The work of the Joint Commission in 1767-1768 played an important role in the long and complex development of relations between the state and Islam in Russia. For the first time in the history of Russia, the meetings of this commission publicly discussed the situation of various religions and developed recommendations for meeting the religious needs of Russian peoples in close connection with their socio-economic needs. One of the significant results is that, in fact, a legislative framework was laid for the recognition of Islam as a tolerant faith in the Russian state.

Although the literature on the history of the Established Commission is quite extensive, however, the problems of interreligious relations, the position of confessions in the instructions and the activities of Muslim deputies have so far remained without proper attention.

In Russia of the XVIII century, the inequality of confessions continued to persist. Preference was given to Orthodoxy as the state religion, and a course was pursued for the Christianization of non-religious peoples. By the beginning of the 60s of the XVIII century, the majority of pagan peoples of the Volga region were baptized. Although in 1764 the missionary organization was stopped by the decree of Catherine II, however, this activity among Muslims was continued by the local dioceses and restrictions that were embarrassing for Muslims remained.

Prior to the Commission's work, Catherine II toured the Volga region. Her obvious intention was also to become more familiar with the Muslims of Russia. During her stay in Kazan, the Empress received students of the Novokreschenskaya school, representatives of the Muslim clergy, and allowed the construction of two mosques in Starotatarskaya Sloboda. Catherine II expressed her attitude to Islam and Muslims in a letter to Voltaire after visiting the ruins of ancient Bulgar. "I found there seven or eight stone houses," wrote Catherine II, " and the same number of minarets, very solidly built. I was approaching a certain ruin, near which stood about forty Tartars. The governor there told me that this was the place where these people came to pray, and that those who were in my mind had come from far away. I wanted to know what their pilgrimage consisted of, so I asked one of the Tartars, who seemed to me more intelligent than the others; but he gave me signs to understand that he did not know the Russian language, and ran to call a man who was a few paces away. As he approached, I asked him who he was, and found out that he was an Iman who spoke Russian quite well. He told me that a certain holy man had lived in that ruin, and that they had come from very far places to offer prayers over his tomb. What I heard from him made me think I was going to die.-

page 113
I can conclude that their reverence for the saints is very close to ours " [Correspondence... pp. 101-103].

Researchers in their works name a different number of elected deputies-from 460 to 564 [Latkin, 1887, p. 250; Platonov, 1998, p. 699; Shchapov, b/g, p.23]. 61 New Baptists were sent from the Kazan province to the Established Commission. Among all the deputies, there were 32 gentiles, and 24 newly Baptized [RGADA, f. 342, op. 1, d. 110, l. 175].

Our own calculations showed that 28 Muslims were elected deputies, including 24 Muslim Tatars, two Bashkirs, and two Bukharians. Among the Tatar deputies there was one old-baptised and one new-baptised. Baptised among the non-religious deputies were 15 people, the largest number of them were Chuvash (five people). The Muslim population delegated the most authoritative members of their community to the deputies. Among them were three mullahs, five murzas, two foremen, one foreman's son, and two clerks. Mullah Mustafa Yusupov represented the employees of the murzas and Tatars of the Sviyazhsk province, Mullah Abdulla Tavyshev represented the employees of the meshcheryaks of the Iset province, and Mullah Almugamet Ibragimov represented the Tatars of the Ichkinsky and Bagaryak yurts. The Orthodox Church was represented by a member of the Synod, the well-known missionary Dimitri Sechenov.

According to some historians, deputies from other faiths were a kind of"ethnographic exhibition". In other words, the idea of ostentatious, external nature of their participation in the legislative process was confirmed. Contemporaries perceived the participation of non-believers in the work of the Established Commission positively, seeing it as a sign of the unification of the peoples of Russia. : "My imagination cannot imagine anything more magnificent than this day, when in our ancient capital the two hemispheres of the earth were united, all the peoples scattered in the expanses of Russia, languages, customs and faiths of various kinds appeared... Moscow then seemed to be the capital of the universe, and the Assembly of Russian deputies - the Sejm of the world "[Karamzin, 1802, p. 64].

In the Decree of Catherine II, a provision on religious tolerance was formulated for the first time: "In only a great state that extends its domain over only many different peoples, it would be very harmful for the peace and security of its citizens to have a vice, prohibition or non-permission of their various faiths. And there is truly no other means, except the reasonable and other laws of permission, which our Orthodox faith and politics do not reject, by which all these lost sheep can be brought together to the true faithful flock. Persecution irritates people's minds, and allowing them to believe according to their own law softens even the most stiff - necked hearts, and leads them away from matured stubbornness, yielding their disagreeable disputes to the silence of the state and the union of citizens" [Nakaz..., pp. 160-161]. Recognition of one of the fundamental rights gave hope that the state would continue to take into account the religious needs of Muslims.

The meeting of the Commission was officially opened on July 30, 1767 in the Faceted Chamber of the Kremlin. The Empress presented the assembly with an Order and a Rite for the commission. During the work of the Established Commission, it was decided to solemnly present Catherine with the title of "great, wise mother of the fatherland". Among the participants in the celebrations on this occasion were Murza Ayup Yenikeyev from the Tatars of the Penza province, Marian Tilyak Denisov from the Kungur district of the Perm Province, and newly baptized Mordvin Kirill Burmistrov from the Tambov Province. But the Empress refused this title.

The work of deputies took place at the general meeting and in 19 private commissions. There were no Muslim deputies in these commissions.

The line of conduct of deputies in the Established commission was determined by instructions from their seats. These instructions, including for Muslim deputies, were prepared by specially elected representatives of counties and provinces and reflected the urgent needs of the population.

page 114
of that time. The spiritual needs of Muslims, along with socio-economic ones, occupy a leading place in them, although S. F. Tashkin argued that for Muslims the problem of their religious status has already lost its former acuteness [Tashkin, 1922, p.55]. A significant proportion of confessional issues in the instructions shows that these issues continued to remain relevant. The fact that Muslim religious figures, as the most authoritative and competent part of Tatar society, took an active part in the development of the instructions also played a role here. So, the order of Seitova sloboda of Orenburg was signed by akhun Abdul Selim Uraev, mullahs Kuley Chupashev, Abdul Karim Imankulov, Iskhak Abdulkarimov.

One of the most pressing problems for the Muslims of the Volga region was the problem of building new mosques at the request of the believers themselves without various bureaucratic restrictions. After the destruction of mosques in 1742-1743, although legislative acts were passed allowing the construction of mosques, the restrictions contained in these decrees practically did not allow Muslims to legally build their religious buildings.

The instructions could not but reflect this situation. Let us turn as an example to the order of the service murzas and Tatars of the Kazan Uyezd, signed by Rakhmankul Alkin. It emphasized that previously serving Murzas and Tatars had, according to Muslim law, mosques in every village where they performed their rites. Since 1743, all existing mosques have been destroyed. Then, at the request of the Tatars, the Senate allowed mosques to be built if there were at least 200 souls in the village. Newly baptized people live together with Muslim Tatars. In the villages where newly Baptized people live, they are not allowed to build mosques. Service members of the Murzas and Tatars asked to be allowed to build mosques in each village, as it was before 1743 [Sbornik..., vol. 115, pp. 318-319].

The content of other instructions on this issue was approximately the same. Yasach Tatars of Sviyazhsk and Kungur, Bashkirs of Ufa counties, meshcheryaks of the Orenburg province reported that due to the lack of prayer houses, they were forced to go to the neighboring village, asked permission to build mosques "with their own cats" in all villages, so that there would be "a separate hut for the public meeting for prayer" [Sbornik..., vol. 115, p. 235].

Many of the instructions drew attention to the situation of Muslim clerics. The Muslim clergy, unlike the Orthodox, did not receive a salary from the state and did not have any benefits. Moreover, they carried out all State duties on an equal basis with other members of the community. This injustice could not be ignored by the drafters of the instructions. Thus, the Yasach Tatars of the Kungur uyezd asked to exempt mullahs and azancheys from paying the per capita salary, and the Bashkirs of the Ufa uyezd-from all state services and extortions [Sbornik..., vol. 115, p. 358; Kulbakhtin, 1996, p. 39].

The Muslim population was concerned about the right to use the usual norms of Sharia law in resolving various legal conflicts. For example, the Yasach Tatars of Kazan, Ufa counties, and Seitova Sloboda asked that "usobiya" be sorted out according to Muslim law. Muslims also preferred Sharia law when "Tatar wives are baptized into the Russian faith and do not return their kalym". In such situations, they wanted the issue of Kalym to be decided by a mullah, not a Russian court. The interference of the civil administration in spiritual affairs did not suit the petitioners because the judges did not know the Muslim laws. Bashkirs of the Ufa uyezd asked to transfer the court for family and inheritance cases to the Akhuns [Sbornik..., vol. 115, p. 359, 395, 402; vol. 147, 227; RGADA, f. 347, op. 1, d. 109, l. 200, 235, 256 vol.].

Some of the requests contained in the instructions directly addressed practical aspects of inter-confessional relations. So, the residents of the Old Tatar settlement of Kazan were clearly not satisfied with the fact that an Orthodox church was located in its center

page 115
and the Novokreschenskaya school. Murzas and serving Tatars wrote: "We most humbly hope that it is not more repugnant to a person, no matter what law and rank he may be, to suffer from the reproaches and abuse of his law from others; and through this he gets into great excitement, more than other unnecessary and abusive speeches; and it often happens that people of different ranks are extreme they consume our thoughts about the law and our prophet, just as during our pilgrimage abusive words cause us extreme offense" [Sbornik..., vol.115, p. 311]. The position of the authorities, which was openly dismissive of Islam and its supporters, naturally could not find understanding among the Muslim part of the population. Tatars of the Kungur uyezd reported with resentment that people of other faith "scold, revile" their faith. They suggested that offenders should be publicly punished mercilessly, and officers should be fined. Bashkirs of the Iset province asked that "in the content of our law be left free" [RGADA, f. 342, op. 1, d. 109, l. 359; Sbornik..., vol. 115, p. 359].

One of the "pillars" of the Muslim faith is performing the Hajj-visiting the holy places in Mecca and Medina. Since the late 1930s, Muslims have not been able to fulfill this obligation, as Russian-Turkish relations became more complicated, and Muslims were forbidden to perform the Hajj to Mecca through Turkey, although the Russian government in agreements with Turkey defended the right to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem for Orthodox pilgrims. Muslim deputies from almost all regions of Russia have asked the authorities to allow the pilgrimage through Turkey and ensure that passports are issued freely for this trip. This was stated by Abdul Abduzhelilov from the Gilan court in Astrakhan [Sbornik..., vol. 134, p. 182]. Similar requests were contained in the instructions of the Tatar settlement of Astrakhan, serving murzas and Tatars of Kazan, Penza, Saransk, Alatorsky, Kurmyshsky, and Ufa counties. However, in the 18th century, these requests were not fulfilled. The first Russian legislative act on the permission of pilgrimage to Mecca appeared in 1803 [Arapov, pp. 298-299].

As already noted, the spiritual problems of non-believers were closely intertwined with socio-economic ones. Thus, since the Council Code of 1649, Russian legislation has prohibited Muslims from using Orthodox labor. This restriction, which protected the Baptized from the possible influence of Islam, infringed on the economic interests of both Orthodox and Muslims. The ban greatly affected the closest neighbors of the Tatars-the Mari, Mordvins, Udmurts, and Chuvash people, who were deprived of significant sources of additional income.

Given the economic losses, the Tatars of Seitova Sloboda, Orenburg Province, sought permission to hire baptized people from among the Gentiles as workers for plowing and housekeeping. At the same time, they assumed obligations to feed their employees with lenten food, and on Sundays and holidays to let them go to pray in the Berdskaya Sloboda and Sakmar Cossack town, where there were churches and Orthodox priests. In turn, the newly-baptized Yasach Mari residents of the Kazan Uyezd asked to be allowed to hire non - believers for their own needs, and non-believers-newly-Baptized, not seeing in this "contrary to the Greek law" [Sbornik..., vol. 147, pp. 221-222; vol. 115, p. 392].

Restrictive measures introduced with the active participation of the Orthodox Church complicated not only the previously established mutually beneficial economic relations between Muslims and pagans and Orthodox Christians, but also interethnic relations. In the order from murzas and serving Tatars, which was announced by Murza Yakup Mangushev, it was said that earlier Tatars lived together in the neighborhood of Mordvins, Chuvashs, Mari and Udmurts, and then these relations deteriorated as a result of the actions of the Novokreschenskaya office, which "repaired great prohibitions so that they would have nothing to do with them."

page 116
they had a neighborly attitude." The deputy asked that the former good-neighborly relations were not forbidden to them.

As the content of the instructions shows, a number of problems in confessional matters were caused by the actions of the authorities aimed at converting non-Russian peoples to Orthodoxy and keeping them in the new faith. These instructions negatively assessed the practice of providing benefits and privileges to those who were baptized from among the gentiles. Employees of the Murza and Tatars of the Kazan Uyezd noted that Tatars are baptized and released from recruitment, do not pay poll money, do not repay debts; those convicted of theft remain at large. In their opinion, newly baptized people cannot be sincere adherents of the Orthodox faith, since they are baptized out of need, not out of desire, do not know the dogmas of the faith, and are only called baptized [Sbornik. ... vol.115, p. 375].

One of the consequences of the Christianization policy was the cohabitation of the baptized and the unbaptized in the same villages. This situation was perceived by Muslims as an undesirable phenomenon. Quite often, the instructions offered to relocate the baptized from the places where they lived before baptism. For example, the service Tatars of the Sloboda Uyezd of the Vyatka province argued for such a measure by saying that the baptized take in all sorts of random people for residence and leave themselves in large numbers, no one knows where, and the Tatars have "considerable losses" from this. It was also said that Muslim Tatars cannot influence the behavior of newly Baptized people. Murzas and service Tatars of the Old and New Tatar settlements of Kazan spoke out for the resettlement of those who converted to Orthodoxy to places inhabited by Russians and newly Baptized people. They also advocated that the yards, manors, vegetable gardens, and hay mowing of newly baptized Tatars should be sold to Muslim Tatars and their relatives, and not to Russians and newly Baptized ones [Sbornik..., vol. 115, pp. 311-312, 342].

In a number of instructions received from places with Orthodox populations, the idea of resettlement was also present. However, even here it had a very pragmatic, material basis. Typical in this respect is the punishment of the residents of Kasimov. They noted that Tatars live in the Tatar settlement of their city among the Russians and demanded that "the Tatars should be taken out", and the liberated lands should be transferred to Kasimov merchants. Russian residents of Kasimov asked to relocate the Tatars from the old settlement on Mount Ulanova, and also transfer their lands to merchants [Sbornik..., vol. 144, p. 169].

As a result of the implementation of previously adopted acts on the resettlement of Baptized people and their subsequent cancellation, both Muslims and Orthodox Christians found themselves in the same localities. Attempts to relocate them did not always reach the goal, as there were no people willing to change their place of residence. The village was actually split into two communities due to the different social and legal status of Muslims and baptized people. Mutual claims increased. If during the time of the Novokreschenskaya office, special military teams were engaged in protecting the Newly Baptized, then due to the termination of its activities, these functions were transferred to the provincial chancellery, which could not always satisfy the interests of both parties.

Let us now consider the positions of non-religious deputies on religious issues, which were revealed at the meetings of the Established Commission. Previously, the deputies were introduced to the Empress's order at a Large Meeting. The main place in their work was occupied by reading decrees on individual issues and discussing them. Muslim deputies were active in discussing various issues. Although the idea of religious tolerance was reflected in the documents of the Established Commission, the old traditions made themselves felt. They were particularly pronounced in the order to the deputy from the Holy Synod, which consisted of ten points. The previous draft of the order, drawn up by the chief prosecutor of the Synod I. I. Melissino, was rejected by the Synod [Znamensky, 2000, p. 319]. The order to the Synodal deputy was not drawn up under the influence of freethinking-

page 117
the Chief prosecutor's office, but on the basis of the Spiritual Regulations and the hierarchs ' own ideas. In the sixth paragraph of the order, it was about corrupting and deviating from the Orthodox faith, which must be subjected to "worthy punishment". In addition, in the additions to the order, diocesan bishops were asked to ensure that Orthodox people "do not enter into other laws, and that no non-Orthodox religion of a Russian person, both Christian and infidel, as well as foreign ones who are subjects in Russia, is accepted throughout the Russian Empire" [the Order and instructions of the Russian Orthodox Church]. items..., pp. 243, 254].

The Synod's Spiritual and Civil Commission has compiled a 47-point" Table of Contents for the future draft on spiritual and civil affairs". It included sections on the preservation and strengthening of the dominant faith in Russia; on the false faith; on the patience of other faiths; on the spread of the dominant Greek-Russian faith and on the benefits for the latter's hosts. The Commission classified Islam as a false religion, which is more harmful than mere idolatry. Therefore, converting from Christianity to Islam was considered a more serious crime than returning to paganism. The Commission considered such apostates as the most dangerous persecutors of Christianity. She proposed to ban all non-believers from religious propaganda and any attempts to involve Orthodox people in their faith. A fine of up to 1,000 rubles and a one-year banishment to a monastery were imposed for seducing Orthodox people to a different faith. And the tolerance of faith allowed by Orthodoxy was interpreted from the point of view of promoting the baptism of Muslims [Pokrovsky, 1910, p.93, 96-98].

On April 28, 1868, the reading of the laws on non-believers began at the general meeting of deputies. Without any system, deputies were introduced to the laws on benefits for newly Baptized people, starting from September 1, 1720 to 1764 [Sbornik..., vol. 32, pp. 39-40]. At the same time, the decree of Anna Ioannovna of September 11, 1740, which solved the problems of mass baptism and the provision of benefits to newly baptized people, was not brought to the attention of deputies.

Both Orthodox and Muslim deputies were concerned about the fact that Muslims do not have equal rights with the Baptized in resolving controversial issues and giving evidence. This legal problem was raised by the Cossack deputy Burtsev, who asked whether Mohammedans can be witnesses in Orthodox cases [Sbornik..., vol. 14, p. 135]. Ayup Yenikeyev, a representative of the service members of murzas and Tatars of the Penza province of Murza, and Sagit Khalfin, a deputy from Tatar Settlements of Kazan, tried to resolve it. According to Sagit Khalfin, " a Mohammedan was admitted to witness in all cases, on an equal basis with Christians, according to the previous reference to the Koran. By bringing both the Christian and other laws of the people and the Mohammedan to the faith, they are ordered to include in the oath that he must tell the most basic truth that he has heard, and not look at the fact that one of those who have a dispute with him is one law, and the other is another law." Sagit Khalfin's speech was supported by Murza Ayup Yenikeyev, who asked to preserve the custom for Muslims to take the oath by kissing the Koran [Sbornik..., 14, pp. 156-158].

Muslim deputies also drew attention to another problem. As Murza Ayup Yenikeyev noted, newly baptized people "after baptism receive freedom from punishment, live together with non-believers, do not observe the Christian faith, and also repair, moreover, theft and all sorts of disorders, and from this they cause sensitive ruin to the remaining non-believers." The Tartar centurions and elders can do nothing with the newly-baptized, since they leave obedience on the ground that they have become Christians of the Greek faith. Orthodox deputies also spoke about the facts of conversion to Christianity, dictated by the desire to avoid punishment for committed offenses [Sbornik..., vol. 32, pp. 393, 641-644].

According to the already mentioned A. Enikeev, criminals from among the newly Baptized should be punished according to the law, they should be sent to the appropriate places in order to " completely eradicate the villainous enterprise." In addition, this MP believed that but-

page 118
those who are baptized must live together with Russians, not with Muslims, to establish their faith.

A. Enikeev made his proposals on June 3, 1768. A month earlier, the Commission received comments from deputy Pyotr Karyakin from the city of Khlynov. It is noteworthy that the positions of the two deputies coincide. Thus, P. Karyakin suggested that non-believers who were baptized voluntarily "should be given benefits under the current laws, left to live wherever they want; and those who are baptized in order to get rid of punishment should be resettled in Russian villages and villages that are located at least 100 versts from non-Religious homes; at the same time, they should be placed in one village no more than five people" [Sbornik..., vol. 32, pp. 393-395].

The interweaving of socio-economic and religious aspects was characteristic of many of the issues raised at the Commission's meeting. So, this was revealed during the discussion of the proposal of the deputy from Ufa Alexey Podyachev to ban the Tatars of Seitova sloboda Orenburg to conduct trade in other counties. The deputy insisted that these Tatars trade only within the settlement itself [Sbornik..., vol. 8, p. 98]. By that time, the Tatars of Seitova Sloboda were already known as strong trading competitors. They were natives of the Kazan province. The Kazan servants of the Sloboda Tatars, by virtue of the letters granted to them, had the right to trade freely, which was confirmed by the highly approved report of the Senate of August 7, 1763. A. Podyachev's proposal caused a heated discussion in the Commission.

Almost two dozen votes were cast against the proposal of Ivan Kobelev, a deputy from Kazan, who demanded that Tatars be "banned from engaging in trade". These were the votes of such deputies as Murza Abdul Dautov (from the serving Tatars of the Iset province), Rakhmankul Alkin (from the serving Murzas and Tatars of the Kazan uyezd), Ivan Alekseev (from the old-baptized Tatars), Chemekey Ishpaev (from the unbaptized Mari people), Bekchentai Baituganov (from the unbaptized Udmurts), Peter Ivanov (from the newly-baptized Mari people), Kolman Ishteryakov (from the Yasach Tatars of the Perm province), Yarmak Davydov (from the Yasach Tatars of the Sviyazhsk province), Mustafa Yusupov (from the serving murzas and Tatars of the Sviyazhsk province), Ayup Yenikeev (from the serving Murzas and Tatars of the Penza province), Fedor Sarkaev (from the Novokreschnaya Mordovia), Yakup Yuraev (from the serving murzas and Tatars of the Alator province), Abdulzhalil Maksyutov (from the service Tatars of the Ufa province), Ekim Bekbokov (from the Yasach Mari), Toktamysh Izhbulatov (from the Bashkirs and Tarkhan of the Ufa uyezd), Bazargul Yunaev (from the Bashkirs and Tarkhan of the Ufa uyezd).Sartov of the Iset province), Almugamet Ibragimov (from the serving Tatars of the Ichka and Bagaryat yurts of the Iset province), Ivelyamin Khanseitov (from the serving and yasach Tatars of the Siberian province) [Sbornik..., vol.8, pp. 183-185, 191-193]. Deputies of various faiths were united by common economic interests.

Thus, for the first time in the history of Russia, the position of Islam and problems of interreligious relations were discussed publicly. There is reason to believe that the position of Muslim deputies allowed us to outline legislative measures that take into account the specific interests of Muslims. They were able to independently develop proposals for the preparation of new laws and adequately defend them publicly. These proposals were later used in lawmaking and laid the foundations for a fundamentally new, tolerant attitude towards Islam , the religion of a significant part of the subjects of the Russian Empire. An underlying movement towards religious tolerance and a change in the position of Islam in Russia has begun. The decree of the Synod of June 17, 1773, on the tolerance of all faiths, was adopted not only after the work of the Established commission, but also, as it seems to us, as a result of this work.

page 119
list of literature

The first Russian decree on pilgrimage to Mecca, Decree of the Synod / / Russia in the Middle Ages and modern Times. Collection of articles dedicated to the 70th anniversary of the corresponding member. RAS L. V. Milova, Moscow, 1999.
Belyavsky M. T. The Peasant Question in Russia on the Eve of the E. I. Pugachev Uprising (Formation of Anti-serfdom thought). Moscow, 1965.

Znamenskiy P. V. Istoriya russkoy tserkvi [History of the Russian Church], Moscow, 2000.
Karamzin N. M. Istoricheskoe pravennoe slovo Ekaterine Vtoroy [Historical Word of Praise to Catherine the Second]. Moscow, 1802.

Kulbakhtin N. M. From the history of Gaininsky Bashkirs. Ufa, 1996.

Latkin V. N. Legislative Commissions in Russia in the XVIII century. Istoriko-yuridicheskoe issledovanie [Historical and Legal Research], vol. 1, SP6, 1887.

Order of Her Imperial Majesty Catherine the Second, autocrats of the All-Russian, given Commission on the composition of the draft of the new Code. SPb., 1893.

Instructions and points to the deputy from Sv. Synod to the Catherine Commission on the composition of the draft of the new code / / Christian Reading. 1876. September-October.

Correspondence of the Russian Empress Catherine II and Monsieur Voltaire, which lasted from 1763 to 1778. Part II. Moscow, 1803.

Platonov S. F. Lectures on Russian History, St. Petersburg, 1998.
Pokrovsky I. M. Ekaterininskaya komissii o sostavlenii proektov novogo ulozhdeniya i tserkovnye voprosy v ney [Catherine's Commission on drafting a new Code and Church Issues in it]. 1766-1771 gg. Kazan, 1910.

Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts (RGADA)

Collection of the Russian Historical Society. Vol. 8, 14, 32, 34, 115, 134, 147. St. Petersburg, 1871-1915.

Semevsky V. I. Krestyane v tsarstvovanie imperatritsy Ekateriny II [Peasants in the reign of Empress Catherine II]. Vol. 2. SPb., 1901.

Soloviev S. M. History of Russia since ancient times. In 18 kn. Kn. XIV. Vol. 27-28. Moscow, 1998.

Tashkin S. F. Foreigners of the Volga-Ural region and Siberia based on the materials of the Legislative Commission. Kazan, 1922.

Shchapov A. Zemsky Sobor of 1648-1649 and the Assembly of Deputies of 1767. B / M., b/ G.

Permanent link to this publication: