exhibited an ornate Ukrainian baroque, as in the Church of Sts. Zacharias and
Elizabeth (1757–76), perpetuating seventeenth-century architectural styles for
much of the century. Its wooden Dormition Cathedral was rebuilt in stone in
1686 faithful to thefifteenth-century Kremlin original, but was remodeled with
Naryshkin baroque cupolas in 1726. Only late in the century did St. Petersburg
classical styles make their appearance, and even then with a time lag. The 1771
Church of Michael the Archangel reflected a restrained baroque typical of early
St. Petersburg architecture. Neoclassical appeared in the Tobolsk city plan (1763),
the archbishop’s residence (1773–5), and the cathedral bell tower (1797). The
visual landscape of Tobolsk certainly exhibited a Russian presence, but it was not
one in tune with the cutting edge of imperial design until late in Catherine II’s
time. Similarly, nearby Tiumen was graced in the early eighteenth century with the
Holy Trinity Monastery ensemble done in Ukrainian baroque style by architects
from Kyiv.
These trends are all the more marked moving eastward in Siberia. In the 1750s in
Eniseisk in central Siberia the Savior Monastery constructed a church in restrained
Figure 13.8The Church of Sts. Peter and Paul (1726) in Kazan displays the florid
decorative style of the Moscow late seventeenth-century baroque. Photo: Jack Kollmann.
286 The Russian Empire 1450– 1801