.

59. For a description of Nikolai Riabushinskii's colorful life, see Bowlt, "Nikolai Ryabushinsky: Playboy of the Eastern World," Apollo , December 1973:487-88. Photographs of the interior and exterior of the house appeared in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 2 (1910-1911), pp. 11-14.

60. A brief survey of the Vtorov clan is contained in Buryshkin, Moskva kupecheskaia , pp. 197-200. Vtorov continued to live in the house for a short period after the revolution but was shot in May 1918 "under mysterious circumstances" that may have involved one of his relatives. In any event the Moscow Soviet permitted a public funeral, attended by a large and respectful crowd that included workers' delegations from Vtorov's various textile factories. In 1934 the house was converted to the American ambassador's residence.

61. The innovative work of Ivanov-Schitz has received little attention in Soviet scholarship. Photographs of his building for the Merchants' Club were included in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 1 (1909), pp. 32-34; and in Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1912, no. 1:41.

62. See Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1913, no. 2:86-87; and 1914, no. 3:31, 34.

63. See Iu. S. Iaralov and S. M. Zemtsov, eds., Zodchie Moskvy XV-XIX vv . (Moscow, 1981), pp. 292-96. The museum was originally named after Alexander III, although the government provided only 200,000 rubles toward its construction, in comparison with over 2 million from Nechaev-Maltsev. Now named in honor of Aleksandr Pushkin, the museum is the subject of an exhaustive study based on Klein's correspondence with Tsvetaev: I. E. Danilova, ed., Gosudarstvennyi muzei izobrazitel'nykh iskusstv imeni A. S. Pushkina: Istoriia sozdaniia muzeia v perepiske professora I. V. Tsvetaeva s arkhitektorom R. I. Kleinom i drugikh dokumentakh, 1898-1912 , 2 vols. (Moscow, 1977). Photographs of the museum accompanied the article "Novyi muzei iziashchnykh iskusstv imeni Imperatora Aleksandra III," Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1912, no. 1:77-83; and 1913, no. 2:47-52.

64. See Evgeniia I. Kirichenko, "Istorizm myshleniia i tip muzeinogo zdaniia v russkoi arkhitekture serediny i vtoroi poloviny XIX v," in Vziamosviaz' iskusstv v khudozhest-vennom razvitii Rossii vtoroi poloviny XIX v ., ed. G. Iu. Sternin (Moscow, 1982), p. 145.

65. Klein's sketches for the Iusupov mausoleum appeared in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 1 (1909), pp. 35-37. His assistant in the project was Grigorii Barkhin, later a leading Constructivist architect.

66. See Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1913, no. 2:45-46; and 1912, no. 1:72-73, for interior photographs.

67. See "Novaia Moskva," Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1915, no. 4:21, 25.

68. See "Sergei Ustinovich Solovev," Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir , 1913, no. 2:18-20; and 1914, no. 3:26, 30.

69. M. I. Astaf'eva-Dlugach and Iu. P. Volshok, eds., Zodchie Moskvy: XX vek (Moscow, 1988), pp. 65-66. Rerberg was assisted by Viacheslav Oltarzhevskii, who also collaborated in work on the Northern Insurance Company project.

70. See the unsigned article on new construction in the Kitai-Gorod district, "Novaia Moskva," Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir 3 (1914):61-67.

71. Sketches of the more highly ornamented initial version of the Northern Insurance Company project appeared in Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo arkhitekturnogo obshchestva , no. 1 (1909), pp. 98-99. Photographs of the completed building were published in no. 2 (1910-1911), pp. 82-84, and in Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir 1 (1912): 1, 3, 4.

72. Buryshkin, p. 198. Information on the financing of the project appeared in "Novaia Moskva," Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir 3 (1914): 62-63, with accompanying photographs. For a discussion of the technical aspects of the structure (a combination of brick walls and reinforced concrete), see M. A. Kozlovskaia, "Konstruktivnye struktury i arkhitekturnye formy grazhdanskikh zdanii," in Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaia forma v russkom zodchestve XIX-nachala XX vv ., ed. Iu. S. Lebedev (Moscow, 1977), pp. 139-42.

73. M. P. Makotinskii, "A. V. Kuznetsov," in Zodchie Moskvy: XX vek , pp. 104-5. break

74. Because of the outbreak of war, the proceedings of the fifth congress were never published. Aleksandr Kuznetsov's lecture appeared in the two-part article "Arkhitektura zhelezobetona," Zodchii , 1915, no. 19:191-98; and no. 20:203-9. For a critical assessment of the fifth congress and the split between the architecture and engineering sections, see A. D. Alekseeva, Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka, 1908-1917 , 4:332-33.

75. Aleksandr Kuznetsov, "Arkhitektura zhelezobetona," Zodchii , 1915, no. 20:209.

76. A. Stepanov, "O promyshlennom zodchestve (Zametki i mysli)," Zodchii , 1915, no. 12:119-23; and no. 13:131-137. After 1914 the role of industrial architecture assumed increasing importance, not only because the war made demands on industry but also because the commercial and housing markets declined rapidly. For a survey of architectural developments in Russia during the First World War, see A. A. Strigalev, "Spetsificheskie cherty arkhitektury Rossii v period mezhdu nachalom pervoi mirovoi voiny i oktiabr'skoi revoliutsiei," in Problemy istorii sovetskoi arkhitektury , ed. A. A. Strigalev (Moscow, 1985), pp. 6-30.

77. A. M. Ginzburg, "Rol' Germanii v russkoi stroitel'noi promyshlennosti," Zodchii , 1915, no. 16:155-59.

78. For a brief discussion of Ginzburg's work, see Borisova and Kazhdan, Russkaia arkhitektura , p. 138, with illustrations on p. 141. Although Ginzburg has received little attention in Soviet publications, numerous photographs and sketches of his work appeared in Moskovskii arkhitekturnyi mir 2 (1913): 92-97; 3 (1914): 111-16; and 4 (1915): 78.

79. The House of Public Meetings is now a railway workers' club. See N. L. Zharikov, Pamiatniki gradostroitel'stva i arkhitektury Ukrainskoi SSR v chetyrekh tomakh (Kiev, 1983), 2:127-28.

80. V. Machinskii, "Arkhitekturnye zametki," Zodchii , 1914, no. 25:297. His earlier article under the same title questioned the cultural leadership of the bourgeoisie and commented on the collapse of aesthetic standards (see Zodchii , 1914, no. 11:126-28).

81. "Arkhitekturnye zametki," Zodchii , no. 25:297.

82. Ibid., p. 298. Although Machinskii's artistic tastes are, to say the least, conservative, his attitude toward modernism seems the product not so much of critical hostility as of social analysis during a period of crisis. After the revolution, Machinskii wrote extensively on the development of workers' housing. See S. Frederick Starr, Melnikov: Solo Architect in a Mass Society (Princeton, N. J., 1978), p. 122.

81. "Arkhitekturnye zametki," Zodchii , no. 25:297.

82. Ibid., p. 298. Although Machinskii's artistic tastes are, to say the least, conservative, his attitude toward modernism seems the product not so much of critical hostility as of social analysis during a period of crisis. After the revolution, Machinskii wrote extensively on the development of workers' housing. See S. Frederick Starr, Melnikov: Solo Architect in a Mass Society (Princeton, N. J., 1978), p. 122.

83. "Arkhitekturnye zametki," Zodchii , 1914, no. 25:300. For a lucid discussion of the intellectual background of these ambivalent, often hostile, attitudes toward capitalism and the development of a "bourgeoisie" in Russia, see Alexander Gerschenkron, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), pp. 152-87.

84. See the conference report by Mariia Koroleva, "V vserossiiskii s"ezd zodchikh," Zodchii , 1914, no. 2:17. A survey of critical attacks on the style moderne after 1910 is presented in Vladimir V. Kirillov, Arkhitektura russkogo moderna (Moscow, 1979), pp. 41-43.

85. Oskar Munts, "Parfenon ili Sv. Sofiia? K sporu o klassitsizme v arkhitekture," Arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennyi ezhenedel'nik , 1916, no. 2:19-22. The article by Benois, which appeared during November and December in the newspaper Rech ', took as its point of departure the neoclassical, retrospective trend in a recent show of student projects at the Academy of Arts.

86. Munts, "Parfenon ili Sv. Sofiia?" p. 22. Munts's article gave rise to an extended polemic with a group of neoclassical revivalists—writing under the name Duodecim, or the Twelve—who praised classicism as a universal language of architecture and culture. See "Za arkhitekturu," Arkhitekturno-khudozhestvennyi ezhenedel'nik , 1916, no. 9:115-18. The polemic continued in subsequent issues during 1916, with replies from both Munts and Duodecim. A recent Soviet article identifies Duodecim as a group of advanced students (including Georgii Lukomskii) in the architectural program at the Academy of Arts: A. A. Strigalev, "Spetsificheskie cherty arkhitektury Rossii v period mezhdu nachalom pervoi mirovoi voiny i oktiabr'skoi revoliutsiei," p. 29.

87. For a discussion of Munts's project for Tuchkov Buian, in which he competed with two other architects, Ivan Fomin and Mikhail Dubinskii, see Alekseeva, Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka, 1908-1917 , 4:330, 332. A number of Munts's projects were published in Ezhegodnik Obshchestva arkhitektorov-khudozhnikov , particularly in no. 2 (1907), no. 4 (1909), no. 6 (1911), and no. 8 (1913). The 1912 volume contained a design for the main Moscow Post Office, which he co-designed with the engineer L. I. Novikov. The final design of the post office facade was modified by the Vesnin brothers, under contract with the firm of P. P. Visnevskii. See A. V. Erofeev, "Moskovskii neoklassitsizm (predrevoliutsionnoe tvorchestvo Vesninikh)," in Strigaleva, Problemy istorii sovetskoi arkhitektury , pp. 46, 50-51.

88. For a brief account of Munts's career after the revolution, see Barkhin, Mastera , 1:69-74.

89. Lukomskii, "Novyi Peterburg," p. 10.

90. Georgii Lukomskii, Sovremennyi Petrograd (Petrograd, n.d.), p. 30. This slender, elegant volume, subtitled "A Sketch of the History of the Appearance and Development of Neoclassical Construction," represents a compendium of Lukomskii's major writings on the neoclassical revival—including those in the 1913 and 1914 issues of Apollon —with an expanded preface, from which the quotation in the text comes. The imperial eagle and other insignia on the cover, as well as the material surveyed, indicate a publication date of 1916. Excellent photographic plates follow the essay. break

91. Lukomskii (1884-1954), a descendant of Ukrainian nobility, left Russia by way of Kiev, where in 1918 he participated in a survey of the city's medieval churches. After the German troops withdrew from the Ukraine at the end of the First World War, Lukomskii emigrated to France and resumed his career as a prolific writer, publishing frequently in French and English on European as well as Russian art. His lasting affection for the architecture of Italy and its classical values is reflected in the books he wrote on Venice, Rome, and the work of Vignola.

92. Moisei Ginzburg, Style and Epoch , trans. and ed. Anatole Senkevitch, Jr. (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1982), p. 42. The translator's introduction surveys the intellectual background of Ginzburg's analysis of art and society.

93. See Fig. 240. For a discussion of the prerevolutionary neoclassical phase in the work of the Vesnin brothers, see A. V. Erofeev, "Moskovskii neoklassitsizm (predrevoliutsionno tvorchestvo Vesninykh)," in Strigaleva, Problemy istorii sovetskoi arkhitektury , pp. 41-52. The neoclassical revival continued during the early period of Soviet power, as architects such as Fomin, Belogrud, and Shchuko produced numerous designs for public buildings in the so-called Red Doric or proletarian classical manner. Two remarkable examples are project sketches, dating from 1919, by Fomin and Belogrud for a Palace of Workers, reproduced in A. M. Zhuravlev, A. V. Ikonnikov, and A. G. Rochegov, Arkhitektura sovetskoi Rossii (Moscow, 1987), pp. 56, 59. The persistence of neoclassicism in the work of many prominent architects during the first two decades of Soviet rule does not, however, justify the assumption that post-revolutionary modernism, Constructivism in particular, was essentially derived from a rationalist interpretation of the neoclassical revival. For further discussion of the complex relation between modern neoclassicism in Russia and the rationalist approach to design, both before and after the revolution, see Selim V. Khan-Magomedov, Aleksandr Vesnin and Russian Constructivism (New York, 1986), pp. 15, 34-35.

94. The question of continuity during the period of transition in early Soviet architecture is examined in V. E. Khazanova, Sovetskaia arkhitektura pervykh let oktiabria, 1917-1925 gg . (Moscow, 1970).

95. Books on city planning included A. Ensh, Goroda-sady (goroda budushchego ) (Petersburg, 1913); V. Semenov, Blagoustroistvo gorodov (Moscow, 1912); V. Dadonov, Sotsializm bez politiki: Goroda-sady budushchego v nastoiashchem (Petersburg, 1912); Mikhail Dikanskii, Postroika gorodov, ikh plan i krasota (Petrograd, 1915). In addition, numerous articles on city planning by these specialists and others regularly appeared in journals such as Zodchii and Gorodskoe delo . For a survey of this material see Alekseeva, Russkaia khudozhestvennaia kul'tura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka, 1908-1917 , 4:298-303. The Soviet scholar V. L. Ruzhzhe has written numerous articles on the topic, as well as Progressivnye tvorcheskie vozzreniia arkhitektorov Peterburgskoi shkoly kontsa XIX-nachala XX vv. (Idei gorodovsadov ) (Moscow, 1961). S. Frederick Starr provides an informed discussion of Russian approaches to town planning during the decade before and after 1917 in "The Revival and Schism of Urban Planning in Twentieth-Century Russia," in The City in Russian History , ed. Michael F. Hamm (Lexington, 1976), pp. 222-42. Early Soviet approaches to planning and the link with prerevolutionary concepts are also analyzed in Khazanova, Sovietskaia arkhitektura , pp. 43-100.

96. See William C. Brumfield, "Architecture and Urban Planning," in The Soviet Union Today: An Interpretive Guide ed. James Cracraft (Chicago, 1988), pp. 164-176.

97. The current revival of interest in the style moderne and its aestheticism is evident not only from the rush of Soviet articles and books on the topic during the past two decades, abundantly clear in the citations to the present work, but also from the growing interest on the part of the Soviet public in preserved monuments such as the Riabushinskii house. break