CHRONICLES - historical works X-XVIII centuries.

In some cases, the research was carried out by year (by “le-there”; hence the name fybt) and co-pro-w-y-da- moose hro-no-gra-fi-che-ski-mi, sometimes ka-len-dar-ny-mi yes-ta-mi, and sometimes pointing to the clock, when about-is-ho-di-lo co-existence. Chronicles exist in a number of European countries, one wide-spread of the country mainly in Old Russian state , Russian lands and princes, the Russian state, as well as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. According to visual features, they are close to Western European an-na-lamas and chron-kas. In the Old Russian state, Chronicles could name not only the exact data about what happened, but also the dis- position false descriptions of actions in a chronological order without breaking them down into annual articles. Most of the Chronicles, representing a collection of previous texts, based on yearly records , include do-ku-men-you (international do-go-vo-ry, private and public-personal acts), sa-mo-hundred - significant literary works (“by weight”, “words”, lives and other hagio-graphic materials, sayings) ) or their frag-men, as well as for the texts of folk-lore-no-go pro-is-like-de-niya. Every Chronicle or a chronicle of writings is considered as a self-sufficient integral literary work, I have -what we sat down with, as well as the structure and ideological direction. The main attention in the Chronicles is usually given to the ancestors, since from them, according to medieval ideas, -whether from-me-not-in-the-historical development, around-the-same pra-vi-te-lei, church-hier-rar-hams, war-us and conf-lik-there; in the Chronicles there is not much information about the wide layers of the village, the development of culture, everything there is no outside information about economic developments. Chronicles were usually compiled at the courts of princes, church hierarchs, and in monasteries. Over 1000 lists of Chronicles have been preserved, dating back to the XIII-XVIII centuries, the most ancient of which are per-ga-men “Le-to-pi-sets soon pat-ri-ar-ha Ni-ki-for-ra” with Ros-tov-ski-mi from-ves-tiya-mi (last quarter of the 13th century ), Nov-gorod-skaya first summer-writing of the old-she-go-da (re-editions) (Si-no-distant list, 2nd half XIII century, 2nd quarter of the XIV century), Lav-ren-t-ev-skaya le-to-pis (1377), as well as on-pi-san-naya on bu-ma-ge Ipat-ev- skaya le-to-pis (1420s). Earlier summer-written codes of re-con-st-rui-ru-yut-xia is-sled-to-va-te-la-mi on the basis of ana- li-for the saved-memories. Summer-written texts are class-si-fi-tsi-ru-ut-sya by type, re-dak-tsi-yam, from-vo-dam; according to the conditional names (depending on the production, location, to one person or another; according to the place of storage) - Lav-ren-t-ev-skaya, Ipat-ev-skaya, Niko-nov-skaya, Er-mo-lin-skaya, Lvovskaya, Ti-po-grafskaya, etc. If several Chronicles bear the same titles, a conventional number is added to them (New City 1- 5th, Sophia 1st and 2nd, Pskov 1-3rd), and what does the well-measurement have to do with their time? creation, or with the subsequent publication, or with other circumstances.

The scheme of the ancient Russian le-to-pi-sa-niya, divided into a whole (with certain stipulations, to -pol-not-nii-mi and from-me-ne-nii-mi) with modern research-to-va-te-la-mi, proposed by A.A. Shah-ma-tov. According to his point of view, the initial stage of Russian literature was the Ancient Code, compiled under the Mitro -according to the ca-fed-re in Kiev around 1039 (according to M.D. Pri-sel-ko-vu - in 1037). In 1073, he was extended and became the head of the Kiev-Pecher Monastery of Ni- co-nom Ve-li-kim; along with other sources, was used by the abbot of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery, Io-an-n, with the co- becoming the so-called At the beginning of the century, around 1093-1095 (original title - “Time-name, like the na-ri-tsa-et-sya-to- writing of the Russian princes and the land of Russia..."). Text Initially, to the fullest you-written-ka-mi from the Byzantine chronicle and ma-te-ria-la-mi ki-ev-sko-go ve-li-ko-prince-of-ar-hi-va (Russian-Byzantine do-go-vo-ry), lay in the base “By the time of-men- new years." According to the Shah-ma-to-va scheme, its first edition (not preserved) was created by mo-na-khom Kiye- in the Pe-cher-sko-go monastery Ne-sto-rum around 1113, re-ra-ba-you-va-was the abbot of the ki-ev-sko-go you-du-bits- of the Mi-hai-lov-go monastery of Sil-ve-st-rom in 1116 (kept in the composition of the Lav-ren-t-ev-skaya le-to- pi-si) and an unknown person close to the new city prince of Msti-sla-v Vla-di-mi-ro-vi-chu, in 1118 (kept in the village of Ipat-ev-skaya le-to-pi-si). In the future, the Initial Code and the “Tale of Bygone Years”, as a rule, were used in the production of art -to-rii of Ancient Ru-si in the regional le-to-pi-sa-nii. In later times, the pop-up appeared back in the 1850-1860s (M.I. Su-ho-mli-nov, I. I. Srez-nev-sky and others) concept of the emergence of Russian summer-pi-sa-niya in the form of an-na-li-sti-che- skih notes and their subsequent stage-by-stage narration (V.Yu. Aristov, T.V. Gi-mon, A. A. Gip-pi-us, A.P. To-loch-ko). According to this concept, Russian literature arose in Kiev at the end of the 10th and 11th centuries and continued until the creation of “Po -all the years” in the form of some an-n-fishings, year-by-year records of some-of-the-years, from-whether- with brevity, fact-graphic-ness, from-the-sut-st-vi-em of complex narrative constructions, development were in the right direction to increase the accuracy (appearance of exact dates) and increase the volume of light -de-niy, ras-shi-re-niya te-ma-ti-ki and ob-ga-sche-niya nar-ra-tiv-ny-mi insert-ka-mi and until-pol-not-nii- mi.

“The Tale of Bygone Years” formed the basis of the Ki-ev-sk-le-to-pi-sa-niya, which was carried out on pro-tya history of the XII - 1st third of the XIII centuries. The most important stage of its development was the Kiev vault of 1198 (kept in the Ipat-ev-skaya le-to-pi-si village) , founded in the Vydubetsky monastery. According to B.A. Fish-ba-ko-va, he was preceded by 3 other svo-das, established: in the Kiev-Pecher-sky monastery by abbot Po-li-kar-pom (oh-vaty-val of the co-being of 1141-1171); at the court of the Ki-ev-sky prince of the Holy-glory Vse-vo-lo-di-cha (1179); at the court of the Bel-gorod-sko-go and ov-ru-sko-go prince Ryu-ri-ka Ros-ti-sla-vi-cha (1190). According to V.T. Pa-shu-to, Kiev-skoe le-to-pi-sa-nie lasted until 1238. Its individual fragments (for example, the description of the Battle of Kalka in 1223) became part of the Galits-ko-Volyn-skaya le-to-pi-si ( XIII century; perhaps, separate summer-written records were kept in Ga-li-che and Vla-di-mi-re-Vo-lyn from the middle of the 12th century) , which at the end of the 13th century was united with the Kiev Battle of 1198. Both remembrances were kept in the Ipat-ev-skaya le-to-pi-si.

The Novy-Gorod Le-to-pi-sa-nie arose between 1039 and 1042 as a shortened selection or a copy of the earlier Ki-ev Chronicle (possibly, Ancient Code), which is subsequently not-sys-te-ma-ti-che-ski lasted until 1079. Around 1093, the New City arch was created, which was based on the previous New City tradition and culture. Ev-sky Initial vault (according to A.A. Gip-pi-us, T.V. Gi-mon). In the mid-2nd half of the 1110s the so-called Leningrad was formed. the Vse-vo-lo-yes vault, in which the Novy-Gorod vault was com- pletely extracted from the Ki-ev-skogo le-to-pi- Sa-niya and notes-ka-mi about the new city so-by-ti-yah at the end of the 11th - beginning of XII centuries, based on memory. In the future, annual records in Novgorod were kept regularly. Is-follow-up-to-va-te-la-mi you-de-la-you-are-the-new-city-vul-dical vault, compiled by Herman Vo- started in the 2nd half of the 1160s and continued until 1188. Subsequently, the ruler's le-to-pi-sa-nie was carried out practically without interruptions until the 1430s. According to Gip-piu-sa, Ger-man Vo-yata also created the ancient vault of the Yur-e-va monastery, on the basis of something Around 1195, a new vault was built in this monastery.

An important step in the New-city le-to-pi-sa-niya was the creation of the New-city 1st le-to-pi-si, came before us in 2 of the vo-dahs (re-dak-tsi-yah) - the elder and the younger (a number of lists from the middle of the 15th century). The next stage of the New-Gorod-sko-go summer-pi-sa-niya was developed in 2 sub-bor-kahs of the New-Gorod-Karam-zin -sky le-to-pi-si, okan-chi-va-shih-sya in 1411 and 1428 and preserved in the unified list of the late 15th - early 16th centuries . The co-founder of these sub-rocks for the first time paid attention not only to the local Nov-gorod, but also to the general Russian wow. This ten-den-tion is based on its development in the New City 4th Le-to-pi-si senior (from-lo-zhe-nie events before 1437; lists from the 1470s and the 1st quarter of the 16th century) and younger ones (before 1447; lists from the last quarter of the 15th century) edited tions. Its special re-working appears in the Nov-gorod-skaya 5th chronicle (from before 1446, list) the end of the 15th century), in which there is a tendency to return mainly to the local new towns -would-be. The history of the New City republic for the years 1447-1469 was preserved in the most complete form in the world. hundred-ve so-called Le-to-pi-si Av-ra-am-ki (1st part before 1469, created in the late 1460s - early 1470s; 2nd part - in 1495); more brief versions of the summer of the 3rd quarter of the 15th century - in some lists of the New City 4th summer pi-si, and also (until 1461) in the Le-to-scribe of the episcopal Pavel (spis-juk 2nd half XVI century). Despite the morning of the New-Gorod-res-pub-li-coy not-for-vi-si-mo-sti (1478), summer-written work -that in Novgorod continued in the 16th century. In 1539, according to the authority of the arch-bishop Ma-ka-ria, a le-to-piss vault was created, known under the name of the New City Le-re -the-writing of Dub-rov-skogo (or Nov-gorod-skaya 4th le-to-pissi according to the list of Dub-rov-sko-go) (from the lo-zhe-nie before- up to 1539; preserved in the list at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th centuries). Another Chronicle of the 16th century - Nov-gorod-skaya 2nd, until 1572 - in fact, not-completed for-go-tov -ka, in which so-b-ra-ny you-pi-ki from various Chronicles without co-blue-de-niy chron-no-logich. in a row.

At the end of the 16th and 17th centuries, the Novgorod Uva-rovskaya Le-to-pis was compiled (continuous text until 1606, individual weight of 1612, 1645 and 1646), the final part of which (since 1500) is based on not-saved new native sources. The reintroduction of summer writing work in Novgorod (1670-1680s) is connected with the activity pat-ri-ar-ha Io-a-ki-ma. At this time, the Novgorod 3rd edition was created (spatially re-edited in the first form from -but-sit-by the time between 1674 and 1676, in the final form - by 1682 and, possibly, several after- current years; a brief edition in full form between 1682 and 1690, in brief - between 1690 and 1695 years), as well as the largest, both in volume and in abundance and variety of used sources -kov Nov-gorod-skaya Za-be-lin-skaya le-to-pis (from-lo-zhe-nie before-ve-de-but until 1679; co-sta-le-on-inter -du 1680 and 1681). Afterwards, a significant memory of the New-city-rod-sko-le-to-pi-sa-niya became Nov-go-rod-skaya Po-go-din-skaya le-to-pis (created in the 1680-1690s), before late XVI I century, and in some countries it continued until the end of the 18th and even the beginning of the 19th centuries. What is particularly special about the New City Chronicles of the late 17th century is the appearance in them of systematic references to sources -ki and even individual elements of cri-ti-ki is-precisely.

Per-re-yas-lav-skoye le-to-pi-sa-nie arose in the 1st quarter of the 12th century in the city of Per-re-yas-lavl (Russian), per-vo-na -started, but as the episcopal le-to-pi-sets (until 1175), someone was replaced by the prince's le-to-pi-sets, led as a mi-ni-mum until 1228.

On the basis of ana-li-for the preserved Chronicles you-de-la-et-sya and pre-Mongol-Cher-ni-gov-skoe le-to-pi -sa-nie, representing the summer-pi-set of Prince St.-glory Ol-go-vi-cha, arose in the 1140s and continued -married under his sons - Ole Svyato-sla-vi-che (died in 1180) and Igor Svyato-sla-vi-che (died in 1201).

In the Russian-in-Suz-dal-land, summer-written records have been traced since the middle of the 12th century, systematic Summer written records in North-Eastern Russia began to weigh in the late 1150s in Vladimir. In 1177, under the Uspensky council, the first vla-di-mir le-to-pis-ny vault was created. In the subsequent great princely palaces (1193, 1212 and 1228), local influences also co-existed with information from the summer writings of Pe-re-yas-lav-la (Russian). To the memory of the Vla-di-mir-skogo le-to-pi-sa-niya of the 13th century from the Rad-zi-vil-lov-skaya le-to-writing, preserved in 2 copies of the 15th century. (Rad-zi-vil-lov-sky sp-sok pro-il-lu-st-ri-ro-van more than 600 mi-nia-tyu-ra-mi). In the 13th-15th centuries, constant writing work was carried out in Ros-to-ve, fragment-men of Ro-to-to-go summer -pi-sa-niya were preserved in the composition of the Russian society collections of the 15th-16th centuries.

By the 13th century, from the Pskov le-to-pi-sa-niya, which was connected with the aspirations of the Pskov-vi -whose pri-ob-re-sti is not-for-vis-si-most from the Nov-gorod-skaya re-pub-li-ki. WITH beginning of the XIV centuries, summer-to-pi-sa-nie was carried out at Tro-its-kom so-bo-re, ru-ko-in-di-li-them in the garden. The pro-graph of the Pskov Chronicles that have come down to us was created in the 1450s or early 1460s as a result of the unification of shi-ro-co- go-kru-ha is-to-k-kov (Pskov-le-to-pi-s-pi-s, chrono-graphically ma-ter-ria-lov, smo-len-sko-li -tovsky is-toch-ni-ka, etc.). According to A.N. On-so-but-woo, as a result of it, until its completion, the codes of 1464, 1469, 1481 and the end of the 1480s arose. The oldest preserved Pskov Chronicle - Pskov 2nd Chronicle (from before 1486), presented by a single Si-no-distant list (mid-1480s), which was, in the opinion of Na-so-no- va, copy her pro-graph, but in my opinion B.M. Klos-sa, - her under-lin-no-one. On the basis of the building of 1481, 2 rights arose in the development of the Pskov summer, co-storage -she-go-xia and after the union of the Pskov Republic to the Russian state (1510). The first of them was represented by the 1547 palace (Pskov 1st Le-to-pis), co-sta-vi-tel of a co-feeling -vu-et to Moscow go-su-da-ryam, but about-li-cha-et them in-me-st-ni-kov; the second is the house of the abbot of the Psko-vo-Pe-cher-skogo monastery. Cor-ni-liy of 1567 (Pskov 3rd summer letter), reflecting the mood of the bo-yar-st-va, op-po-zi-tsi-on-but -go Mo-sk-ve.

According to A.N. On-so-now, from the end of the 13th century until the annexation of the Tver Grand Duchy to the Russian State (1485), the Tver forest was continuously conducted -to-pi-sa-nie. Once upon a time, the Tver summer-written ma-te-ri-al was preserved only in the form of separate pieces and excerpts, because it was glo-loved by the Moscow le-to-pi-sa-ni-y, and sometimes, perhaps, on-the-measure-but-destroyed-wives by Moscow books-no-ka- mi. Tver ma-te-ri-al co-contained in the great-prince's court of 1305, which became the basis of Lav-ren-ty-ev -skoy le-to-pi-si. Is-follow-to-va-te-la-mi you-de-la-ut-sya Tver arches of 1327, 1409, etc. Tver is-exact-ki-use-use -was involved in the compilation of the Ro-gozh-skogo le-to-scribe of the 1st half of the 15th century (list of the mid-15th century). The Tver Le-to-piss (Tver collection), containing a fragment of the Tver Le-to-pi-sa-niya, has been preserved the end of the 13th - the end of the 15th centuries (lists from the 17th century).

In connection with the rise of Mo-s-cov-sko-go-prince-st-va of Mo-s-cov-skoe le-to-pi- sa-nie, first-in-at-first-but (in the 14th century) su-sche-st-vo-vav-neck in the form of brief za-pi-se mi-tro-personally -th yard and family chronicle of Mo-s-cov-skih Yes-no-vi-whose, re-accepted and developed a society Russian summer-written tradition. Due to the political position of Mo-sk-you, both princely and mi-tro-personal le-to-pi have developed here -sa-nie. The first Moscow grand princely palace was the “Great Russian Le-to-pi-sets” (1389). The next significant memory of the summer in Moscow was the Russian society for the maintenance of Tro- Its-kaya le-to-write (from before 1408), compiled, according to V.A. Kuch-ki-na, after 1422. One of the largest written monuments of the 2nd half of the 15th century is the Moscow Grand Prince's Code of 1479, the ideological basis -how someone has established the hereditary right of the Grand Dukes of Moscow to Novgorod. Its later edition is the Moscow Grand Prince's Code of the late 15th century. An important memory of the Moscow le-to-pi-sa-niya of the end of the 15th century is the Si-me-o-nov-skaya le-to-pis (list of the 16th century ).

A wide range of sources (some of them unique) were attracted by Metropolitan Da-ni-l when he created the Ni-ko new le-to-pi-si - the largest memory of the Russian summer-to-pi-sa of the 16th century, subsequently the best -the name according to one of the later lists, under the-above-the-lying Patriarch Niko-nu. Is-to-ria was based on Da-ni-lom mainly from a church point of view, and the protection of property in- the Church has moved to the forefront. In the early 1560s, the summer-written tradition of the Moscow mi-tro-personal department continued in the “Step-pen-book” ", established under the blue-de-ni-em of Metropolitan Afa-na-siya and pro-po-ve-to-va-shay "symphony" of churches and secular authorities.

The Moscow summer-to-pi-sa-nie was carried out non-stop until the end of the 1560s, the largest memory-memories - os-no-van-naya at the Moscow Grand Prince's Palace at the end of the 15th century. Vos-Kre-sen-skaya le-to-pis (1st edition on-cha-ta in 1533, last, 3rd, edition created-on-me- railway 1542 and 1544) and “Le-to-pi-sets na-cha-la tsar-st-va” (in the first-initial edition from-la-gav-shiy events of 1533-1552 and then continued until 1556 and 1560). In the 2nd half of the 16th century, the Litse-voy vault was created - the most complete en-cyclo-pedia of historical knowledge of medieval Russia.

The most important chronicle of the 1st third of the 17th century was the New Le-to-pi-sets, an oh-you-shay period since the end of the tsar-st-vo. va-niya Iva-na IV Va-sil-e-vi-cha Groz-no-go until 1630. Ver-ro-yat-but, he is set up in the vicinity of the pat-ri-ar-ha Fi-la-re-ta and is based on a lot -numerical and different sources, including official grams and documents from the period of Time of Troubles -ni, various Chronicles, etc. He had a significant influence on the subsequent development of the Russian chronicle, the later creation its numerous continuations and re-workings.

Between 1652 and 1658, in the Moscow Chu-do-voy monastery, a pat-ri-ar-shiy summer-written vault of 1652 was created, the basis of which according to the significant-but-abbreviated texts of Vos-Kre-sen-skaya and Niko-nov-skaya le-to-pi-sey, and so- the same source, close to the New-letter-scribe; so-sta-vi-te-la-mi a number of words and sayings have been introduced into the written text. The work of the le-to-scribes of the Chu-do-va monastery became a pat-ri-ar-shiy le-to-piss code of the 1670s, and for -that pat-ri-ar-shiy summer-written code of the 1680s (between 1680 and 1688; from the weight-ten in 2 editions of the 1690s ). The vault of the 1680s became one of the most important literary monuments of the 17th century, created not from the world. nia of the Russian-society le-to-pi-sa-niya; for his co-sta-vi-te-la ha-rak-ter-but aspiration on the shi-ro-com is-to-ric ma-te-ria-le to establish a con-chain tion of the “out-of-bra-no-sti” of the Russian state and its self-powers among all the nations and states of the world. The author gave a patriotic, “go-su-dar-st-ven-nuyu,” point of view on domestic history.

IN XV-XVI centuries according to a wide range of short-letter scribes that appeared in the monasteries: Ki-ril-lo-Be-lo-zer-skom, Io-si-fo-Vo-lo-ko-lam-skom, Troi-tse-Ser-gie-vom, So-lovets-kom, Spa- co-Yaroslavsk. Once upon a time, pro-vints. le-to-pi-sa-nie in Vo-lo-gde, Ve-li-kom Us-tyu-ge and some other cities. Significantly its-ra-zi-em from-li-cha-yut-sya le-to-pi-si white-Russian-li-tov-s, created on the territory ri-to-rii of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in XIV-XVI centuries and his sacred stories. At the beginning of the 16th century, a new type of historical history appeared, which was represented in the Russian chro-no-graphy. fe (the so-called re-edition of 1512) (see the article Chro-no-graphs). IN XVII-XVIII centuries the summer-written form from the us-toy-chi-was preserved only in the provincial summer-to-pi-sa-nia, and to end of the XVIII centuries, the pre-kra-ti-la of its existence.

In the middle of the 19th century, the publication of Chronicles began in the series “Complete collection of Russian chronicles” (PSRL).

The chronicles are the most important information on Russian history of the 9th-16th centuries, they contain a valuable material on history to-rii of the 17th-18th centuries. In the Chronicles from-ra-zhe-na bo-ga-taya si-no-ni-mi-ka, with-kept-shay military, church-naya and hell-mi-ni-st -ra-tiv-naya ter-mi-no-logia, on-m-astic and to-po-ni-mic lex-si-ka (many personal names, nicknames , geographical names, names of churches, monasteries, names of people according to their place of living tel-st-va), phrase-zeo-logia, use-re-la-ut-sya for-them-st-vo-van-nye words and cal-ki with Greek language. By comparing the lek-si-ki “According to the weight of the times” and the later Chronicles, it is possible to trace the life of some people -mi-new, in part-of the military, right up to their removal and replacement with new ones.

The language of the Chronicles has its own uniqueness and unity, and a certain unity -noe work-toy re-dak-to-ditch. The language of the Chronicles does not represent a single system. In it, in addition to two stylistic types of the ancient Russian literary language - bookish (see Church-Slavic language) and vernacular once-a-thief, - we found the origin of the dialistic difference. Individual language features, for example in fo-ne-ti-ke and lek-si-ke, indicate their source in different regions lo-ka-li-za-tion; grammatical and syn-tactical phenomena are more difficult to locate.

RUSSIAN CHRONICLES AND MILLER-ROMANOV VERSION OF RUSSIAN HISTORY.

1. FIRST ATTEMPTES TO WRITE ANCIENT RUSSIAN HISTORY.

A good overview of the history of writing Russian history is given by V.O. Klyuchevsky, pp. 187-196. This story is little known and very interesting. We will present it here, following Klyuchevsky.

1.1. XVI-XVII CENTURIES AND DECREE OF ALEXEY MIKHAILOVICH.

It is known that the modern version of Russian history dates back to XVIII century and its authors are Tatishchev, Miller and Shletser. What was known about Kievan Rus before them? It turns out - practically nothing. Meanwhile, in XVI-XVII centuries in Rus' they were already interested in their ancient history.

V.O. Klyuchevsky writes: “The idea of ​​​​the collective development of our history arose long before Schletser... In this regard, the 16th century is especially outstanding in our country: it was an era of lively chronicle writing... Then extensive chronicle collections were compiled, with detailed tables of contents, genealogical tables Russian and Lithuanian sovereigns... In the chronicle narrative, glimpses of historical criticism become noticeable; they are trying to introduce it methodological plan, even spend a well-known political idea... Extensive chronicle, beginning with the legend of the wedding of Vladimir Monomakh with a crown Byzantine Emperor", p. 188

Apparently, at this time a version of Russian history was created, starting with Vladimir Monomakh. We will return to how this version was created in subsequent chapters. We note here that this version apparently did not yet include the earlier Kievan Rus. That is, the story BEFORE Vladimir Monomakh.

Then there is a break until the middle of the 17th century, when:<<Указом 3 ноября 1657 года царь Алексей Михайлович повелел учредить особое присутственное место, Записной приказ, а в нем сидеть дьяку Кудрявцеву и "записывать степени и грани царственные с великого государя царя Федора Ивановича", то есть продолжать Степенную книгу, прерывающуюся на царствовании Иоанна Грозного. Начальник нового приказа должен был вести это дело с помощью двух старших и шести младших подъячих...

This, so to speak, historiographical commission was arranged with difficulty and was far from being according to the tsar’s decree. She was allocated a room in a cramped and rotten “hut”, where, moreover, next to the historiographers sat prisoners with archers guarding them. Junior clerks were not appointed at all, and the Ambassadorial Order resolutely refused to issue the paper. A lot of trouble was involved in searching for sources... [Kudryavtsev] contacted one order after another, but received the answer that there were no books except for the orders, although later there were manuscripts and documents very suitable for the job...

At the end of 1658, the tsar himself drew the attention of his historiographer to an important repository of historical monuments, to the Patriarchal Library... Kudryavtsev took out an inventory of this book depository and used it to mark the manuscripts he needed. But... the royal command again remained unfulfilled... The Patriarchal Order replied that “no notes were found in that order with the required information about patriarchs, metropolitans and bishops from the reign of Fyodor Ivanovich.” Other orders, despite persistent reports from Kudryavtsev, did not give such an answer...
Handing over his position at the beginning of 1659, Kudryavtsev left almost no tangible fruits of his 16-month historiographical efforts, “there was no place in the Record Order for the sovereign’s business and the beginning was not done at all,” as his successor put it. The order didn't even include the OLD BOOK, which he was instructed to continue, AND THEY DID NOT KNOW HOW IT ENDED AND WHERE TO START ITS CONTINUATION. But the second clerk did nothing either>>, p.189-190.
From all this the following is clear.

1) Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov is the FIRST Tsar, from whose time direct instructions to “start writing history” have been preserved. It was in mid-16th century I century.
2) The people who carried out his order did not find sources on the history of Russia in the capital EVEN OVER THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS.
3) It is strange that the famous Degree Book has disappeared.
4) The working conditions created by this first historiographical commission mysteriously did not correspond to its status. The royal decree was practically sabotaged!

Apparently, V.O. Klyuchevsky was right when he wrote that “in Moscow at that time...neither minds nor documents were ready for such a thing,” p.190. This means that the DOCUMENTS APPEARED LATER. OR WERE MADE?

No wonder Kudryavtsev could not find anything. Apparently, the decree of Alexei Mikhailovich was the impetus that prompted the start of the production of documents. Therefore, at the end of the 17th century they already “appeared”. Klyuchevsky writes directly: “AFTER there were very useful manuscripts and documents there,” pp. 189-190.

Of course, Klyuchevsky seems to be talking here only about sources from the end of the 16th century - early XVII centuries. That is, about documents from the era immediately preceding Alexei Mikhailovich. And he comes to the conclusion that documents from this era appeared AFTER Alexei Mikhailovich. But then it is natural to assume that if the commission could not find documents from the 16th-17th centuries, then the worse the situation was with the EARLIER ERA. For example, a natural question arises. In the era of clerk Kudryavtsev, did the above-mentioned “extensive chronicle code” exist, describing history starting from Vladimir Monomakh, as well as the “Royal Book”, describing the time of Ivan the Terrible? Perhaps they were also written, or significantly edited, after Kudryavtsev?

Apparently, here we are happily groping for the very BEGINNING OF THE CREATION of the overwhelming majority of “ancient” Russian chronicles. And the famous Tale of Bygone Years was probably not even written at that time. See below. Today it is very difficult to say what genuine historical evidence formed the basis of all these future “ancient” chronicles. Of course, such evidence at that time still existed, but, most likely, most of them did not reach us.Today we judge Russian history of the pre-Romanov era, peering at it through the distorted prism of chronicles written or edited after clerk Kudryavtsev.

Looking ahead, let's say that some ancient documents of the 15th-16th centuries have reached us. Acts, texts of agreements, printed books, church sources, etc. But, as we will see, upon close reading, a completely different picture of Russian history emerges from them. It is very different from the one that was born after the decree of Alexei Mikhailovich and the works of historians of the 18th century - Tatishchev, Bayer, Miller, Schletser, and which is taught in schools today. More on this below.

1.2. XVIII CENTURY: MILLER.

After clerk Kudryavtsev, Klyuchevsky passes, bypassing Tatishchev, directly to Miller, who began work on Russian history under Elizaveta Petrovna. Let us ask ourselves: why, in fact, does Klyuchevsky not mention Tatishchev? After all, he lived under Peter I, that is, before Elizabeth Petrovna. We all know from childhood that Tatishchev was the first Russian historian. Where does such disdain for him come from? It turns out, however, that Klyuchevsky is absolutely right.

The fact is that Tatishchev’s book “Russian History from the Most Ancient Times to Tsar Michael” WAS FIRST PUBLISHED ONLY AFTER TATISHCHEV’S DEATH AND BY NOT ANYONE BUT MILLER. See below. Thus, the first version of Russian history was made public by the German Miller.

Klyuchevsky writes: “Let’s fast forward to another era, to the first years of the reign of Empress Elizabeth. At the Academy of Sciences, the visiting scientist Gerard Friedrich Miller worked diligently on Russian history. He traveled through the cities of Siberia for almost ten years, sorting out the local archives, traveled more than thirty thousand miles and In 1743 he brought to St. Petersburg an immense mass of documents copied there,” p. 191. Miller is considered one of the founders of our historical school, along with Bayer and Schlozer. So what do we see?

1) MILLER WAS THE FIRST to publish the complete version of Russian history as it exists today.
2) It’s very strange that historical documents, - and not even the documents themselves, but their handwritten copies made by himself, - for some reason Miller brings “from Siberia.” Does this mean that he could not find old chronicles in Moscow, St. Petersburg, and indeed in central Russia? Isn’t history repeating itself again with the decree of Alexei Mikhailovich, when his clerk could not find historical sources in the capital?

3) Since Miller, the version of Russian history has remained virtually unchanged. Therefore, its further re-statements, carried out by Karamzin, Solovyov, Klyuchevsky and many others, from this point of view are of little interest to us. In fact, they were just retelling Miller.

1.3. BRIEF CONCLUSIONS.

The version of ancient Russian history available today was created in mid-17th century 1st century based on sources written or edited at the end of the 17th - early XVIII centuries. Apparently, the time from the end of the 17th century to mid-18th century century - this is the era of the creation of ancient Russian history. Starting from the creation of primary sources and ending full version. In other words, today's version of Russian history was written in the era of Peter I, Anna Ioannovna and Elizaveta Petrovna. After the publication of “History” by N.M. Karamzin, this version became known in society. Before this, only a narrow circle of people knew her. Gradually it was introduced into the school curriculum.

Our analysis shows that this version of Russian history is erroneous. We will talk about this in subsequent chapters.

Source - A4. CHRON 4. New chronology Rus'. Nosovsky and Fomenko

Partner News

In the 16th century in general Russian chronicle became centralized: chronicle writing was carried out in Moscow (most likely, by the joint forces of the grand ducal and metropolitan chancellery); chroniclers in other cities and in monasteries, when describing the events of the time close to them, were forced to almost literally convey the official grand-ducal (from the mid-16th century - royal) chronicle.

Unified all-Russian chronicle of the 16th century. was represented by a series of successive vaults. These are the code of 1508 ( final part which was reflected in the First Sofia Chronicle according to the Tsarsky list), code of 1518 (text for the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th century in the Second Sofia, Lvov and Uvarov Chronicles), code of 1534 (end of the Resurrection list of the Second Sofia Chronicle).

In the 20s XVI century a chronicle was compiled that, unlike most codes, did not cover all of Russian history from ancient times, but only the time of the three Moscow Grand Dukes (Vasily II, Ivan III and Vasily III) - Joasaph Chronicle.

In the 20s the compilation of the most extensive Russian chronicle, which received the name Nikonovsky from historians, also begins; The initial edition of this chronicle (Obolensky's list) was created, apparently, at the court of the famous church figure (from 1526 - Metropolitan) Daniel, but became the basis of the official grand-ducal chronicle.

In 1542, during the childhood of Ivan IV and the “boyar rule”, a new chronicle was compiled - the Resurrection Chronicle. Next steps Chronicle stories date back to the time of the political power of Ivan IV.

Around 1555, the “Chronicle of the Beginning of the Kingdom” was compiled, covering the time from the death of Vasily III to the Kazan victory of 1552; the compilation of this monument may, apparently, be associated with the activities of Ivan the Terrible’s associate, Alexei Adashev.

In the middle of the 16th century. “The Chronicler of the Beginning of the Kingdom” was revised and included in the second edition Nikon Chronicle(Patriarchal and other lists), brought up to 1558.

In the 60s the most official, multi-volume, richly illustrated edition of the Nikon Chronicle was created - the Facial Vault; the presentation of this grandiose code (which included not only the chronicle narrative, but, in its initial part, also biblical and chronological texts) was suddenly interrupted in 1567.

Traces of some urgent and responsible revision of the Front Code were a special, not completed (the text ends in 1553) edition of it last volume, which has come down to us as part of the “Royal Book”. The reason for this cessation of maintaining the Litsevoy vault, and at the same time the entire royal chronicle, was obviously some drastic political changes during the period of the oprichnina, which made any consistent and stable explanation impossible. political history last period.

Along with all-Russian chronicle, unified since the beginning of the 16th century. and ceased in the 60s, local chronicles continued to exist in Rus' - in Novgorod and especially in Pskov (Pskov First Chronicle - collection 1547 and Pskov Third Chronicle - collection 1567).

Pskov chronicle of the 16th century. deserves attention not only as historical source, but also as a literary phenomenon. As in the chronicles of the 15th century, lively details and journalistic attacks here invade the traditional narrative.

Thus, the story about the annexation of Pskov in 1510 begins in the Pskov First Chronicle (collection of 1547) with a lament for Pskov: “O most glorious one in the great city of Pskov, why are you mourning, why are you crying? And the city of Pskov answered: Why should we not complain, why should we not cry? A multi-winged eagle flew to me... and made our land empty.”

But then this lyrical lament turns into a satirical description of the activities of the Moscow governors and its consequences: “And among the governors and their tiuns and the clerks of the Grand Duke, their truth, the kiss of the cross, flew up to heaven, and falsehood began to walk in them... And you governors, their tiuns and people wrote a lot of blood from Pskov; and some foreigners lived in Pskov, and they were tired of their own land..., only the Pskovites remained, but the land did not give way, and they could not fly upward.”

Even more frank was the journalistic nature of the story about the events of 1510 in the Pskov Third Chronicle (collection of 1567); parodying the words of his fellow countryman, supporter of Moscow Filofei, about Moscow as the “third Rome”, which will “grow and grow and expand until the end” century,” the chronicler wrote about the new Moscow state: “For this reason the kingdom will expand and villainy will multiply.”

In the official Moscow chronicle of the 16th century. we will not find such satirical elements as are found in the chronicles of previous times; the main tone of the narrative is chronicle-business or solemnly panegyric.

However, the official chroniclers of the 16th century. could be artists - especially in those cases when they had to describe living and truly dramatic events. Among the most lively scenes in the chronicles of the 16th century. stories about the death of Vasily III in 1533 and the illness of Ivan IV in 1553 can be attributed.

History of Russian literature: in 4 volumes / Edited by N.I. Prutskov and others - L., 1980-1983.

Russian chronicles of the 16th-17th centuries.

Resurrection Chronicle(Resurrection Monastery, ca. 1531. later editions - until 1541, then until 1580). Ideas of strong princely power; the later edition of the 1540s was compiled by supporters of the Shuiskys. /The official chronicle of the Russian state, in addition to the grand ducal chronicle, the Rostov vault and “The Tale of the Princes of Vladimir” were used/

Nikonovskaya(One of the lists belonged to Patriarch Nikon. 1520 or 1539-42). About the goodness of the Moscow center. /Preparation for the Council of 1531 and the condemnation of non-possessors. includes translations of Maxim the Greek, a collection of words and teachings of Metropolitan Daniel, a copy book of the Moscow Metropolitan See / Reworking of the Resurrection, differs in some details. The Nikon Chronicle is a huge compilation. Among the sources are chronicles close to the Novgorod Fifth, Resurrection, Iosaph (since 1446), Chronograph and others, individual stories and legends about major historical events, local chronicles and works of oral history. folk art. The compilers of the Nikon Chronicle subjected what they had to historical materials processing and created a concept according to which the leading role in the formation of the Russian state belonged to the Moscow princes, acting in alliance with the church. In the 60-70s, the Front Chronicle of the Nikon Chronicle was compiled, which indicates a desire to give the Nikon Chronicle the character of an official interpretation of historical events.

New trends in chronicle writing:

The history of Russia fits into the world; interest in world history; searching for a place in it: Philotheus with the Third Rome; Chronograph (1512 - 1522) – It all starts with Troy, continues with Augustus, then Byzantium, then materials from Russian chronicles. Detailed notes depart from the weather principle.

Texts from big amount illustrations. (Facial vault (60-70s of the 16th century), possibly edited by Ivan the Terrible himself. 16 thousand illustrations. The first three - The World History, seven - Russian)

Expanding the range of sources: contracts and other documents are involved (Likhachev: chronicle writing becomes a “service enterprise of the state archive”)

Strengthening lit. beginning (Alyosha Popovich either dies on Kalka or fights with the Polovtsians; Augustus and Prus as Rurik’s ancestors)

Erasing and falsification of local chronicles - insertions in the pro-Moscow spirit.

8. Historical writings the beginning of the 17th century (“Vremennik”, “Words of the days and kings and saints of Moscow”, “The Legend” by A. Palitsyn).

Troubles as a situation of anarchy and anarchy (which is unimaginable when power is personified) needed to be understood

- “Vremennik” by Ivan Timofeev. (late 1620s). Narration by chapter-reigns, from Ivan the Terrible to Mikhail (does not describe the new dynasty).

Troubles are the product of Ivan the Terrible, who is angry and furious; he was poisoned and rightly so (the approval is not particularly obvious). Fyodor Ivanovich - the opposite of his father, the only sin - transferred power to a slave. Godunov is ambiguous - smart, but angry and flattering; unworthy of the throne by birth; Instead of serving God, he turned to worldly glory. False Dmitry - Otrepiev, Antichrist. Everything that follows is God's punishment (and for specific sins - greed, drunkenness, gluttony, sodomy and swearing). And also for the wrong behavior of the boyars (but they were interrupted by Grozny and therefore they could not resist Godunov). People changed traditions, the people stopped submitting to unrighteous rulers, the autocracy of commoners and slaves resulted in punishment. New dynasty- unspeakable mercy. Bottom line: there is no need to disrupt the natural course of things.

- Andrey Khvorostinin “Words of the days and kings and saints of Moscow”. Justification of the repentant close associate of False Dmitry. He starts with Boris Godunov, who is ambiguous: he seems to be the ideal of a tsar (smart, merciful, tries to help, pious, etc.), but he embittered his subjects, raised slaves to become free, and destroyed many noble people. The punishment for arrogance was the destruction of the kingdom. False Dmitry is an impostor, a defrocked desecrator of the throne, but he is smart and educated. The punishment is rebellion. The foreigners took advantage of the situation and attacked. The people were inspired to liberate Moscow by Patriarch Hermogenes and Philaret (the executor).

Chronicles

Until the 14th century, chronicles were the main source on the history of Russia. From the 14th to the 17th centuries, the development of the chronicle is somewhat uneven. The stages coincide with the development of the Russian lands. Local chronicle traditions are strong. Within this framework, trends towards unifying the general chronicle are outlined. The 15-16th century is a new era in the history of chronicle writing, within this framework, general Russian chronicle vaults began to appear; this is the heyday of the chronicle. At the end of the 16th and 17th centuries, chronicles were taken over by CHRONOGRAPHERS; they gradually replaced chronicles. The Chronicle records the events of Russian history, and in the chronograph the history of Russian lands is inscribed in the general world history. European context. First, a general Russian chronicle was born in Tver; this happened back in the 14th century under Prince Mikhail Yaroslavovich, it includes not only local information but also events in Novgorod, Smolensk, and even southern Russian lands. In the Tver chronicle, three sets can be distinguished: 1305, 1318, 1327. From this moment on, the tradition of general Russian chronicle writing moved to Moscow. The works of Tver formed the basis of the Moscow chronicle. In the 14th-15th centuries, Atimoskovsky views were very strong and were reflected in the Novgorod (4) and Pskov (3) chronicles. The crimes of Ivan the Terrible were openly exposed. The local nobility (Pashnin) was behind the compilation of these chronicles.

In 1389, the Great Russian Chronicler was created in Moscow. Created on the basis of the Tver Chronicles, this code was subsequently used as the basis for compiling the Trinity Chronicle; it is important because it was the first general Russian metropolitan chronicle. It was created under the influence of Metropolitan Kupriyan. The beginnings of all-Russian chronicles, which began in the 14th-15th centuries, laid the foundation for the official chronicles of the 16th century. The creation of the Simeonovskaya Chronicle played a key role. The official grand-ducal chronicle of Ivan 3, on the pages of which this man was glorified. Uvarov Chronicle of 1518. It became the basis for writing the Nikon and Resurrection Chronicles. These two chronicles are an important stage in completing the unification of Russian chronicles under the auspices of Moscow. They are like the final stage of general Russian chronicle writing.

In the 20s of the 16th century in Moscow, at the court of Metropolitan Daniel, the Nikon Chronicle was created; its writing was timed to coincide with the church council of 1531. At this council the views of those who have not attained were condemned. A distinctive feature of the chronicle was that it was the most complete summary of the history of the Russian state. Included many valuable and unique facts. Therefore, THE NIKON CHRONICLE IS ONE OF THE IMPORTANT SOURCES ON THE HISTORY OF THE RUSSIAN MIDDLE AGES. Despite the fact that it was created in the late 20s of the 16th century, it was replenished several times. Events are brought up to 1558.

The Resurrection Chronicle Compiled in the mid-16th century. There are 12 lists and 3 editions known. This is the official chronicle of Russian history of the first half of the 16th century. In terms of its significance, it occupies a leading position among other chronicles. For the first time, a narrative style begins to predominate on its pages, which later became a distinctive feature of all chronicles created in the second half of the 16th century. This narrative style is reflected in the Chronicler of the Early Kingdoms.

These two chronicles are already examples of a fully formed unified official Russian chronicle tradition. Their content is strictly regulated. Unlike the chronicle specific period The official chronicles were no longer discussed among themselves; they all present one clear system in their eyes. They only record events and say that the power of the monarch is very good. In this form, the chronicle existed until the 60s, 16th century. The oprichnina led to the fact that the official chronicle tradition underwent serious changes, and there was a need to rework the idealization that was embedded there and the chronicle tradition gradually came to naught.

Chronicler of the Beginning of Kingdoms created in the mid-16th century. Created under Adashev. Much is dedicated foreign policy Ivan the Terrible, the anti-boyar orientation is clearly manifested. Describes it as the only means in the struggle to create a unified state. It should be noted that at the end of the 60s the Degree Book was created, created in the entourage of Metropolitan Macarius, Archpriest Andrei appeared as the creators. This is a unique literary historical work. The very fact of its appearance was clear evidence of changes in chronicle writing; within the framework of the staid book there were not only chronicle texts, but also hagioraphic works, and oral traditions were also an integral part of its style. Degree book, from the word step, the authors divided history into 17 steps. Each level is associated with the prince, the basic idea is clearly visible, Russian history at its core is the deeds of the Moscow princes. This is a transitional work that reflects internal transformation.

Letsyvoy Chronicle of Ivan the Terrible. This is a work that combines a chronograph and a chronicle. Occupies 10 volumes. They contain about 16 thousand illustrations. Of the 10, three volumes - general history, and the rest is domestic. This is a historical encyclopedia from the 16th century. It was edited by Ivan the Terrible himself. This is the last all-Russian chronicle collection, after which the tradition of creating them died out. In all subsequent chronicles there is no longer a general picture of the history of the country. The place of chronicles is taken by other historical works, and first of all these are chronographs.

They replace the chronicle. The first chronograph was written in 1512. About 130 chronograph lists have survived. The heyday of the genre dates back to the 17th century. In addition to the historical nature, they included a lot of important things... they were encyclopedias, information of a natural scientific nature, quotes, reprints of the works of ancient authors, lives of saints. Very clear structure. European structure before 1453. There are a lot of moralizing stories in them. Moreover, each section contains its own conclusions.

Chronicles are a mass source, more than 1000 chronicles are known, works of the 18th century are also included, this topic has been studied, Massonov's Monograph HISTORY OF RUSSIAN CHRNICLES OF THE 11th-18th CENTURIES. In M. 1969. They were replaced by chronographs, an important source of political history.

About foreigners

Bussov is believed to have Slavic roots, but we cannot say this; the Moscow chronicle begins with Boris Godunov and ends with the Liberation of Moscow from Polish invaders. He is well informed about the life and everyday life of Russian people. Certain information about False Dmitry the Second. For 7 years of turmoil

Isska Massa, a gallant merchant from 1601-1609, traded through Arkhangelsk; his notes were very accurate. Facts force us to think about reassessment. He gave an autonomous description of False Dmitry and found 21 wounds on his body.

Jan Streis spent two years in Russia, he traveled all over the world. Stepan Razin’s uprising was in full swing in Astrakhan, he wrote about it.

Adam Olstagel (Olearius) was in Russia twice and was a diplomat, the first time was in 1633-35. and the second time in 1643. He was appreciated in Russia, the tsar offered to go into service. In the 17th century, his notes were published and reprinted 4 times. These were actual notes. At this time, foreigners were discovering Russia for themselves.

The 14th-17th centuries included many interesting events in the history of Russia and at this time there were quantitative and qualitative changes in the complex of historical sources. Much has been achieved in the unification of legislation, the growth of commodity-money relations, the increase in the number of official materials, the transformation of sources, the emergence of new genres of literature. Culture takes on a secular character.

TOPIC, Sources on the history of Russia in the 18th century.

1. Legislative sources and legislative materials.

statistical sources

economics-geographical

journalism

periodical materials

personal sources

notes from foreigners about Russia.

legislative sources.

In the 18th century, changes occurred in domestic lawmaking; they had both a qualitative and quantitative side. In the 18th century, the properties of modern legislation were manifested and formed in domestic laws. Imperial legislation began to take shape. Philosophical legislation is spreading. They thought that with the help of laws life could be improved. The topics and scope of laws are expanding. Legislative initiatives greatly depended on the instability of state power.

Main types of legislative acts:

manifestos are some of the most important legislative acts of all important events were reflected precisely in them. On February 18, 1762, a manifesto on noble freedom appeared.

Decrees are the most numerous and diverse group of legislative acts. Unlike the first ones, the scope of application is wider. Almost all areas of life were regulated. Decree on succession to the throne in 1722.

Charters are special legislative acts regulating any field of activity, trade, customs. The military regulations of 1716 aimed at strengthening discipline. Consists of 4 parts (general regulations, disciplinary article, drill training) 1755, 1765, these regulations repeat each other. Charter of 1782 “Notes for infantry service” creator Gollinishchev-Kutuzov

1796 Suvorov’s charter “The Science of Victory”. (General provisions, memo for soldiers) naval charter of 1720 written by Peter the Great there is talk about being about routine.

Regulations and institutions are legislative sources that determine the organization, composition, competencies and regulate the activities of government agencies. The General Regulations of 1720 were created to regulate the activities of all colleges (56 articles). In 1721, spiritual regulations appeared that regulated the activities of the synod. The Regulations of the Chief Magistrate of 1721 determined the order of life in cities (25 chapters). Institutions for governing the province 1775, it describes the functions of provincial government.

Letters granted - Catherine II two letters to cities and nobility.

Orders and instructions - it records the wishes of the landowner to the manager of the estate on how to manage it. Appeared in the 17th century. And in the 18th century, parts of paragraphs became more complete and became more fractional. Instructions of Prince Shcherbatov for the Yaroslavl estates 1758-69.

Forensic investigative documents - reports, denunciations, interrogation materials, confessions. Can be divided into two groups: materials from the official investigation and documents from among the rebels, Charming letters.

Actual materials have been less studied; diplomacy is the focus of study. Privately owned ones are actively developing, because private ownership is gaining activity legal relations all this requires clearer argumentation and selling. Types of agreements: Fortress(fortresses) - acts fixing transactions with real estate. Donation, exchange, hiring, power of attorney, contract and supply, loan,

conclusion: in the 18th century, legislative sources and legislative materials were actively developing. However, at this time, they acquire features characteristic of modern sources. Legislation takes on an imperial form, and legislative sources become more diverse.

STATISTICAL SOURCES.

Statistics is the new kind sources, which appeared in the 18th century. She was taking the first steps on the path of her development. There is no complete picture of statistical descriptions. Often statistics are not accurate, since they are compiled by people.

They are divided into two categories: 1. primary (a specific source in which one unit of something is recorded (person, enterprise, etc.)) and secondary (created on the basis of primary sources, a higher level they summarize information on specific units)

special materials such as the population census.

Types of statistics:

demographic statistics. It originated in the 18th century. The first general population census took place in 1897 in Russia. And before that there were audits - this was the accounting of the tax-paying population. Only the male population was taken into account. The first audits did not cover the entire population as it was simply not possible. The national outskirts remained unregistered and also evaded. In the 18th century there were 5 revisions and in the first half of the 19th century there were also 5.

The first revision was 1719-1721, the second was 1744, the third was 1762, the fourth was 1782, the fifth was 1795. Based on the dates, we can say that the statistics were not accurate. In the first two, the outskirts of the state were not taken into account (Siberia, Ukraine, the Baltic states), in the subsequent ones they were taken into account. There were those who were missed, and a large number of fugitives. As part of the first audit, there were 900 thousand fugitives. Male. Based on the audits, “ Revision tales" There was no single form for compiling them; it changed over time. I was always interested in age and financial situation. Additions to the audit tales and salary books appeared in which the data was clarified and, first of all, this concerned the poor. Based on accounting of the tax-paying population. Sub-income unit yard.

The beginning of industrial statistics was laid. 1724 year of foundation. Two boards, “Berg” and “Manufactur”, began to carry out reports, both industrial and agricultural. A special form has been developed and has changed over time. The main indicator was the number of enterprises. There were also such marks as the number of products and information about their sales.

Agricultural statistics, the state of affairs was even worse than in industrial statistics, it began to develop later, it was not given much attention, since the 80s of the 18th century, governors were required to provide information on grain crops, but the whole problem was that there were no authorities.

There are special statistical works that are based on data. There are only two of them in the first half of the 18th century; this is the work of Ivan Kirillovich Kirillov “The Blooming State of the Russian State”, published in 1731. It contains information about provinces, cities and monasteries. Mikhail Dmitrievich Chulkov, second half of the 18th century, work in 7 volumes “Historical description of Russian commerce.” The author is a very famous publicist and ethnographer. Between 1781 and 1788, seven volumes were published; in them he outlined the history of the development of trade in Russia since the Middle Ages. The first volume includes information about the trade of Russian lands with early Middle Ages to the 17th century. From the second to the 5th, Russian foreign trade in the 18th century is considered. In 6 internal trade of the 18th century, conclusions can be drawn from it on the specialization of the country's regions. In volume 7 he talks about categories of goods, he traces where they are sold and at what price this happens. One can draw a conclusion about the state of the domestic market, and despite the fact that the work is descriptive, one can find many valuable facts and statistical information.

Conclusion: statistical sources provide us with important information on the socio-economic life of Russia in the 18th century, they show the development of industry and agriculture, and also allow us to draw conclusions about the dynamics of the country's population.

The birth rate was high, and population growth before the revolution was significant.

geographical descriptions. Manuscripts left by travelers.

Krasheninnikov traveled to Komnchatka. From 1737-1741. In 1755 he published the work “Description of the Kamchatka Land” and published two volumes.

Lepekhin travels through the Volga region and the Urals. 1768-1774. As a result, three volumes were released. Rychkov description of Orenburg.

Journalism

actively developing and closely intertwined with politics. Important for the study of ideology, important for understanding political struggle. Feofan Prokopovich Archbishop of Novgorod sermons and messages. Actively promoted Peter's reforms. Solemn sermon of victory at Poltava. True to the will of the Monarchs. Spiritual regulations, the structure and functions of the synod are determined.

Posashkov Ivan Tikhonovich. "A book about poverty and wealth." Coming from an environment of wealthy peasants. He had a drinking factory. One copy is intended for presentation to Peter I in 1724. After the book was handed over, Posashkov was arrested. For the thoughts expressed on the pages. The book has 9 chapters.

Polenov, Shcherbatov.

Alexander Nikolaevich Radishchev Travel from St. Petersburg to Moscow. He was sentenced to death for this book. death penalty. He theoretically substantiated the harm of any autocracy and drew conclusions. Journalism is represented by 3 directions: Conservatives, liberals and revolutionaries.

Periodical printing.

Newspapers and magazines. The first newspaper, Kuranta, 2 copies a day, was delivered to the Tsar in the morning for breakfast.

There were 119 different periodicals of these, only 3 newspapers and 116 magazines.

The importance of newspapers is that they appeared. Although they were all state-owned, it was possible to say that fundamental changes were taking place. Initially, all magazines did not have independent status and were supplements to newspapers. In 1765, the journal of the Academy of Sciences, Monthly Essay, began publication. Essays on various branches of science were published here. The first was the historian Miller. It existed for 10 years unchanged, after which it was considered inappropriate to create on such a basis, they began publishing various magazines on various areas Sciences. Several magazines began to publish history.

“Proceedings of the Free Economic Society” was published until 1917. Personal data on various areas of socio-economic. There is a lot of information on economic development based on peasant crafts. The first printed magazine “The labor-loving bee” was published by Sumarokov. The magazine is satirical. Essays. A year later the magazine was closed. He began publishing a new private magazine, “Idle Time for Consumed Time.”

Catherine the Second, she tried to seize the initiative from private magazines, the magazine All sorts of things, Kazelsky, but he preached “Smiling Satire”, the essence is that satire should be soft and not touch the essence of the system, but touch on minor shortcomings.

Novikov, he began publishing his magazines and showed other problems in 1769, the magazine “Truten”, the main issue was the question of serfdom. In 1770 the magazine was closed. He began publishing the magazine “Pustamelya”, which continued the work begun as a drone. It was here that the genre of theater review first appeared. In 1772, the magazine “Painter” began to be published, vividly illustrating the difficult situation of the peasants and their needs, criticizing the landowners and the activities of the administration. Began publishing the first women's magazine "Fashionable monthly publication or library for ladies' toilet", written in a light style.

Magazine "Economic Store" edited by Bolotov 17

800 copies interlocutor of lovers of the Russian word stood Ekaterina 2 behind him. A clearly expressed anti-Novikov orientation. Derzhavin was published in this magazine.

There were two groups of pro-government magazines and Novikov magazines. In 1789, Krylov began publishing the magazine “Mail of Spirits”

In Russia in 1786, the first provincial magazine “Secluded Poshekhonets” appeared

personal sources

memories, memoirs, diaries, letters.

This is a collection of sources. The main function is to establish interpersonal communications. Specifics:

Diaries. Recording human events day after day.