1. Psyché had been a collaboration between Molière (who designed the tragédie-ballet, wrote it in prose form, and began the versification), Pierre Corneille (who completed the versification), Philippe Quinault (who provided the sung lyrics), and Lully (who composed the music); after its première at court in January 1671, Molière gave a commercial production of Psyché at the Théâtre du Palais-Royal beginning in July of that year. Lully, 's first opera, Les Fêtes de l'Amour et de BacchusGoogle Scholar, inaugurated the Académie Royale de Musique on 15 November 1672; this amounted to a pastiche of musical episodes culled from several of his comédies-ballets with Molière (Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme [specifically, Le Ballet des ballets], La Pastorale comique, Les Amants magnifiques, and George Dandin), which were loosely tied together in a libretto by Quinault.

2. Reutenfels, Jacob, De Rebus Moschoviticis ad Serenissimum Magnum Hetruriae Ducem Cosmum Tertium (Padua, 1680), pp. 104–5Google Scholar: ‘Idemque proxine retroactis annis scenam saltatoriam, necnon Ahasveri, & Estherea historiam, comice descriptam, praesentari sibi ab exteris, Moscuae degentibus, sastinuit. Cum enim ex nuntiis passim intellexisset, Europae Principibus varios interdum ludos, choreas, aliaque delectamenta, ad fallenda temporis fastidia, exhiberi, specimen eius rei in tripudio aliquo Gallico derepente fieri iussit.’ A Russian translation is in lakov Reitenfel's, ‘Skazaniia svetleishemu gertsogu toskanskomu Kozme tret'emu o Moskovii’, trans. and ed. Stankevich, A., Chteniia v Imperatorskom Obshchestve Istorii i Drevnosti Rossiiskikh pri Moskovskom Universitete (henceforth abbreviated ChOIDR) 3, chast' 2 (1905), p. 88Google Scholar. Many thanks to Dr Martha Lahana for providing the text of Reutenfels's original and to E. Kent Webb for advice on translating the Latin.

3. For a survey, in English, of Aleksei's theatre, see Jensen, Claudia, ‘Music for the Tsar: A Preliminary Study of the Music of the Muscovite Court Theatre’, Musical Quarterly 79, no. 2 (1995), pp. 368–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar and the bibliography cited therein. Primary sources are collected in Bogoiavlenskii, S. K., ‘Moskovskii teatr pri Tsariakh Aleksee i Petre’, ChOIDR 2 (1914), pp. iii–xxiGoogle Scholar, 1–76 and see also the text of the first play and the excellent commentary in Robinson, A. N., ed., Pervye p'esy russkogo teatra, vol. 1 of Ranniaia russkaia dramaturgiia (XVII-pervoi poloviny XVIII v.), edited by Robinson, A. N. et al. (Moscow, 1972).Google Scholar

4. On the liturgical dramas, see Velimirović, Miloš, ‘Liturgical Drama in Byzantium and Russia’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 16 (1962), pp. 349–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Polotskii's verse recitations are discussed in Eremin, I. P., ‘“Deklamatsiia” Simeona Polotskogo’, Trudy Otdela drevne-russkoi literatury 8 (1951), pp. 354–61Google Scholar and see also Robinson, , Pervye p'esy, pp. 21ff.Google Scholar

5. The embassy was headed by Charles Howard, first Earl of Carlisle. See the account in [Miege, Guy], A Relation of Three Embassies from His Sacred Majestie Charles II to the Great Duke of Muscovie, the King of Sweden, and the King of Denmark (London, 1669), p. 142Google Scholar (on the comedy) and pp. 99–100 (the winter of 1663–4 in Vologda): ‘Our Musique was most commonly at Dinner, at which time there was nothing to be heard but Trumpets and viols, whose delightful and agreeable Harmony, did sometimes so charm the Russes, that it drew great Company of them to hear it. And indeed the Musique was very good, being managed by one of the best experienced Musicians of England, who from time to time composed new airs.’

6. These requests are summarized in Jensen, , ‘Music for the Tsar’, pp. 372 and 384.Google Scholar

7. On the date of this production, see Jensen, , ‘Music for the Tsar’, pp. 372–5Google Scholar; many thanks to Martha Lahana, who provided photocopies of the report by Simon Helmfelt, the Swedish resident in Moscow, where the production is described. On Artemon Matveev, see the following English-language sources and the bibliography cited therein: Longworth, Philip, Alexis: Tsar of All the Russias (New York: F. Watts, 1984), pp. 208, 210–11Google Scholar (on his role in the theatre); Crummey, Robert, Aristocrats and Servitors: The Boyar Elite in Russia, 1613–1689 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, passim; and Martha Lahana's forthcoming ‘Breaking the Rules in Muscovy: The Example of A. S. Matveev’.

8. See Jensen, , ‘Music for the Tsar’, pp. 384–5.Google Scholar

9. V. B. Likhachev travelled to Florence in late 1659; he arrived there in January 1660. An English translation of a portion of Likhachev's report to the Foreign Office, cited here, is in Longworth, , Alexis, p. 210Google Scholar. Likhachev's full report is published in Drevniaia Russkaia Vivliofika (henceforth abbreviated DRV) vol. 4 (Moscow, 1788), where the description of the theatrical presentation is on pp. 350–1. The production Likhachev saw consisted of three sections: the ascents and descents from oceans and clouds, excerpted above, a scene showing the dead on a field of battle, with sailors piloting small ships on an ocean, and a land battle, with firearms. There was also dancing and other performances. Likhachev also saw other musical entertainments during his stay. An account by his Italian hosts is reproduced in Buturlin, M. D., Bumagi florentinskago tsentral'nago arkhiva kasaiushchiiasia do Rossii / Documenti che si conservano nel R. Archivio di Stato in Firenze, Sezione Medicea, Riguardanti l'antica Moscovia (Russia) (Moscow, 1871), especially document XXVIII on pp. 44–7 (Italian) and pp. 212–18 (Russian).Google Scholar

10. The official account of Potemkin's trip is published in DRV 4, pp. 360–457 (Spain) and 457–544 (France). Potemkin's account of the French portion of his trip is available in a modern edition in Likhachev, D. S., ed., Puteshestviia russkikh poslov XVI–XVII vv: Stateinye spiski (Moscow and Leningrad, 1954), pp. 227–315Google Scholar; see also Galitzin, E. M., La Russie du XVII^e siècle dans ses rapports avec l'Europe occidentale: Récit du voyage de Pierre Potemkin (Paris, 1855)Google Scholar, which includes French translations from Potemkin's account.

11. On the series of embassies during this period, see Solov, S. M.'ev, Istoriia Rossii s drevneishikh vremen v piatnad-tsati knigakh, kn. 6, vols. 11–12 (Moscow, 1961), pp. 540ffGoogle Scholar. Potemkin's mission also had economic interests, particularly in France; see Likhachev, , Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, 426–27Google Scholar, n. 2. It also involved feeling out western rulers about the Muscovite candidacy for the Polish throne; Wojcik, Zbigniew, ‘Russian Endeavors for the Polish Crown in the Seventeenth Century’, Slavic Review 41, no. 1 (1982), pp. 59–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar places great emphasis on the Spanish government's negative response to this idea when it was broached by Potemkin. A short description of the Spanish portion of the trip is in Alekseev, M. P., Ocheiki istorii ispano-russkikh literaturnykh otnoshenii XVI–XIX vv. (Leningrad, 1964), pp. 18–21.Google Scholar

12. Potemkin's career is outlined in Russkii biografiches-kii slovar’ (St Petersburg, 1905; reprint, New York: Kraus Reprint Corporation, 1962), s.v. ‘Potemkin, Petr Ivanovich’ see also Likhachev, , Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, pp. 426–7Google Scholar, n. 2; and Crummey, , Aristocrats and Servitors, pp. 42, 100–1, and 207.Google Scholar

13. During the seventeenth century, the Russian calendar was ten days behind the Western system and Muscovite diplomats used the Russian calendar in their reports; in this paper, dates are usually presented in both systems. Potemkin's itinerary is based on the account in DRV 4: the arrival at the cities of Cadiz, (p. 360)Google Scholar, Toledo, (p. 376)Google Scholar, and Seville, (p. 371)Google Scholar. On their preparations for their entry into Madrid, see DRV 4, 376–78. Weiner, Jack, Mantillas in Muscovy: The Spanish Golden Age Theatre in Tsarist Russia, 1672–1917, University of Kansas Humanistic Studies, no. 41 (Lawrence, Kansas, 1970), 1Google Scholar, citing Garnazo, Gabriel Maura y, Carlo II y su corte (Madrid, 1911), vol. I, p. 308Google Scholar confirms that the party entered the city on 8 March 1668.

14. DRV 4, pp. 428–9 and 439 describe the potekhi and visits to poteshnye dvory (amusement halls) in Spain; on Potemkin's tour of the Palacio Real, see Weiner, Jack, ‘The Death of Philip IV of Spain and the Early Russian Theatrical Repertoire’, Theatre Research/Recherches Théâtrales 10, no. 3 (1970), p. 184Google Scholar and notes 25 and 26.

15. Gazette, 7 September 1668, pp. 937–8. Potemkin reports on these events in Likhachev, , Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, pp. 249ffGoogle Scholar. The dates of their receptions at Saint-Germain-en-Laye are: 25 August/4 September, 29 August/8 September, and 13/23 September; see Likhachev, , Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, pp. 254, 261, and 284ffGoogle Scholar and the journal of the Sieur de Catheux, in Galitzin, A. P., ed., ‘Une ambassade russe à la cour de Louis XIV’, Bibliothèque Russe, nouvelle série, vol. 3 (Paris, 1860), pp. 1–32 [14–15, 19, and 24].Google Scholar

16. The events of this week are found in ‘Une ambassade russe à la cour de Louis XIV’, (henceforth cited as ‘Catheux, 's journal’) on pp. 20–2Google Scholar. Potemkin's account, in Likhachev, , Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, 278Google Scholar, resumes on 10/20 September.

17. ‘On the sixteenth the Ambassador, his son, the Chancellor, and all their entourage attended the performance of the comedy Les Coups de la fortune, performed by the Marais troupe with set-changes and ballet entrées, which they greatly enjoyed. They requested some wine, which was brought to them. On the eighteenth the troupe of Sieur de Molière performed Amphitryon with machines and ballet entrées, which greatly pleased the Ambassador and his son— to whom two great basins, one with dried fruits and the other with fresh fruit, were presented on the amphitheatre where they were seated. They did not eat of this, but drank and thanked the actors. The chancellor [Rumiantsev] had fallen ill and was not of the party.’(Catheux, 's journal, p. 22Google Scholar — the French spelling has been modernized in all quotations). Potemkin's visits to the Parisian theatres have been mentioned in musicological literature; see, for example, Findeizen, N., Ocheiki po istorii muzyki v Rossii (Moscow, 1928), vol. 1, p. 314.Google Scholar

18. When the rival theatre of the Hôtel de Bourgogne premièred Quinault's play soon thereafter, Boisrobert accused Quinault of plagiary. There was some justification to the charge, since Quinault based his version in part on Boisrobert's play as well as on its Spanish source, Calderón, 's Lances de amor y fortunaGoogle Scholar. Since the Marais theatre had originally premièred Boisrobert's play, it would be reasonable to assume that Potemkin saw a revival there on 16 September.

19. It became increasingly common in the mid-1660s to perform spoken plays with interludes of music and dance for special occasions. In July of 1664, the Troupe Royale of the Hôtel de Bourgogne performed Corneille's tragedy Œdipe with dramatically related entracte ballet by Lully (Entr'actes d'Œdipe, LWV 23). The following summer, Molière's company participated in a fête given in the gardens of Versailles, where the actors performed Le Favori by Marie-Catherine Desjardins (better known as Mme de Villedieu) as a comédie-ballet, with musical intermèdes by Molière and Lully. Afterwards, refreshments were served onstage, and then the guests retired to the labyrinth—where a torchlit banquet accompanied by an ensemble of strings, winds, and various court singers awaited them. For further discussion of this Versailles performance, see Gethner, Perry, ed., The Lunatic Lover and Other Plays by French Women of the 17th & 18th Centuries (Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann, 1994), pp. 35–8.Google Scholar

20. ‘And to conclude this chapter, | and to finish with it my letter, | the comedians of the Hôtel [de Bourgogne], | not with mediocre pomp, | but beautifully; I remember it, | for once more I was witness to it, | from the box where I was stationed, | have been three times awaiting | the Muscovite Excellencies, | with magnificent dances, | with lovely plays, with concerts, | and even with sweet treats: | but having this time other business, | rather than the necessary pastimes, | they could not show up | at the aforesaid place (which didn't bother me), |but still, the Royal Troupe | having prepared its treat, | entertained them for real, | at least, in their intention.’ Robinet's letter from the Gazette rimée of 29 September 1668 is quoted in François and Parfaict, Claude, Histoire du Théatre François depuis son origine jusqu'à présent (Paris, 1745Google Scholar; reprint, New York: Burt Franklin, 1968), vol. X, pp. 336–7, and in Galitzin, E. M., ‘Une ambassade russe’, pp. 436–9Google Scholar. Potemkin's account for the period of 10/20 September, when the Muscovite officials were informed of their scheduled audience with the king, through the visit itself on 13/23 September, is wholly occupied with the complexities of protocol (particularly the vexing issue of correctly reproducing the Tsar's title); no mention is made of the planned and then cancelled visit to the Hôtel de Bourgogne. See Likhachev, , Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, pp. 278–97Google Scholar. (There is a similar one-week gap in Potemkin's account following his meeting with the Spanish king on 7 March; see DRV 4, pp. 388–95.)

21. Les Faux Moscovites was first published in 1669 (Paris: Quinet). Poisson's comedy is available in Fournel, Victor, Les Contemporains de Molière (Paris, 1863), vol. I, pp. 455–76Google Scholar. This was not the first play given on a Russian theme, for the Mémoire de Mahelot lists ‘La Moscovitte, pièce de Mr Canu’—a lost tragicomedy that was performed at the Hôtel de Bourgogne in the early 1630s (see Lancaster, H. Carrington, ed., Le Mémoire de Mahelot, Laurent, et d'autres décorateurs de l'Hédie-Française au XVII^e siècle (Paris, 1920), p. 73Google Scholar, and Scott, Virginia, The Commedia dell'arte in Paris, 1644–1697 (Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia, 1990), pp. 129–37).Google Scholar

22. The play begins with Lubine railing at her drunken husband Lubin, a former thief who is now forced to peddle bootblack. Seeking employment, Lubine approaches the innkeeper Gorgibus, who awaits the arrival of a Muscovite nobleman and his entourage. Meanwhile, two Russian ‘interpreters’ have been enjoying the hospitality of the inn for over a week, where they have been running up a substantial bill. In reality, the interpreters (La Montagne and Jolicoeur) are imposters, engaged by the Baron de Jonquille to gain access to Gorgibus's home in order to carry off his daughter, Suson. La Montagne and Jolicoeur meet up with Lubine, who complains to them about her husband Lubin and wants to ask the Muscovite nobleman to annul her marriage. After she leaves, Lubin enters singing a chanson de guerre (‘En revenant de Canadas’). La Montagne and Jolicoeur, pretending to be ex-soldiers, greet Lubin as a camarade in arms, question him about his military service, and engage him to impersonate the Muscovite nobleman. Meanwhile, Gorgibus has had enough with the two interpreters and has sent for the police— in spite of Suson's protestations that they are honest men. Lubin, pretending to be the Muscovite nobleman, makes a triumphal entrance speaking pidgin Russian while La Montagne and Jolicoeur interpret for him, and enjoys a feast that Gorgibus has prepared. Lubine enters, throws herself at the Muscovite nobleman's feet, and requests that he annul her marriage on the grounds of Lubin's impotence; Lubine is then pursued offstage by the enraged Lubin, while La Montagne explains to Gorgibus that he is merely mounting the customary siege that serves as after-dinner exercise. La Montagne orders the innkeeper to blow a trumpet, which is the cue for Suson's abduction. Lubine reveals the ruse to Gorgibus, but the Baron de Jonquille returns with Suson and asks the innkeeper for his daughter's hand in marriage. Gorgibus agrees, and when Lubine returns in fear for her life, Suson offers her protection to the unhappy wife.

23. ‘The Muscovites, being in Paris, promised to come to our playhouse, and our announcements and playbills advised of the day of their arrival; but having been summoned that same day to Saint-Germain for their final audience [with the king], they broke their promise and, consequently, we broke ours. Nevertheless, the crowd that came to our playhouse to see them was so large that there would have been no room for them had they come after all. This obliged me, on the encouragement of several of my comrades, not being able to have the real Muscovites, to cook up some fake ones. And since five or six days sufficed for this, everyone easily sees that these Muscovites were made in haste; and it is the latter ones that you will readily see in this comedy, and in our playhouse, if you wish, since they will not appear there except as advertised.’ (Preface to Les Faux Moscovites;, cited in Parfaict, , X, pp. 337–8.)Google Scholar

24. Wheatley, Henry B., ed., The Diary of Samuel Pepys (London, 1903), vol. 2, p. 402Google Scholar; Pepys's diary is also cited in Konovalov, S., ‘England and Russia: Three Embassies, 1662–5’, Oxford Slavonic Papers, n.s. 10 (1962), pp. 60–1.Google Scholar

25. Jusserand, J. J., ed., A French Ambassador at the Court of Charles the Second (London, 1892), p. 67Google Scholar; see also Konovalov, , ‘England and Russia’, p. 61, n. 3.Google Scholar

26. There are two portraits of Potemkin dating from his 1681–2 trip. One is a full-length portrait by Juan Carreño de Miranda, now in the Prado Museum in Madrid; see Museo del Prado: Inventario general de pinturas, vol. 1 La colección real (Madrid, 1990), p. 516. Colour reproductions are in Lorente, Manuel, The Prado: Madrid (New York, 1965), 2, p. 100Google Scholar and in Rossiia i Ispaniia: Dokumenty i Materialy, 1667–1917 (Moscow, 1991), 1: following p. 256 (where there is also a colour reproduction of the title page of Potemkin's report). Another portrait, a three-quarters view, was painted in England by Sir Godfrey Kneller; see the facsimile and discussion in Dukelskaya, Larissa A. and Renne, Elizaveta P., The Hermitage Catalogue of Western European Painting, vol. 13, British Painting: Sixteenth to Nineteenth Centuries (Moscow and Florence, 1990), 91–92Google Scholar. A copy of this painting is in the Armory of the Kremlin in Moscow. Two engravings were made from Kneller's portrait: one ascribed to Abraham Blooteling (see Dukelskaya, and Renne, , The Hermitage Catalogue, p. 91Google Scholar and Stewart, J. Douglas, Sir Godfrey Kneller and the English Baroque Portrait (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), p. 124, no. 585)Google Scholar and another by Robert White. A reproduction of White's engraving is in Vinogradoff, I., ‘Russian Missions to London, 1569–1687: Seven Accounts by the Masters of the Ceremonies’, Oxford Slavonic Papers, n.s. 14 (1981), following p. 52Google Scholar; see also Cracraft, James, The Pettine Revolution in Russian Imagery (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), figs. 35 and 162.Google Scholar

27. The other prominent Russian presence in France prior to Potemkin's embassy was the attendance of two diplomats, Kondyrev and Neverov, at Louis XIII's wedding at Bordeaux in 1615. Other diplomatic connections between France and Russia in the intervening years were minor affairs; the most complete discussion is in Rambaud, Alfred, Recueil des Instructions données aux ambassadeurs et ministres de France depuis les traités de Westphalie jusqu'à la Révolution française: Russie, Vol. 1 (Paris, 1890).Google Scholar

28. Berlise-Faure is cited in Rambaud, , Recueil des Instructions, p. 44Google Scholar and n. 1; the description of drunkenness is in Anderson, , ‘English Views of Russia in the 17th Century’, Slavonic and East European Review, 33 (1954), pp. 152–3Google Scholar, citing Mansuy, Abel, Le Monde slave et les classiques français aux xvi^e–xvii^e siècles (Paris, 1912), pp. 446–7Google Scholar. See also Depping, G.-B., ‘Une ambassade russe à Paris en 1654’, Revue de Paris (1 07 1853), pp. 140–7Google Scholar, who provides a summary of the official account of the visit. Evidently, the 1668 envoys showed little more sobriety, for Potemkin took precautions in order to appear decently at his audiences with the king. According to Catheux, 's journal (p. 19)Google Scholar, Potemkin ‘fasted until evening rather than dine before his audience, because he needed to have his wits about him when speaking to His Majesty, and that he would not want one to attribute the good or evil that he might do to the meats that he might have eaten, or to the wine that he might have drunk’.

29. Occasional Reflections upon Several Subjects, Whereto is premis'd a Discourse about such kind of Thoughts, 2nd edition (London, 1669), p. 388; Loewenson, Leo, ‘The Works of Robert Boyle and “The Present State of Russia” by Samuel Collins (1671)’, Slavonic and East European Review 33 (1954–1955), pp. 483–4 attributes this work to Robert Boyle.Google Scholar

30. According to Catheux, 's journal (p. 10)Google Scholar, ‘this same day they began to eat some meat, and requested that they might not be served hares, rabbits, or pigeons, nor young veal, for they say that hares and rabbits are too common, pigeons are too innocent, and veal is not good under a year old; what they like best are gosling, ducks, and suckling pig’.

31. Depping, , ‘Une ambassade russe à Paris en 1654’, p. 143.Google Scholar

32. La Montagne. As soon as they have dined and lived

it up,

you must let them do whatever they want.

Gorgibus. But if those things might be dishonorable

to me.

La Montagne. Ah! no, this is not the intent of the

great lord.

This is the normal exercise after the meal,

everything will be honorable; what you must do

is to position yourself immediately on a high chair

to watch them either fight, or raise a seige,

or if they are of a martial and civil mood

they will re-enact the plunder of some city,

then each will go to his chamber to sleep.

33. Lubine. And to inspect the storehouse of hay and

oats,

the Muscovites are in the Saint-Antoine district;

they say that they are mounted on little ponies,

to see them one must pack into the Baudet gate.

Everyone is already crowding around in our street,

and to get in their path would be to face certain

death.

You'll certainly be wealthy and fortunate:

Ah! everyone says that he is a great lord.

34. According to Manuel Couvreur, the actors of the Hôtel de Bourgogne borrowed costumes used in a recent Russian mascarade that had been inspired by the Muscovite embassy; see Jean-Baptiste Lully: Musique et dramaturgie au service du Prince (Bruxelles, 1992), p. 203, n. 150.

35. Gorgibus. I await some foreigners, some men of

distinction,

and I've paid out on their behalf a considerable sum.

Their interpreters have been living here for eight

days,

and have helped themselves to my brocade, satin,

and velour;

I have given a thousand écus to Monsieur the

Interpreter,

and that's hard cash indeed. But I advance, I lend;

while these interpreters partake of great banquets,

their masters come at a snail's pace.

And I fear I'm being taken for a fool.

36. Catheux in Galitzin, ‘Une ambassade russe’, pp. 2 and 26–28 and Potemkin in Likhachev, Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, pp. 284–5; see also n. 16. The Russian expected their ambassadorial parties to be fully supported when in the host country; see Likhachev, Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, p. 430, n. 16. On the background of this ‘tradition’, see Vinogradoff, ‘Russian Missions to London’, p. 38. The Muscovites were seen as paticularly niggardly in rewarding those who had served them: for accompanying him from 9 August until 3 October, Potemkin gave the Sieur de Catheux a pair of fur mittens, a little knife with a sheath, and the fur collar from his robe. Catheux is mentioned by name in Potemkin's account as receiving parting gifts of sable pelts, a common currency of Muscovite embassies (Likhachev, Puteshestviia russkikh poslov, p. 298 [other parting gifts are listed on p. 297]). Sir Charles Cottrell, the Master of Ceremonies at the English court, made the same complaint after the disappointing parting gifts following the Vinius mission in 1673: ‘It is their custome to think whatsoever they get, too little, and whatever they give, too much.’ Quoted in Vinogradoff, ‘Russian Missions to London’, pp. 38 and 54.

37. Fournel, , Les Contemporains de Molière (Paris, 1863) vol. I, p. 468, n.3.Google Scholar

38. Lubin. Let's see then, what will I be.

La Montagne. A noble from Muscovy

and you will say ‘hio’ when you speak;

‘hio’ means ‘yes’, you will jabber

some foreign jargon; but we still need to find

some men to escort you in a grand ceremony,

everyone will be well dressed and paid by us.

39. Robinet's letter of 27 October refers to the lively performances of Raymond Poisson and Claude Deschamps, Sieur de Villiers, who probably played the parts of Gorgibus and Lubin; see Parfaict, X, pp. 338–9n.

40. Catheux, 's journal (p. 18) remarks on the same custom among his Muscovite charges: ‘The ambassador observed a ceremony that he repeated exactly every day while dining and supping: which was to stand up, remove his hat, and to deliver a rather long speech interspersed with compliments and prayers, which an interpreter explained in a few words, after which the ambassador drank to the health of the Tsar and of the King—for which all those who were at the table, taking up their glasses at the same time, would join in.’ A high proportion of Potemkin's account is made up of what purport to be verbatim transcriptions of these highly stylized toasts and speeches.Google Scholar

41. Gorgibus. There the table is brought all prepared.

When he speaks in French I can understand him

well enough,

But when he Muscovizes I no longer understand

anything.

Here, the dinner is ready; he can come sit at the

table.

Bring some seats.

Lubin gives a long speech in pidgin Russian while

cutting the meats and presenting them to the

others.

Jolicæur. Cracq.

La Montagne. Cricq.

Lubin, while swallowing he jabbers nonsense. Crocq.

Jolicæur. The pig, he says, is admirable.

Lubin jabbers at length with glass in hand.

La Montagne, to the ladies. He drinks to your

health.

Mme Aminthe. How idiotic this language is!

What! to talk on and on in order to say but one word!

42. Catheux, 's journal, pp. 10–11.Google Scholar

43. La Montagne. He has drunk to you, now you must

do the same; do not hesitate, Madame.

Mme Aminthe. Ah, spare me!

Jolicæur. It is the mark and seal of his affection.

Mme Aminthe. Because he loves me must I put up

with this?

You would have me drink a glass of hard liqueur?

La Montagne. ‘Tis the custom of the land.

Mme Aminthe. Why, am I in Moscow?

Suson. Go ask him to excuse you from doing it.

Lubin babbles.

La Montagne. He signals you to advance no nearer,

Madame. He says that he is faithful to his wife,

and that he means to have love only for her.

Mme Aminthe. How's that?

Jolicceur. No need to get angry; he has refused many

women as beautiful as you.

44. This point is made in Depping, , ‘Une ambassade russe à Paris en 1654’, p. 143.Google Scholar

45. Laurent d'Arvieux was assigned to accompany the Turkish envoy, and left a description of this visit (and Aga's disdain of the French court] in his Mémoires (Paris, 1735), vol. IV, p. 185.

46. Described in detail in the Gazette, No. 148 (19 December 1669), 1193–1200.

47. For more on the origins of the ‘Cérémonie Turque’, see Martino, Pierre, ‘La cérémonie turque du “Bourgeois Gentilhomme”’, Revue d'histoire littéraire de la France 18 (1911), pp. 37–60Google Scholar, and Rouillard, C. D., ‘The Background of the Turkish Ceremony in Molière's Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme’, University of Toronto Quarterly 39 (1969–1970), pp. 33–52.Google Scholar

48. A general overview of specifically English attitudes is in Anderson, ‘English Views’.

49. The Muscovites appear in Love's Labour Lost, V.ii, from which the quotation that heads this article is also taken. European fascination with the Muscovite cold is discussed in Loewenson, ‘The Works of Robert Boyle’, passim. A Russian ambassadorial party may be connected with another Shakespearian play: see Hotson, Leslie, The First Night of ‘Twelfth Night’ (New York: Macmillan, 1954)Google Scholar. Although the proposed identification of the character Orsino with the visiting Duke Orsino is controversial, the author does include lengthy translations from the account of the visiting Russian ambassador from Tsar Boris, Grigorii Mikulin.

50. Alekseev, , Ocherki, 11–12Google Scholar and nn. 19–20 on sources for Lope de Vega; see also Balashov, N. I., ‘Renessansnaia problematika ispanskoi dramy XVII v. na vostochnoslavianskie temy’, Slavianskie literatury: Doklady sovetskoi delegatsii. V Mezhdunarodnyi s''ezd slavistov (Moscow, 1963), pp. 89–124Google Scholar. The drama Principe perseguido – Infeliz Juan Basilio (manuscript carries censor's stamp from 1650) by the Spanish dramatists Moreto, Belmonte Bermúdo, and Martinez de Menses was based on Lope's work. See Balashov, , ‘Renessansnaia problematika’, pp. 115–21Google Scholar, citing Kennedy, Ruth, ‘The Dramatic Art of Moreto’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Smith College, Philadelphia), 1932Google Scholar, where a synopsis of the play is given on pp. 191–3; an important study considering the date, sources, and later influences of Lope's work is Brody, Ervin C., The Demetrius Legend and its Literary Treatment in the Age of the Baroque (Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, [c. 1972])Google Scholar; Brody offers a thorough discussion of Lope's possible sources on pp. 34–70; he discusses other European sources using the Dmitrii theme and the influence of Lope's drama on pp. 131–2.

51. Alekseev, M. P., ‘Boris Godunov i Dmitrii Samozvanets v zapadnoevropeiskoi drame’, in Derzhavin, K. N., ed., ‘Boris Godunov’ A. S. Pushkina (Leningrad, 1936), pp. 83–6Google Scholar and Anderson, , ‘English Views’, p. 149, n. 72Google Scholar. Pix's work is cited in Avery, Emmett, ed., The London Stage 1600–1800, Part 2: 1700–1729 (Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 1960), p. 8Google Scholar. Brody, , The Demetrius LegendGoogle Scholar, discusses Fletcher's complex treatment of the Dmitrii theme and the relationship between Fletcher's and Lope's plays in Chapter 3.

52. Cited in Anderson, , ‘English Views’, 149, n. 73Google Scholar and in Alekseev, , ‘Boris Godunov’, pp. 96–7Google Scholar. It has not been possible to establish if the other Italian work cited by Anderson, and Alekseev, , Bianchi, Bianco's Il Demetrio (Lucca, 1645)Google Scholar, is actually on a Russian theme. Alekseev, , Boris Godunov, pp. 98–9Google Scholar, citing von Gottschall, Rudolf, ‘Dramaturgische Parallelen: 3. Die Demetriusdramen’ in Studien zur neuen deutschen Litteratur (Berlin, 1892), p. 100Google Scholar, mentions a commedia dell'arte presentation of the Dmitrii theme by Boccabodatti, popular in a French translation in the early eighteenth century. Although Alekseev and Gotschall are somewhat unreliable in their information (for example, the Aubry play they mention is not on the Dmitrii theme), one might note that there was a commedia character with a Slavic background. See Clubb, Louise George, ‘Italian Renaissance Theatre’ in The Oxford Illustrated History of Theatre, ed. Brown, John Russell (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 131Google Scholar; see also Clubb, 's Italian Drama in Shakespeare's Time (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), p. 262Google Scholar, where she discusses the probable Dalmatian provenance of one of Francesco Andreini's commedia roles.

53. Fletcher, John's The Loyal SubjectGoogle Scholar, mentioned above, might also fit into this category. The playwright was the nephew of the diplomat Giles Fletcher, who served as Elizabeth's ambassador to Russia; John used his uncle's Of the Russe Commonwealth (1591) as a source while working on his play. Dictionary of Literary Biography, vol. 58, s.v. ‘Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher’, by Cyrus Hoy; see also the detailed discussion in Brody, , The Demetrius Legend, pp. 156–64.Google Scholar

54. The private performances at Matveev's home are cited in most literature on Muscovite music and are based on the petition of Vasilii Repskii, who complained of his position of ‘slavery’ in Matveev's home, where he was forced to play music against his will; see Kharlampovich, K. V., Malorossiiskoe vliianie na velikorusskuiu tserkovnuiu zhizn' (Kazan', 1914Google Scholar; reprint, Slavistic Printings and Reprintings, vol. 119, ed. C. H. van Schooneveld, The Hague, 1968), 105. An English summary is in Jensen, , ‘Music for the Tsar’, 381Google Scholar. There is no direct evidence that Tsar Aleksei attended these performances, although he was very close to Matveev during these years.

55. Potemkin's return visit to Paris in 1681 is described briefly in Isherwood, Robert M., Music in the Service of the King: France in the 17th Century (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1973), pp. 302–3Google Scholar; contemporary documents are published in the Sbornik Imperatorskago russkago istoricheskago obshchestva (St. Petersburg, 1881), vol. 34, pp. 1–10. Potemkin's trips to the London theatres are outlined in Van Lennep, William, ed., The London Stage 1660–1800, Part 1: 1660–1700 (Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 1965), pp. 304 and 308Google Scholar. On 12 January 1682 the Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series, Jan. 1st to Dec. 31, 1682, ed. Daniell, F. H. Blackburne (London, 1932), p. 24Google Scholar notes the following (emphasis added): ‘By the ambassador's particular command a play called the Tempest was played yesterday, at which he was present.… On Friday the second part of the Siege of Jerusalem is acted by his particular command and on Monday he goes home.’ See also Van Lennep, , The London Stage, p. 304Google Scholar, where the plays are identified as an alteration of Shakespeare's The Tempest by Shadwell, Thomas (Wednesday, 11 01 1682)Google Scholar and Part II of Crowne, John's The Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus Vespasian (Friday, 13 01 1682)Google Scholar; see also the comment for Tuesday, 10 January 1682. Vinogradoff, , ‘Russian Missions to London’, p. 61Google Scholar, quotes the report of the Master of Ceremonies on the 10 January performance: ‘[U]pon the invitation of Mr. Killegrew, Master of the Revells and of the Kings Play House, to the Amb: to see a Play, he went this day; was placed in the Kings Box; he was entertained with very fine Daunces between the Acts; and at the end of the first with a great Basket of Fruit; and as I think, he gave not one farthing either for that or the Play.’

56. Molière's Amphitryon was part of the repertory of the theatre established by Peter the Great, Aleksei's son and eventual successor, in Moscow in 1701–4; this was the next attempt at forming a sustained theatrical venue in Russia, following the closure of the court theatre after Aleksei's death in 1676. The choice of this play is almost certainly not related to Potemkin's viewing in 1668: the ambassador was dead by the time the theatre was formed, and its repertory was imported, like the actors, ready-made from the West. On this theatrical troupe and its repertory (which included adaptations of other plays of Molière), see Karlinsky, Simon, Russian Drama from its Beginnings to the Age of Pushkin (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), pp. 46–9Google Scholar and Vsevolodskii-Gerngross, V. N., Istoriia russkogo dramaticheskogo teatro: Ot istokov do kontsa XVIII veka, vol. 1 of Istoriia russkogo dramaticheskogo teatro v semi tomakh (Moscow, 1977), pp. 90–5.Google Scholar