‘Church and State in Geneva of the Sixteenth Century in the Calvinist Epoch’ was the Master thesis by R. Yu. Wipper, publ. in 1894. Mentioning some ‘legendary’ ideas about Calvin and Geneva, the author did not try to dispel those myths. But the relations between the Church and the State in Geneva of the sixteenth century was in the centre of his research, he noted the way of life which was established in the city under Calvin. He set a question: whether it was a theocratic system (taking into account the dominant role of the Church in administering Geneva) or a dictatorship (if we speak about the personal power of Calvin)? W. tried to find out the answer. He argues against the idea of Calvin’s dictatorship in Geneva, in spite of the great influence of the reformer. He declared that Calvin got the real political influence in the last years of his life (1555-1564), when Geneva became the recognized center and stronghold of the Protestant Europe. But it is not reasonable to overestimate the personal role of Calvin in the ‘foreign policy’: his opinion was often neglected if it was not in tune with ‘governmental trend’. Even less was his influence at the domestic affairs of Geneva. The system of self-government was shaped long before him; there were Big and Small city councils, and the general assembly of citizens. In the nineteenth century, researchers were inclined to explain everything with the dominating role of Calvin in the city, especially in the victory of the oligarchic Small council – as if Calvin was the author of the Geneva constitution of 1543 which confirmed the reforms. The author shows that Calvin seems so influential because of the success of the protestant reform, but his personal influence at the current affairs was limited. The author proved the close interaction of religion and politics I Geneva, especially in the last years of the life of Calvin in the city, when sermons were written into the protocols of the city council, and priests blessed the political decisions of the republican authorities. But W. argues that Geneva was not an exclusion – the similar situation was in the most part of Swiss cities: the religion was intertwined with politics, and the power was in laic hands. According to W., the legend about the theocratic rule in Geneva was born from the lack of separation between the theory and the real facts. He also corrected the legend about the absolute severe moods and punishments in Geneva: they were at the sa,e level, as in other countries of the epoch.