Talk:Peter I of Russia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peter I of Russia article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.5
 This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

I have a date for his birth two actually tough I do not know which one is the correct one, I don't even know why there are two. May 30 (June 9). I also have another date for his death but I did not go by that, incase that as wrong: January 28 (February 8) - fonzy

Russia used the Julian Calendar until January 31, 1918, which was followed by February 14, 1918. So all of Peter I's dates were recorded as Old Style (Julian) dates. (And in fact Britain was still using the Julian calendar during his lifetime: the Catholic countries had converted in the 1580s). Some people like to change these dates to what they "would have been" if the Gregorian Calendar were in effect in Russia. This more often leads to confusion than illumination. In any case, Peter I was born on May 30, 1672, which would have been June 9, 1672 in the Gregorian calendar, and he died on January 28, 1725, which would have been February 8, 1725. Because of the confusion, it's good to state what calendar any given date is in, and I'll put that in the article. -- Someone else 18:50 Apr 22, 2003 (UTC)

I thought it was something to do with the Julian Calendar, but i wasn;t shore, thankyou for confirming my suspicion. -fonzy

There's more material at Peter the Great and the Russian Empire. I'm not sure if this should be merged into Peter the Great, or linked from here, but I'm calling attention to it. Isomorphic 04:41, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

"Peter was extremely tall at six foot seven inches (2 m) and a powerful man. His gangly legs and arms prevented him from being handsome, however. Strangely enough, the legend has it that his "manhood" was so long that he had to tuck it in his boot. One can still hear people refer to this "fact" in today's Russia with regards to someone's unusually big penis ("His is like Peter's", they say)."

That could probably be split up and put into maybe Early Life and a new section about Legacy?--Lucky13pjn 02:04, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

Should all that be in the lead section? Might be better in its own section, or perhaps there's a way to merge it into an existing section. Also, the "legend" leaves me skeptical that anyone could've really believed it, but what do I know? Everyking 20:07, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I am presently expanding this page; by the time I finish, I would most likely have found an appropriate location for the above information. -- Emsworth 23:58, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I am concerned by the removal of information from the article; I hope it's merely temporary and that User:Lord Emsworth plans to add the information back at some point, in some way. Everyking 20:15, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, it is temporary. I will add everything necessary back in the appropriate order. -- Emsworth 00:27, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] in depth

this hardly speaks of his role as an absolute monarch. that is important. There is also no mention of his penis size, which is very important also. He was rather hung.

It also didn't mention where he got the massive ammounts of money needed to fund all these wars. My understanding is that he created a large ammount of relatively strange taxes, like the beard tax. However, the article seems to portray (at least for me) the beard tax solely as a method with which he attempted to force the people to be more western. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Cannot answer about size of any of his parts of the body :-)) But he was very promiscuous. When he visited the French court, one of the French ladies noted, that most of the women in Peter's entourage (servants) were pregnant or had very young children and when asked they answered: "The Tzar mercifully gave this gift to me". --212.30.67.30 15:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The beard tax was for both purposes as most of his taxes where. During a 20 year period there were maybe 6 total months of peace. He needed the money bad. Boris B —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.253.163.210 (talk) 19:14, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ambiguity

The following line is somewhat ambiguous: "desperation to turn Russia into the great modern Empire that it once was." Does this mean that Peter wanted to restore Russia to its former glory, i.e. "to restore Russia into the great modern Empire that it had once been" or does it mean that it had never been a great empire until that point, and the use of past tense for said greatness is for benefit of today's readers?--Xiphon 17:38, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The latter, I think. It had never been a modern empire before his time. It's a non-NPOV sentiment of course, since for "modern" we should probably read "Western", but that was Peter's POV after all. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
True. So then shouldn't I change the sentence to read "desperation to turn Russia into a great modern empire". Whether Russia has ever been a great modern empire, POV or otherwise, is largely irrelevant to this topic, all that's required is the knowledge that it was this ambition that drove him forward. Yes?--Xiphon 19:14, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:34, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

If by modern you mean, that at the time of the pinnacle of the power, Russia was more developed than others states, the answer is no. Basically the strongest empire, or better kingdom during Byzantion times, was Kievan kingdom. After it, the city states, starting with Novgorod. But they all have fallen before Mongol incursion. --212.30.67.30 15:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Forget the modern issue, how about the Empire issue. Russia was prior to Peter the Great closest to being an Empire during Ivan the Terrible and that was only because he was able to add part of Ukraine at their own request, and expand to the black sea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.253.163.210 (talk) 19:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peter the Great

Analyse the major ways in which Tsar Peter the Great (1689-1725) sought to reform his society and its institutions in order to strengthen Russia and its position in Europe


    Answer all parts of the question- thank you

Dear me. You'll be lucky if you get much homework help on here, which is what I assume this is after. I doubt any one will write the essay for you. Just keep referring to the question, and come to a conclusive judgement at the end and you'll be fine ;). M A Mason 18:59, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Prussian/German Culture

I've often heard that Peter the Great was enamoured with Prussian/German culture, how much truth is there to this?

About Prussia, not much. You're probably thinking of Peter III, not Peter I. Peter III was so much pro-Prussian that when Russia was at war against Prussia, he was a supporter of Prussia. After 7 years of war and hundreds of thousands of casualties, when he became emperor of Russia and learned in 1762 of the Russian victory in the war, he basically said "Oh, shit!" and proceeded to give the victory to Prussia. It is not surprising that he became quite unpopular and was soon after ousted by his wife, Catherine the Great, in a bloodless coup where the main casualties were the barricks of wine that she ordered given to the population of St. Petersburg in celebration of the event. On the other hand, about "German culture", remember that, in the history of Russia, the word "german" was often used in the more general sense of "western". Peter I did take measures leading to the "westernization" of Russia. - J. 142.169.187.53 19:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

In general the word for strangers, including Germans, was "nemtsy", meaning "nem" = not able to speak (Russian language; so, when we speak about German influence, we speak of influence of all Nemtsy, that is, all foreigners. Also, at the time of Peter the Great there was no Germany as we know of, only the Holy Empire, which was an empty title. Peter was interested at beginning mostly about Dutch, later on also about English and German states. It is significant, that among the whole of Russian elite, he was basically the only one enamoured with sea and ships; that being Dutch preserve. His first "education" in foreign affairs was predominantly from Kukuy, the little town near Moscow where foreigners were allowed to stay. Among foreigners in Kukuy there were mostly Dutch, people from German feudal states, a lot of Scots and or Stuart followers and last, but not least, the most dominant influence in Peter's youth, Francis Lefort, who was from Suisse.--212.30.67.30 15:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


I think you didn't understand the question J. He/She is asking about culture not politics. It's not about Prussia, but Germany in genereal and in specific academics. Peter 'collected' academics, in particular German scholars, for the founding of the Academy of Science. One most famous example of such a 'collectable item' was G.W. Steller. Sea cow anyone? If you are interested I would read Leonhard Stejneger "G.W. Steller. The pioneer of alaskan natural history." So I would answer this question with 'yes', but restricted in the academical realm. engelsaa@uc.edu

I quote Paul Bushkovitch in his book, Peter the Great, page 50, "The autocratic Peter was obsessed with the Dutch Republic, mainly its mariners, shipbuilders, and engineers. Dutch was the only foreign language Peter knew well, and later when he attempted to learn and speak German the mixture that ensued tried the comprehension and good humor of many a foreign guest. He was fascinated with Dutch painting and architecture, with mathematics, navigation, and technology..." Perhaps it should be changed from German and Prussian to Dutch?68.193.169.74 03:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed Dates and Erroneous Statistics

http://www.cityvision2000.com/history/peterthe.htm : "Born: May 30 (June 9), 1672, Moscow. Died: January 28 (February 8), 1725, St. Petersburg."

"He was a big strong man (6' 8 inches - 2.04 meters)"

Perhaps this should be changed in the main article, but I am not sure.

[edit] Peter's Eccentricities

There are several eccentricities that are often associated with Peter the Great that go unmmentioned in the article. Apparently he would often force his guests to drink incredible amounts of liquor, and had a fascination for the awkward, "collecting" unusual persons and sometimes practicing comical and odd ceremonies featuring the same. I have read secondary sources that indicate this; however, I do not wish to edit the article for the sake of erring. Perhaps somebody could include these facets of Peter's personality in a future version of the page? Eccomi 00:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Robert Massie observes that "In Peter's time, dwarfs and giants were much valued throughout Europe as exotic decorations in royal and noble households." (p.637) Also, forcing guests to drinks incredible amounts of liquor (by non-Russian standards) seems to be a Russian tradition predating and postdating Peter the Great. So I'm not sure that either habit would have been seen as eccentric by his contemporaries. J Heath 00:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Peter had a high alcohol tolerance (partly due to his size) and often get his guests drunk to hear what they would say. With respect, Ko Soi IX 03:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
even more fun must have been torturing his son cruelly to death (after promising him and his refugium-providers fair terms). After all, he still had one son more, and this one did not talk back, being two years old. This worthy child died soon after. ALSO ironic!!
Dr. Vivian Green describes a number of bizarre behaviors on Peter's part. She describes him founding a religious order whose sole function was to parody the Catholic church through blasphemies, drinking, and orgies. He appears to have had a ruthlessly sadistic streak in which he enjoyed watching the dismemberment of women and forcibly extracting teeth from his courtiers. More than one source describes him placing the decaptitated head of his wife's lover in her bedchamber for her to view. Peter was, at the very least, a sadist and at worst a madman. 75.93.59.254 22:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

In regards to extracting teeth.. Peter was actually very interested in dentistry and although like you stated often forced others to be his test subjects, the intention was slightly more genuine than many of his other sadistic tendencies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.228.98 (talk) 07:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Putin's Painting

The line about Vladmir Putin having a portrait of Peter in his office seems like it should be in the history section, not the introductory paragraph.

[edit] Cultural depictions of Peter I of Russia

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 17:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Legitimate issue

Exactly what does this concern? His children? The title is not exactly effective. Schnauf 18:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I was just reading this article when I noticed a large amount of vandalism. I do not have the facts to fix all the problems, so I am hoping that someone here does. One example is "Peter was a shithead, with an extremely small dick of 2.03 inches (0 feet 2.03 inches), and large, fat balls." in the first caption. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Saxxyman66 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC).

I'm not sure what this sentence used to be, so someone who does should revert the vandalism: "To improve his nation's position on the seas, Peter whored around a lot" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.111.223.231 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 2007 March 23 (UTC)

[edit] Pyotr, or Petru?

I have just took a look at the The Bronze Horseman, and was really puzzled to find out that the name marked on it is not Pyotr, but Petru (of course, in Cyrillic). I noticed that the name marked here is indeed Pyotr. How is it possible to have one name on official statues, and another here? Is the name "Petru" the old version of Pyotr? Dpotop 19:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Petru (Петру) is the dative case of the name Pyotr (Пётр) (Петру от Екатерины - to Peter from Ekaterina). Alæxis¿question? 20:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, got it. In Romanian, "Пётр" is "Petru", and this specific name does not have a dative case (instead, you use the construction "lui Petru", literally "to Peter"). Dpotop 08:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I see. I was kind of surprised given that Romanian also has cases... Alæxis¿question? 09:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah. Other names, do have a dative case. For "Maria", the dative is "Mariei". Also, if I'm not very mistaken, in Romanian the dative and the genitive are the same. Of course, I may be **very** wrong, because my last lessons of Romanian took place some 13 years ago. Dpotop 10:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean? Don't you use both of them (cases) like every day? Alæxis¿question? 15:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I think most substantives have a unique dative-genitive form. Thus, while the two cases exist, their forms are identical. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you much more on the subject. I am unusually old for a wikipedian, and therefore I forgot more than most of them. :) Dpotop 17:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Calendar

I changed the following paragraph: In 1699, Peter also abolished the traditional Russian calendar, in which the year began on 1 September, in favor of the Julian calendar, in which the year began on 1 January. Traditionally, the years were reckoned from the purported creation of the World, but after Peter's reforms, they were to be counted from the birth of Christ. Russia moved to the Julian calendar just as the rest of Europe was moving to the Gregorian calendar. Russia would stay on the Julian calendar until the October Revolution in 1917.

In fact, the calendar used in Russia before Peter I was also Julian, but what did he change was only the date of New Year celebration and numbering of years from the birth of Christ.--Dojarca 14:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article needs cites and cleanup

This article needs additional cites for verification. In addition, it is also marred by Weasel / Peacock / POV / and/or original research assertions. Some examples:

"The memory of this violence may have caused trauma during Peter's earlier years." - Or may not? Cite?
"Throughout the ages it has been the habit of many historians to portray Sophia as an ambitious, Machiavellian woman..." - Who? Why? Evidence for/against this?
"Peter himself came to associate Sophia with the dark forces of opposition" - Oooh, scary. Who says so?
"Peter himself ... forgetting as do many historians that in the seven years of her regency that Peter and his mother, while pushed out of the scene, were never threatened or harmed." - Any citable evidence of Peter's forgetting this?

Please clean up these problems to improve this article. -- 201.53.4.206 21:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I have been working on the page, and I removed the citation, weasel, and cleanup tags after a few hours of work. Let's mark specific passages that need work with individual tags from henceforth. Also, remember that the original basis for the article was the 1911 Britannica, so there will likely be remnants of the flowery speech and hyperbolic rhetoric found in said book. Historymike (talk) 03:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted metahistorical discussion of character of Sophia

I have deleted the following paragraph:

Throughout the ages it has been the habit of many historians to portray Sophia as an ambitious, Machiavellian woman who would do whatever it took to achieve power. By early middle age, Peter himself came to associate Sophia with the dark forces of opposition, forgetting as do many historians that in the seven years of her regency that Peter and his mother, while pushed out of the scene, were never threatened or harmed. Indeed, the often overlooked fact that Peter lived, busy and content, through the regency speaks volumes.

The paragraph asserts that many historians characterize Sophia in a particular manner (ambitious, Machiavellian) then argues that this characterization is inaccurate. There are two problems: First, the paragraph doesn’t cite any historians who depict Sophia in that manner. Second, and more seriously, Wikipedia isn’t the place to resolve disputes among historians in any event. Rather, Wikipedia should set forth the facts, and perhaps the major views among historians, to allow readers to reach their own conclusions.

Zepeian (talk) 04:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] potatoes

What about potatoes? There's no mention about Peter the Great introducing potatoes to Russia here even though it is an important development in Russian history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.83.84 (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)