DOI 10.51255/2311–603X_2025_3_187

S. V. Bondarev. The Activities of the Gatchina and Peterhof Palace Administrations at the
Beginning of the 20th Century // Petersburg Historical Journal, no. 3, 2025, pp. 187–197

Abstract:

The famous suburbs of St. Petersburg — Peterhof and Gatchina — had the status of palace towns
at the beginning of the 20th century and were under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Imperial Court. The purpose of this article is to study the management system and organization of the economy of two settlements in the 1900s as a separate type of urban settlements. The study is devoted to a little-known side of the activities of suburban Palace Administrations, which, along with servicing the royal palace complexes, were engaged in the development of urban infrastructure and were responsible for all aspects of the life of settlements that were part of the suburban imperial residences. An appeal to the history of the development of two cities of
the Court Department provides for consideration of the features of construction development, communal and gardening, public safety and other aspects. The analysis of interaction of senior officials of various departments with ordinary employees, the mode of work of services in directions, the specifics of work of architects, police chiefs, custodians, fire chiefs, fountain attendants and representatives of other professions allows to present a picture of everyday life in suburbs with a special status. As a result of the work, the features of economic activity of Peterhof and Gatchina palace administrations as bodies engaged in provision of royal residences and towns near them are revealed. Scientific novelty lies in a comprehensive consideration of organizational and administrative work on management of economy of two palace towns and issues of organization of economy and urban economy of Peterhof and Gatchina at the beginning of the 20th century. The study will allow to supplement the picture of the national system of organization and management in the Russian Empire, to make a contribution to the study of history of cities of the Russian Empire. Also, the article contains new information for studying the history of palace and park ensembles in Peterhof and Gatchina.

Key words: Ministry of the Imperial Court, Nicholas II, Peterhof, Gatchina, Palace Administration, royal residence, city, palace, Alexandria, Russian Empire.

Author:

Bondarev, Sergey Viktorovich — Candidate of Historical Sciences, Head of the Exhibition
Service, Peterhof State Museum-Reserve; Research Fellow, St. Petersburg Institute of History, Russian Academy of Sciences (St. Petersburg, Russia).
E-mail: evr@peterhofmuseum.ru

References:

Efimov, A. A. Deyatel’nost’ Ministerstva imperatorskogo dvora po gradostroitel’nomu razvitiyu Petergofa pri Nikolae I [Activities of the Ministry of the Imperial Court for the Urban Development of Peterhof under Nicholas I. In Russ.]. In Peterburgskii istoricheskii zhurnal. 2018. No. 3 (19), pp. 25–35.

Efimov, A. A. Osobennosti soglasovaniya remontno-stroitel’nykh rabot v Gatchine v kontse XIX — nachale XX vekov [Features of the Approval of Repair and Construction Works in Gatchina in the Late 19th — Early 20th Centuries. In Russ.]. In Uchenye zapiski Novgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2021. No. 6 (39), pp. 617–620.

Efimov, A. A. Regulirovanie i kontrol’ chastnoi zastroiki v Gatchine v 1830–1840-h gg.: razreshitel’nye protsedury [Regulation and Control of Private Construction in Gatchina in the 1830–1840s: Permitting Procedures. In Russ.]. In Peterburgskii istoricheskii zhurnal. 2017. No. 1 (13), pp. 50–59.

Gushchin, V. I. Istoriya Petergofa i ego zhitelei [History of Peterhof and its Inhabitants. In Russ.]. Book 1. St. Petersburg, 2001. 510 p.

Khoruzhaya, T. I. Pervye shagi v elektrifikatsii Aleksandrii [The First Steps in the Electrification of
Alexandria. In Russ.]. In Dvortsy i tekhnika: sbornik statei po materialam nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii GMZ “Petergof”. St. Petersburg, GMZ “Petergof”, 2021. P. 168–178.

Tikhonravova, Z. B. Telefonnaya set’ obshchestvennogo pol’zovaniya v imperatorskom Petergofe [Public Telephone Network in Imperial Peterhof. In Russ.]. In Dvortsy i tekhnika: sbornik statei po materialam nauchnoprakticheskoi konferentsii GMZ “Petergof”. St. Petersburg, GMZ “Petergof”, 2021. P. 150–167.

Uzhgerenas, M. P. Poslednyaya letnyaya rezidentsiya imperatora Nikolaya II: rol’ inzhenernoi infrastruktury v formirovanii kompleksa “Nizhnyaya dacha” v parke “Aleksandriya” v Petergofe [The Last Summer Residence of Emperor Nicholas II: the Role of Engineering Infrastructure in the Formation of the Lower Dacha Complex in the Alexandria Park in Peterhof. In Russ.]. In Urbanistika. 2018. No. 1, pp. 14–29.

Zimin, I. V. Aleksandrovskii dvorets v Tsarskom sele: lyudi i steny [Alexander Palace in Tsarskoe Selo: People and Walls. In Russ.]. St. Petersburg, Tsentrpoligraf, 2015. 636 p.

Zimin, I. V. Anichkov dvorets: rezidentsiya naslednikov prestola [Anichkov Palace: Residence of the Heirs to the Throne. In Russ.]. Moscow, Tsentrpoligraf, 2019. 624 p.

Перейти к полноэкранному режиму

Similar Posts

|

PHJ № 2 (34) 2022 — Z. A. Ismailova. POSTHUMOUS CHRONICLE PRAISE OF THE RULER AS A HISTORICAL SOURCE

This article is devoted to the study of such a separate historical and literary genre as the chronicle praise of the ruler. During the 11th–16th centuries, chronicle praise was a very common technique of medieval scribes. Comparing the praises of different Russian Chronicles and different historical periods, the author proves that the chronicle praise of the ruler grew out of a brief posthumous description of him, reflected the chronicler’s good knowledge, his likes and dislikes, and in the 12th century acquired a ready-made form — a literary form. Early praises (11th–13th centuries) correctly reflected historical reality, contained individual traits of the ruler, changed depending on historical conditions, which increases their value as a historical source. It was also found out that there were two main forms of praise — southern and northern. The difference between them is that southern praise was secular, while northern praise was ecclesiastical; southern praise was limited to local interests, and northern praise had a world-historical scale. In general, praise can be considered as a separate chronicle of the medieval genre, characterized by special plot and stylistic features.

| |

PHJ № 3 (47) 2025 — K. V. Godunov. DEBATES ON CIVIL WAR DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR

This article examines how the debates that took place during the First World War influenced the dissemination of the concept of “civil war” and the impact this had on the political situation of the time. Particular attention is paid to discussions within the radical socialist milieu. It is demonstrated that the proponents of the slogan advocating the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war — first and foremost, V. I. Lenin and his supporters — acted within a specific historical and ideological context. They took into account the earlier discursive articulations of civil war as well as the experiences of socialists in other countries, particularly the rhetoric of Karl Liebknecht. Drawing on the views of prominent Bolsheviks such as A. G. Shlyapnikov, A. M. Kollontai, and N. I. Bukharin, the study shows that not all members of the party unequivocally supported Lenin’s call for civil war. Even among Lenin’s prominent allies, interpretations of the slogan varied, with differing views expressed regarding its meaning and practical implementation. Debates about the means of ending the global conflict and about the prospects for revolution and civil war were significant in several respects. During the First World War, the Bolsheviks acquired the reputation of being the “party of civil war”. This image played a major role in various anti-Bolshevik propaganda campaigns in 1917, even though in reality, not all members of the party fully endorsed Lenin’s position. Disputes surrounding the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war contributed to the cultural preparation for internal conflict. The notion of “civil war” gained renewed momentum and expanded its reach; its articulation during the crises of the First World War contributed to the radicalisation of the political situation. These debates among socialists led party activists at various levels — regardless of their agreement or disagreement with the necessity of civil war — to engage with the idea and to participate in the development of a political language centred around violence.

PHJ No 4 (36) 2022 – G.M.Ivanova. The quality of life of a Soviet person in the mid-1950s through the eyes of Finnish journalists

The article, based on materials from the TASS Bulletin of Foreign Official Information, reveals the details of the stay of a delegation of Finnish journalists in the Soviet Union in October 1954. Modern historical knowledge makes it possible to characterize the position of Finnish journalists as objective, and to recognize their assessment of the quality of life in the USSR as quite adequate.

|

PHJ №1 (45) 2025 — E. D. Tverdyukova. “BECOMING NOT ONLY TOBACCO WORKERS, BUT ALSO AMMUNITION MANUFACTURERS”: THE LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE LENINGRAD TOBACCO FACTORY NAMED AFTER URITSKIY V. N. RUMYANTSEV TO THE V. P. ZOTOV (7.7.1942)

The published document is a primary source on the history of the 1st Leningrad Tobacco Factory named after Uritsky. It was the largest enterprise in the USSR to operate during the siege of Leningrad, supplying the city’s population and its defenders with cigarettes and tobacco. In the challenging conditions of war and blockade, smoking frequently served as means of coping with psycho-emotional distress, alleviating hunger, and acquiring a certain ritualistic significance. The factory’s activities in the initial year of the Great Patriotic War are discussed by the factory director, V. N. Rumyantsev, in a letter to V. P. Zotov, A. I. Mikoyan’s commissioner on food issues. The factory’s staff, in their efforts to substitute scarce raw materials, not only produced tobacco products but also successfully mastered the production of ammunition and medicines. The author of the letter goes on to describe his efforts to maintain the factory’s operational capacity during the first blockade winter, and characterizes the domestic characteristics of the workers.