Thread: Питер

Anyway, I wrote a message about the SPb's myths.
Here it is:

At the place where SPb is situated were about 40 villages and many cultivated fields (for example, some old Swedish maps prove that). Do you think all of those people lived on a bog? And were peasants? Of course, they had a good land which yielded a rich harvest. Because everyone knows that soils are rich at flood-lands.

There are a few strong myths about SPb. This "bog" legend is the strongest, although it's absolutely unscientific. Even Pushkin fell a victim of the myth, though he was one of the smartest people his generation.

I guess you want to ask me how did it happen?

It's a very complicated topic, because I need to explain a very big part of Russian history, a lot of cultural things and so on. In short, SPb was conceived as a very modern city. But the place was chosen spontaneously. In fact, this biggest project of Peter the First (I hope you know who this is) was not very popular in the first tens years. People didn't want to live in the new city. Poor infrastructure, high prices for all etc couldn't support growth of the population.
In the time of this great housing development all of those myths were created. They were used for a sort of justification why people don't have to live there, in this "ruinous place". Also, there was an opinion that Peter the First is the "Antichrist", because he didn't respect the Church at all. So his projects are just the Devil's joke. (It's a little bit primitive explanation, but I'm just trying to explain the main aspects of the complicated relations in Russian history.)

So, now we have a cluster of the myths which were supported by the next generation of the nobles. Because they (the myths) show how it was hard to build a great city "on a bog" and so on. It became a sort of fundament of the official propaganda. Although now we have a lot of confutations, myths usually are very tough, you know.

Well, also SPb is a "mystic" city. You feel it every time you walk down its streets somewhere in the downtown. This nuance shows the best correlation with all the picture. The myths feel good in a mystic city.

I have found a very good and full research of all these legends. Unfortunately, it contains a lot of text and it's in Russian: http://www.uhlib.ru/istorija/_velich...urga/index.php

If you assimilate the correct point of view, you can be, I think, the first American woman who knows more information than most of the residents of Saint-Petersburg. Also it would be nice if you include something about it in your book.

Originally Posted by Paul G.

This "bog" legend is the strongest, although it's absolutely unscientific.

Ну, надо признать, что в Питере много болотистых участков, особенно если сравнивать с Москвой. Когда едешь на поезде из Москвы в Питер, то в районе станций Фарфоровская и Навалочная (4-7 км до вокзала) наблюдаются болота, которые засыпали совсем недавно. В дождливые дни там стоят огромные лужи. Старые учителя моей школы говорили, что после войны в районе школы не было ничего, кроме болот. В районе станции Рыбацкое я проходил практику. Добирался до места через болото, по мосткам.
Сейчас конечно уровень Питера выше, чем был 300 лет назад. Это так называемый "культурный слой". Масса привозной земли и прочее. Дома 18-го века утопают первыми этажами в землю. Во времена Пушкина наводнения наносили больший ущерб, так как улицы были ниже.