¹ On the effects of the “No Child Left Behind” act on music and arts education, see MacPherson, Karen, “Educators: A Dire Picture for Arts Ed under ‘No Child’ Law,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, July 19, 2004; Hoffman, Gretchen, “Most School Districts Lack Arts Plan,” San Gabriel Valley Tribune, September 28, 2005; Hudson, Eric J., “Parents Step Up for Arts, Music: Group Formed to Aid Struggling Programs,” Boston Globe, February 9, 2006; Alspach, Kyle, “School Music Program Axed,” Sentinel & Enterprise (Fitchburg, MA), December 13, 2005; Caviness, Crystal, “Beating the Drums for Music Education,” UPI, August 13, 2003. status, the debates over its inclusion in the curriculum reveal the hidden ideologies that shape the place of the school in society.Google Scholar

² Although the identity of the “music educator” was still under construction in both the Russian Empire and the United States during this period, I have opted to use this term to describe musicians and pedagogues whose primary concern was the establishment or development of a coherent system of music instruction in the schools. Many of these individuals, however, were not classroom teachers.Google Scholar

³ The nature of Russia's national/imperial/cultural identity continues to trouble historians. The collapse of the Soviet Union, and with it the final collapse of the larger Russian empire, has provoked scholars to reexamine not only specific issues regarding Russian identity but also to question the usefulness of applying approaches to identity developed for other societies to the Russian case. Yuri Slezkine's classic study of Soviet ethnonational identity, “The USSR as a Communal Apartment, or How a Socialist State Promoted Ethnic Particularism,” Slavic Review 53, no. 2 (Summer 1994): 414–452, explored the failure of attempts to build a distinctly Soviet supra-identity encompassing the many “nations” of the Soviet Union. For the nineteenth century, scholars such as Marina V. Loskoutova remind us of the importance of the region as a competitor to the nation/empire for the loyalty of Russian subjects. See her “A Motherland with a Radius of 300 Miles: Regional Identity in Russian Secondary and Post-Elementary Education from the Early Nineteenth Century to the War and Revolution,” European Review of History/Revue européene d'histoire 9, no. 1 (2002): 7–22.Google Scholar

⁴ The classic studies of the Slavophiles and of Official Nationality remain Andrzej Walicki, The Slavophile Controversy: History of a Conservative Utopia in Nineteenth-Century Russian Thought, trans. Hilda Andrews-Rusiecka (London: Clarendon Press of Oxforcl University Press, 1975), and Riasanovsky, Nicholas V., Nicholas I and Official Nationality in Russia, 1825–1855 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959). For a more recent analysis of Slavophilism and Russian nationalism see Rabow-Edling, Susanna, “The Political Significance of Cultural Nationalism: The Slavophiles and Their Notion of a Russian Enlightenment,” Nationalities Papers 32, no. 2 (June 2004): 441–56.Google Scholar

⁵ Greenfield, Liah, “The Formation of the Russian National Identity: The Role of Status Insecurity and Ressentiment,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 32, no. 3 (July 1990): 549–91. For an interesting challenge to the idea that the Church and the clergy were inherently attracted to conservative nationalist ideologies, see Pisiotis, Argyrios K., “Russian Orthodoxy and the Politics of National Identity in [the] Early Twentieth Century,” Balkan Studies 42, no. 2 (2001): 225–43.Google Scholar

⁶ Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, rev. ed. (New York: Verso, 1991). Similar ideas about the role of culture in the construction of national identity can be found in Hobsbawm, Eric and Ranger, Terence, eds., The Invention of Tradition (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Eugen Weber's classic study of the modernization of France, Peasants into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1870–1914 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1976), also provides a useful point of comparison as it highlights the role of culture, and in particular the school, in the transformation of a disjunct rural society into a (more-or-less) unified nation. An interesting attempt to explore the role of the print media in the construction of Russian identity, a la Anderson, can be found in Andreas Renner, “Defining a Russian Nation: Mikhail Katkov and the ‘Invention’ of National Politics.” Slavonic and East European Review 81, no. 4 (October 2003): 659–82.Google Scholar

⁷ The modern scholarly literature on Russian music education is quite limited, with few substantive studies in languages other than Russian. Russian pedagogical scholarship on school music is much richer, but most of it focuses on practical pedagogical questions rather than the historical development of music education. D. L. Lokshin's Khorovoe penie v russkoi dorevoliutsionnoi i sovetskoi shkole (Moscow: Akademiia Pedagogicheskogo Nauka, 1957), although a half century old, still provides the best introduction to Russian school music pedagogy. The work of Soviet researchers, moreover, was strongly influenced by the prevailing cultural ideologies of the state, in particular an uncritical acceptance of traditional ideas of the intelligentsia's responsibility to “uplift” the people as well as more specifically socialist approval of the “democratization” of culture. See, for example, Kozhevnikov, G. S., “Uchitelia peniia dorevoliutsionnoi rossii i ikh prosvetitel'skaia deiatel'nost',” Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo Pedagogicheskogo Instituta 170 (1976): 128–39. More recently, scholars such as S. E. Beliaev have begun to reexamine the development of music education in the late Imperial period as a means to reconsider music pedagogy in the present. See, for example, Beliaev's Muzykal'noe obrazovarrie na urale: istoki, traditsii (Ekaterinburg: Nauka, 1995), esp. 15–21.Google Scholar

⁸ TsGIA SPB (Central State Historical Archive, St. Petersburg), fond 408, op. 1, d. 51, prilozhenie I, p. 3.Google Scholar

⁹ Puzyrevskii, A., Metodicheskiia zametki po prepodavaniiu peniia v narodnykh shkolakh, 2d ed. (Moscow, 1892).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Puzyrevskii, A. I., “O zhelatel'noi postanovke prepodavaniia peniia v gorodskikh uchilishchakh,” Russkaia shkola, vol. 2, book VII–VIII (July–August, 1892): 177–79.Google Scholar

¹¹ Ibid., 184.Google Scholar

¹² The scholarly literature on late Imperial Russian education is substantial and diverse. Early Western studies of Russian education, such as Patrick Alston's Education and the State in Tsarist Russia (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1969) and Allen Sinel's The Classroom and the Chancellery: State Educational Reform under Count Dmitry Tolstoi (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973) focused on the role of the state in education. Beginning in the mid-1980s, social historians contributed detailed studies of popular literacy, peasant schools, and the work lives and political experiences of male and female schoolteachers, significantly enriching our understanding of the complex role of the school in community and society. See, in particular, Brooks, Jeffrey, When Russia Learned to Read: Literacy and Popular Literature, 1861–1917 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985); Eklof, Ben, Russian Peasant Schools: Officialdom, Village Culture, and Popular Pedagogy, 1861–1914 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986); Seregny, Scott, Russian Teachers and Peasant Revolution: The Politics of Education in 1905 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989); and Christine Ruane, , Gender, Class, and the Professionalization of Russian City Teachers, 1860–1914 (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1994). Education studies continue to deepen and enrich our understanding of Russian history. Wayne Dowler's recent study of schooling in non-Russian regions, Classroom and Empire: The Politics of Schooling Russia's Eastern Nationalities, 1860–1917 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001), explores complicated questions of literacy, language, and national identity in the multiethnic Russian empire.Google Scholar

¹³ Eklof, , Russian Peasant Schools, 167–68.Google Scholar

¹⁴ See, for example, Mironositskii, P., “Tserkovnoe penie v shkole,” Narodnoe ohrazovanie, no. 2, book 2 (February 1900): 121–27.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Eklof, , Russian Peasant Schools, 260–62.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Zemstva (singular zemstvo) were institutions of local self-government established in Russia as part of the Great Reforms of Tsar Alexander II. One important role of district and provincial zemstva was the establishment and administration of local schools. For an introduction to the Great Reforms, see Lincoln, W. Bruce, The Great Reforms: Autocracy, Bureaucracy, and the Politics of Change in Imperial Russia (Dekalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 1990) and Eklof, Ben, Bushnell, John, and Zakharova, Larissa, eds., Russia's Great Reforms, 1855–1881 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994). On the zemstvo as an institution, see Emmons, Terence and Vucinich, Wayne S., eds., The Zemstvo in Russia: An Experiment in Local Self-Government (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982). For a recent Russian view on the zemstvo and education, see Abramov, Vitali Feonovich, “Zemstvo, narodnoe obrazovanie i prosveshchenie,” Voprosy istorii 8 (1998): 44–60.Google Scholar

¹⁷ RGIA (Russian State Historical Archive), fond 733, op. 195, d. 537, ll. 1–11; 13–15v.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Mironositskii, P., “Tserkovno-prikhodskaia shkola i tserkovnoe penie” (speech read in Kiev, 19 July 1894), 2–3.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ramenskii, A., Raspredelenie zaniatii po peniiu v gorodskikh prikhodskikh i sel'skikh uchilishchakh, 23–24. Originally published as an appendix to Tsirkuliar po Orenburgskomu Uchebnomu Okrugu no. 8 (1889).Google Scholar

²⁰ Mironositskii, P. P., Noty-bukvy: pevcheskaia gramota dlia nachal'nykh shkol i narodnykh khorov, sostavil po angliiskoi bukvennoi metode, vol. 2 (St. Petersburg, 1905), 13. This book is an explicit attempt to bring the English Tonic-Sol-Fa method to the Russian classroom (page v).Google Scholar

²¹ In “fixed do” systems, each note of the scale is assigned a specific and usually unchanging syllable. Thus, in Fixed Do, both a C Major and a C minor scale would both be notated as Do, Re, Mi, Fa, So, La, Ti, Do, while an F major scale would read as Fa, So, La, Ti, Do, Re, Mi, Fa. In “movable do” systems, the tonic of the scale is always represented by the syllable Do. Singers must change the pitch assigned the syllable “do” if the key of the piece changes, for example, from C major (Do equals C) to G Major (Do now equals G). Most variants of the “movable do” system are chromatic, so that sharp, natural, and flat pitches with the same note name are designated by slightly variant syllables. Thus, in Movable Do, a C Major scale would read as Do, Re, Mi, Fa, So, La, Ti, Do, but the C natural minor Scale would read as Do, Re, Me, Fa, So, Le, Te, Do.Google Scholar

²² Ramenskii, , Raspredelenie zaniatii po peniiu, 9.Google Scholar

²³ Mironositskii, , Noty-bakvy, 76. This still relatively simple example includes a change from major to minor key, passing notes, and a variety of indications of duration.Google Scholar

²⁴ These considerations shaped the recommendations of government panels empowered to examine the teaching of music in the secondary schools. See, for example, RGIA, fond 733, op. 194, d. 1296, ll. 53–53v.Google Scholar

²⁵ Veber, K. Ed., Kratkii ocherk sovremennogo sostoianiia muzykal'nogo obrazovaniia v Rossii, 1884–1885 (Moscow, 1885). The essay is a melange of collected periodical articles by a variety of authors and original commentary.Google Scholar

²⁶ Ibid., 84–88. The conservatory professor is identified only by his initials, B. D. V.Google Scholar

²⁷ Ibid., 92–95.Google Scholar

²⁸ Karasev, A. K., Izdaniia po obucheniiu peniiu sostavlennyia A.K. Karasevym i kratkii ocherk ego muzykal'no-pedagogicheskoi i izdatel'skoi deiatel'nosti (Kiev, 1900), 2–3.Google Scholar

²⁹ Karasev, A., Metodika peniia. Part II. Rukovodstvo dlia teoreticheskogo i prakticheskogo izucbeniia khorovogo peniia s uchashchimsia srednego i starshego vozrasta, dlia organizatsii pevcheskikh khorov, v sviazi s izucheniem nachale garmonii i regentskogo dela (Moscow, 1914), 7–8.Google Scholar

³⁰ TsIAM (Central Historical Archive of Moscow), fond 179, op. 11, ed khr 577, 1. 17v.Google Scholar

³¹ Dm. Zarin, compiler, Metodika shkol'nogo kborovoqo peniia v sviazi s prakticheskim kursom, Year 1 (Moscow, 1907), 1–2; 33–34; 50–51.Google Scholar

³² Maslov, A. L., Metodika peniia v nachal'noi shkole osnovannaia na noveishikh dannykh eksperimental'noi pedagogiki (Moscow: I.D. Sytin, c. 1913), 15.Google Scholar

³³ On the relationship of music supervisors to classroom teachers in the United States, see Coffman, Don D., “Vocal Music and the Classroom Teacher,” Journal of Research in Music Education 35, no. 2 (1987): 98–99.Google Scholar

³⁴ Jorgensen, Estelle R., “Justifying Music Instruction in American Public Schools: An Historical Perspective,” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education no. 120 (Spring 1994): 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁵ Crawford, Richard, “Musical Learning in Nineteenth-Century America,” American Music 1, no. 1 (Spring 1983): 1–11.Google Scholar

³⁶ Bergee, Martin J., “Ringing the Changes: General John Eaton and the 1886 Public School Music Survey,” Journal of Research in Music Education 35, no. 2 (1987): 103–104.Google Scholar

³⁷ Eaton, John, “Education in Music at Home and Abroad,” in U.S. Bureau of Education, The Study of Music in Public Schools, Circular of Information, no. 1 (1886), 43. See also, Bergee, Martin J, “The Favorable Moment and the Needed Assistance: The Study of Music in the Public Schools, 1886,” in Music in American Schools, 1838–1988, eds. McCarthy, Marie and Wilson, Bruce D. (College Park. MD: Music Library, University of Maryland at College Park, 1991), 77–83.Google Scholar

³⁸ Gramit, David, “Education and the Social Roles of Music,” in Cultivating Music: The Aspirations, Interests, and Limits of German Musical Culture, 1770–1848 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 93–124, esp. 117–19.Google Scholar

³⁹ Eaton, , “Education in Music,” 51–52.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Warren, Charles, “The Place of Music among the Aesthetic Arts Defined, and Its Value as a Part of Free Common School Instruction Considered,” in U.S. Bureau of Education, The Study of Music in Public Schools, Circular of Information, no. 1 (1886), 16.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Silver, Edgar O., The Condition of Music Instruction in the Public Schools of the United States: Special Report Presented at Nashville, Tenn., July 17, 1889 (Boston: New England Publishing Co., 1890), 3–4.Google Scholar

⁴² Ibid., 6–7.Google Scholar

⁴³ Ibid., 7–8.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Ibid., 8–9, 14–15.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Martin, George H., Report on the Teaching of Music in the Public Schools of Massachusetts to the Committee on Music of the State Board of Education (Boston: Wright and Potter, 1906), 11–12 and 1 5.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Ibid., 7–8 and 10.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Ibid., 13–14.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Yont, Rose, The Value of Musk in Education (Boston, 1916), 46–63.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Shawe, Elsie M., “Public School Music in Relation to the Music of the Community,” in National Education Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Forty-Ninth Annual Meeting (Winona, MN: NEA, 1911), 790–91.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Clark, Frances E., “The Status of Music in the United States,” in Addresses and Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the National Education Association (Denver, 1909), 677.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Ibid., 680–81.Google Scholar

⁵² Nelidov, K., “Polozhenie muzykal'nogo obrazovaniia v srednei shkole i zhelatel'nye izmenenie v ego sovremennoi postanovke,” Russkaia muzykal'naui gazeta, Part 1 no. 12 (1900): 335–336.Google Scholar

⁵³ Ibid., 340–41.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Nelidov, K., “Polozhenie muzykal'nogo obrazovaniia,” Russkaia muzykal'naia gazeta, Part 3 no. 14 (1900): 409.Google Scholar