Identification of any social group consists of certain components that form a complete system of ideas about themselves and others. In terms of content, it includes two cross-sections: cognitive and emotional. In functional terms, it is a system for identifying "friends" and "strangers" [Stefanenko, 1999, p. 211]. This article examines the structure of the ethno-confessional identity of the baptized Tatars of the Middle Volga region who converted to Islam in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. It is revealed on the basis of the analysis of the following components: the attitude of Muslim Tatars to the "apostate" baptized Tatars, the latter's ideas about the Russian emperor, which act as one of the factors of their identification, and markers of ethno-confessional identity. The article is based on the materials of the State Archive of the Ulyanovsk Region (SAUO), presented by numerous office-keeping and judicial-investigative documents.

ATTITUDE OF MUSLIM TATARS TO BAPTIZED TATARS

The confessional separation of baptized Tatars and Muslim Tatars began in the middle of the 16th century, when some Tatars converted to the Orthodox faith. The newly formed group of Tatars who were baptized at that time began to live in separate villages from the Muslims [Iskhakov, 1991, p.24; Iskhakov, 1994, p. 36].

In itself, confessional separation does not lead to ethnic separation and hostile relations between the non-religious parts of the people. Certain historical conditions are necessary for the occurrence of such phenomena. Such unfavorable circumstances arose in the 30-50s of the XVIII century as a result of attempts by the Russian Empire to forcibly plant Christianity among the non-Orthodox subjects of the Middle Volga region and the Urals. These attempts were expressed in reprisals against the Muslim community, in socio-economic pressure on Muslims who did not want to become Christians and were forced to pay their duties for the New Baptists. A chasm quickly formed between the two confessional groups of Tatars - the baptized and the Muslims [Mikhailova and Korshunova, 1997, p. 26], and the division and tension had many different manifestations. Muslims did not want to pay taxes for New Baptists and even before the term of benefits expired, they were forced to pay their poll tax, which gave rise to mutual hostility [Grigoriev, 1948, p.244-245]. Conflicts that arose on this basis were typical for all newly baptized and unbaptized people in the Middle Volga region (Dmitriev, 1978, p. 4). 103; Kudryashov, 1974, pp. 135-136; Kuzeev, 1992, p. 190].

In the 60 - 70s of the XVIII century, the Established Commission received orders from Muslim Tatars with a request to evict all baptized Tatars to other villages [Iskhakov, 1995, p. 81]. For example, the order of the Yasash Tatars of the Sviyazhsk Uyezd said: "Will it not be commanded

page 44

these from the Newly Baptized Tatars, where there are few of them, should be transferred, and from now on transferred to Russian or Novokreschensk settlements. And where a smaller half of the Tatars remain, they should also be taken to Tatar settlements" (Nikolsky, 1920, p. 370). Such wishes were caused by the fact that according to the decree of August 23, 1756, Muslims were allowed to build mosques on the condition that there were at least 200-300 male souls in the village and that Russians and New Baptists would not live there [Tatary Sredny..., 1976, p.376]. In the village of Dolgiy Ostrov, Buinsky Uyezd, Simbirsk Province, Tatars who were baptized once lived, and were driven out of the village by fellow Muslim Tatars [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 577, l. 79-79 vol.In their instructions, the Muslims also complained that " some of the Tatars of Novokreschen are causing us great attacks and ruin. Therefore, when one or two of our brethren happen to be present somewhere, and there are more of them, they are beaten and tortured in vain for no reason, while others still take away money and clothes" [Nikolsky, 1920, p. 378].

Subsequently, Muslims developed a stable negative attitude towards the baptized Tatars. For example, "when meeting their baptized brethren, the Muslim Tatars considered it their duty to swear at them with the words "kryazhen" or " tyugyngan "(baptized) - words that received the meaning of strong swearing from them " (Prokofiev, 1905, p. 153). Muslim Tatars also used such words as "chukyngan" and "chumylgan" to refer to baptized Tatars (Glukhov, 1992, p. 193). A number of related words with the root "chukyn" mean baptism or are curses, for example: chukyngyry ("get lost"), chukyndyru ("baptize"), chukynchik ("scoundrel, unclean"); chukynu ("be baptized, receive baptism"), chukynyp kit ("get lost") [Tatar-Russian..., 1966, p. 641]. Sources indicate that even at the beginning of the 20th century, the words "kryazhen " and" baptised " were used as swear words in everyday Muslim communication and were considered a grave insult.1 The meaning of the word kryazhen (baptized) was equivalent to the negative meaning of the word kyafer (infidel).

The negative emotional attitude was an expression of the ethno-confessional separation that occurred, which was perceived by Muslims and baptized Tatars.2 Acceptance of the Christian faith was associated with the loss of Tatar ethnic identity. For example, K. Prokofiev reported that a well-educated Muslim told the missionary Malov that "a hundred years ago there was a bishop in Kazan who wanted to make all of us Tatars Russian" (Prokofiev, 1905, p. 169). Baptized Tatars were regarded by Muslims as marginals who occupied an intermediate position: they ceased to be Muslim Tatars, but at the same time they did not become Russian. So, in 1880, the nobleman Stulkin, a baptized Tatar, in a conversation with a priest, said that "the most zealous performers of Mohammedan rituals are alienated from us because, in their expression, we are" neither this nor that " [GAO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. chr. 345, l. 4 - 4ob.]. Thus, according to the views of Muslims, the baptized Tatars lost their former ethno-confessional Tatar-Muslim identity.

The marginal position of the baptized Tatars was determined by the disdainful and hostile attitude towards them not only of Muslims, but also of Russians, as the officer A. I. Lipinsky wrote in 1868: "The moral state of these people causes complete regret, being bad Christians, they are also deprived of the opportunity to visit the Mohammedan mosque and listen to the mullah... despised by their own people, they are not Paul-

1 In 1895, the prosecutor received a petition from a peasant named Z. Fakhardinov, who wrote about insulting him with the word "baptized" [GAUO, f. 108, op. 26, ed. hr. 133, l. 3-3 vol.]. In 1898, in the cathedral mosque of the village of Bolshoy Saiman, the decree mullah Z. Bibarsov insulted the peasant N. Seyukov, calling him the words "kafer" and "kryazhen" [f. 1, op. 80, units of hr. 34, l. 2; f. 88, op. 1, units of hr. 1002, l. 12-12ob.].

2 S. Chicherina wrote that in response to her question: "Are these Tatar books?" - the baptized Tatars answered: "No, the Baptismal ones." Among them, "Tatar means Mohammedan, baptized means Orthodox" [Chicherina, 1905, p. 93].

page 45

They are called the respect of Russians "[Materials for Geography..., 1865, p. 326]. This was also stated in the personal decree of Alexander I for 1802, according to which priests were obliged to exhort " native Russians... do not despise the newly baptized Tatars, do not be alienated from their community and enter into kinship and marital relations with them" [Runovsiky, 1901, p.386].

In the 19th century, the process of ethnic consolidation developed among the Tatars of the Volga-Ural region, and the conversion of baptized Tatars to Islam was one of the forms of its manifestation [Iskhakov, 1993, p. 29; Iskhakov, 2002, p.40-41]. The attitude of the Muslim Tatars towards the baptized Tatars gradually changed for the better. 3 In 1876, the priest M. Lebedev wrote:"...Baptized and unbaptized Tatars hide agitators, and even if they do... If an Orthodox priest found an agitator in the house of a baptized Tatar, then everyone present would pass him off as a native and dear visiting guest" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 213, l. 128]. Priest of the village of Pimurzino, Buinsky uyezd. Belozersky, wanting to make an admonition, did not find the "fallen ones" at home, as they hid from him, being at that time "with their neighbors-unbaptized Tatars" [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 213, l. 113 vol.]. Back in 1858, the missionary and the enlightener N. I. Ilminsky noted that " when priests or officials appear to exhort apostates, the Mohammedans try either to hide them, or, if this is impossible... they support their spirit of perseverance..."[Materials on history..., 1936, p. 225].

By the beginning of the 20th century, the attitude of Muslim Tatars towards baptized Tatars who converted to Islam and remained in Orthodoxy was generally positive. For example, in a note to the chairman of the Committee of Ministers, written in 1905 on behalf of the Kazan Muslim Tatars, it was explicitly stated that the" apostate " baptized Tatars are people "in spirit Muslims, and in registration Christians. And since they are related, we can't look at them with indifference." Therefore, the note, along with other petitions, set out a request for "permission for Christians to register, but after falling away from Orthodoxy, Muslims openly and fearlessly profess Islam, with the right to register them in a Muslim society" [GAUO, f. 76, op. 2, ed. hr. 1446, l. 10]. At the beginning of the 20th century, S. V. Chicherina noted that "... Muslims sympathized with the apostates and supported them in every possible way" (Chicherina, 1905, p.83). At the same time, according to her observations, the attitude of Muslims towards the Tatars who remained in Orthodoxy also improved: "In the huge Muslim village of N. there were only seven yards of baptized Tatars, and the Muslims did not offend them, treated them with respect, as "developed religiously" and "sustained" in life " [Chicherina, 1905, pp. 92-93].

IDEAS OF THE "FALLEN" ABOUT THE EMPEROR AS A FACTOR OF IDENTIFICATION

In the Russian Empire, baptized Tatars occupied a marginal position: being Christians, they remained "non-native" in the state and were not integrated into the Orthodox community [Kuzeev, 1992, p. 263]. The authorities and the church took up the religious education of baptized Tatars in the 60s of the XIX century, turning to the pedagogical system of N. I. Ilminsky [Bryan-Bennigsen, 1994, p. 110-111; Zagidullin, 1990, p. 68]. Completely illiterate baptized Tatars for a long time did not have the opportunity to raise their social status even within the peasant class. Only since 1802 was it recommended to appoint them to rural posts by a personal decree [Runovsky, 1901, p. 386].

3 However, M. Glukhov's work states that the attitude of some Muslim Tatars who converted to Islam has not become benevolent. He writes that the "apostates" faced " discrimination against the Muslim clergy and the least conscientious Muslim brotherhood." Those who had fallen away were given special humiliating places in the mosque, and offensive nicknames were given. However, the author does not refer to the source of the information gathered [Glukhov, 1993, p. 31].

page 46

With the adoption of the Orthodox faith, the baptized Tatars found themselves outside the cultural context of the Muslim world, outside the framework of the complex of primary and secondary religious education that has developed among Muslim Tatars. In general, the cultural gap with the Muslim world led to a decrease in the educational level of baptized Tatars in comparison with Muslim Tatars, who at that time had education as an important factor of ethno-confessional identity [Amirkhanov, 1992, p.47; Mikhailova and Korshunova, 1998, p. 37; Pla, 1998, p. 156].

The unfavorable social situation of the baptized Tatars, aggravated by the emotionally negative attitude of Muslims and the disdainful attitude of Russians, contributed to the loss of the former Tatar-Muslim identity by the baptized Tatars and influenced the formation of their marginal consciousness, which was manifested during the apostate movement of 1866-1868.

In Simbirsk province, 86.2% of baptized Tatars participated in this movement. Later, by the end of the 19th century, there were practically no baptized Tatars left in the province, with the exception of those who were baptized in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. According to the sources of the 60-70s of the XIX century, there are villages where the baptized Tatars of the Simbirsk province remained in Orthodoxy (Elkhovoozernoye - 6 houses, Pogrebovsky Settlements-one family, Trekh-Boltaevo-8 families).

Some baptized Tatars soon after" falling away "" returned " back to the Orthodox faith, but there were few such cases. So, Joachim Romanov, who buried a relative without a Christian rite, after the priest's admonitions indicated the place of burial and asked to bury the deceased in a Christian way [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr.70, l. 89-89ob]. Krestyanin D. Trekh-Boltaevo Stepan Pavlov "after a long period of unconsciousness in his error, decided to renounce Mohammedanism and wrote with his own hand a subscription for unswerving stay and obedience in the Holy Orthodox Church" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 149, l. 289-290]. Yegor Ignatiev, krestyanin D. Forty Saidaks, the priest reported, "in my own opinion... and at present, according to the subscription given to him, he is ready to join and perform Christian rites " [GAO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 155, l. 64-64ob]. In the Kazan province, where the "apostasy" of the baptized Tatars became particularly widespread, also few of them "returned" to the Orthodox faith. In the village of Bolshye Kibyak Kozi, only 9 families out of 103 agreed to stay in Orthodoxy. Out of 750 households in 75 villages, only one family in the village of Chirkchi-Bikbeevo agreed to stay in Orthodoxy. In d. In Yangildino, 33 people out of 154 "apostates" "returned" to Christianity [Zagidullin, 1990, pp. 74-76].

Marginal consciousness was peculiar not only to them, but also to the baptized Tatars, who completely converted to Islam. For example, some of them found it difficult to define their confessional identity. Thus, a retired soldier Danila Stepanov (Galiulla Veliullov), a Tatar who was baptized in the village of Burgany, said about himself: "...I do not know any faith, I bear two names, Tatar and Russian, but I do not go and have never been to church, and I also do not perform Mohammedan rites " [GAU, f. 108, op. 1, ed. ch. 50, l. 87].

Not all "apostates" had a clear understanding of the ethnic and religious circumstances of their conversion to Islam. In some cases, some Tatars "fell away", guided by the example of other "fallen away". Thus, a retired soldier from the village of Chikildym buried his deceased son "without permission, following the example of other baptized Tatars" [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 70, l. 84]. In 1866, the priest A. Baratynsky "fallen away" responded to the exhortation:"...Not everything will be so, but our society will be based on something; where everyone goes, we will follow them, but we will not go to your church alone." The" fallen away " baptized Tatar Vasiliev echoed: "I follow my brothers wherever they go, so do I, but I don't want to remain a Christian alone "[GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 70, l. 93ob.]. The reverse meaning of this recognition is noteworthy, expressing the dependence of the "fallen away" on the behavior of other Tatars like him: if if they remain in Orthodoxy, then he is with them. Situa-

page 47

the situation when he will remain in the Orthodox faith, and all other Tatars will convert to Islam, seems to him impossible. In a report dated February 1, 1866, the clergyman S. Zelenovka wrote down the following words of the" fallen " baptized Tatars: Elkhovoozernoy: "On January 3, 1866 ... they submitted a petition for fear of remaining one of the baptized Tatars, as they heard that other villages were baptized Tatars submitted a petition" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 70, l. 11].

In other cases, the rejection of Orthodoxy was determined by submission to the collective decision of society, i.e. some baptized Tatars refused to perform Orthodox rites not because they considered themselves Tatars and therefore Muslims, but because their fellow villagers decided so. Joakim Romanov, peasant of the village of d. Elkhovoozernoy, to the exhortation, he replied that he was "confused by society" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 70, l. 89 vol.]." Fallen away " baptized Tatar D. Pimurzino told the priest that "he would not bury in a Christian way, fearing persecution from other baptized Tatars, since all of them, according to him (from the priest's report - A. K.), pledged to each other not to perform any Christian duties" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. 70, l. 67]. Priest Smirnov krestyanin D. Poor Tatar beggar Ivan Grigoriev, a baptized Tatar, responded to the exhortation that he could not "reunite with the Orthodox Church and baptize his son, since the inhabitants of his baptized Tatars insist that they do not accept any admonitions from anyone and do not fulfill any Christian duties for fear of responsibility to the whole society" [GAO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 7155, l. 84].

Baptized Tatars not only realized, but also emotionally perceived their marginality, so it is no accident that during the movement of 1866-1868, its active participants used ridicule and swearing as a way to influence the self-consciousness of Kryashens. Thus, in the Kazan province, "Mullah Mukhamedzyanov was arrested for agitation conducted among baptized Tatars and for ridiculing non-drowned baptized Tatars "[Zagidullin, 1990, p. 76]. In the village of Trekh-Boltaevo, Simbirsk province, after the highest refusal of the petition, as reported by priest P. Vostokov,"...most of the corrupted Tatars, not trusting their horse breeders, wanted to return to Orthodoxy, but the horse breeders (intercessors and organizers of the petition), persecuting them with ridicule, contempt and abuse, to which the Christian religion is also subjected, try in every possible way to keep them in unity with themselves and feed them with the hope of dismissal to Mohammedanism and by their similar actions, they have reached the point that even those who did not express their consent to apostasy from Christianity at the beginning do not currently fulfill any Christian duties " [GAO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 213, l. 88]. Under the influence of the "horse guides", the "fallen away" filed a second petition.

On May 25, 1875, Dean A. Baratynsky wrote about the content of such an emotional impact on the self-consciousness of baptized Tatars. When some baptized Tatars " hesitated in their intention and wanted to stay... in the midst of the Holy Church ... and from Kazan, rumors were spread that if the Tatars after all this (submitting petitions. - A. K.) but remain in Christianity, they are ordered under strict punishment to change their clothes, let go of their hair, always go to church and speak Russian... " [GAO, f. 134, op. 7, units hr. 213, l. 110 vol.].

Such an image of a baptized Tatar who remained in Orthodoxy is the opposite of that of a Muslim Tatar: non-Tatar clothing (probably meaning belts on shirts), long hair (Muslim Tatars cut their hair short), church attendance, and everyday communication in Russian. It can be said that the image was an ethno-confessional installation, addressed with a question to the baptized Tatars: who should we be - Orthodox or Muslims? And the answer was very clear: if you stay in Orthodoxy, it means that you will be similar in appearance to the Russians and, perhaps, will become them in the future.

page 48

after all, but you are Tatars, not Russians, and therefore should be Muslims, and therefore Tatars in the end.

The ethno-confessional attitude was a guide in overcoming marginality by reconstructing the previously lost Tatar-Muslim identity, which was carried out in various forms. These include the collective interaction of" apostate "baptized Tatars in renouncing Orthodox rites and observing Muslim ones, which later led to the organization of an illegal Muslim community; contacts of "apostates" with Muslim Tatars, during which they received support and confirmation of their belonging to Muslim Tatars.

A similar role of confirming the Tatar-Muslim identity of the" apostate " baptized Tatars was played by the image of the sovereign emperor formed in their public consciousness, which was closely connected with the rumors about granting Tatars freedom of religion, which were widely spread on the eve of the abolition of state dependence of state - owned peasants of the Kazan province and served as a reason for the emergence of the movement of baptized Tatars in 1866-1868 for returning to Islam.

Orthodox priests A. Baratynsky and Smirnov wrote about the spread of these rumors among the baptized Tatars of the Simbirsk province in 1866 [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. chr. 70, l. 2, 11]. And in the late XIX-early XX centuries. already "illegal" Muslims perceived the rumor about the manifesto not as a rumor, but as a real manifesto that granted them freedom of religion. In 1903, a descendant of the" fallen away " parents claimed in a petition: "I have heard that at the present time there are Muslims like us, whose parents, grandparents and great-grandparents, although they had Christian names, but they themselves, because of their birth after 1866, that is, after following the Supreme command of the blessed memory of the Sovereign Emperor Alexander II that Muslims who were attracted to Orthodoxy in former times are Muslims let them practice their religion." 88, op. 1, ed. hr. 1449, l. 11]. In 1891, the "apostate" baptized Tatar Gainulla Bikinev explained in a petition submitted to the provincial government that "By the Highest decree in 1866, although our society was allowed to profess the Mohammedan religion, but on the condition that a person should be chosen for the performance of the rite of worship from among those who had fallen away from Orthodoxy" [GAO, f. 88, op. 1, ed. hr. 465, l. 4-6].

In the petitions of the baptized Tatars, the image of the Russian emperor is interpreted as a "compassionate father", merciful and punishing, "All-powerful Monarch"," All-merciful sovereign", who acts as a guarantor of justice and legality of the actions of his loyal citizens, i.e.," fallen " baptized Tatars. In this capacity, the emperor seemed to certify that the" apostates "- as loyal citizens - were not Tatars who had" fallen away " from Orthodoxy, but real Muslims. Therefore, any actions of the local authorities preventing the "apostates" from becoming Muslims were considered illegal by them. The emperor, as it were, justified the actions of the "fallen" in advance, recognizing them as Muslims. The same image of the sovereign emperor is formed from the texts of petitions of the" fallen " baptized Tatars. Novye Ikhli (1852), who did not want to move to the Old Russian villages [GAUO, f. 318, op. 3, ed. chr. 269, l. 120-121].

And later, in the 1870s, the baptized Tatars were characterized by faith in the justice of the tsar [Zagidullin, 1990, p.78]. But his image was already endowed with a new quality. On May 25, 1875, Dean A. Baratynsky wrote in a report that " rumors about the granting of a new law by the Sovereign Emperor, by virtue of which supposedly baptized Tatars can freely convert to Mohammedanism, as schismatics to the old faith, that the Sovereign himself secretly holds the Mohammedan faith... They were carried around the bazaars in Kazan by various wanderers..."[GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. chr. 213, l. 111]. Thus, the Sovereign

page 49

he turned out to be the same Muslim as the" fallen " baptized Tatars. They had their own king, a Muslim, who could not help but allow them to convert to Islam. In such an Islamic guise, the sovereign has become closer and clearer. His image was endowed with exactly the quality that the "fallen ones" especially needed. He expressed their need for a legal profession of Islam, for external and independent confirmation of their Tatar-Muslim identity. According to D. Burbank, in such a multinational and multi-confessional state as the Russian Empire, "a person manifests his individuality, which was understood as a direct individual connection with the monarch and his power to decide fate" [Burbank, 1997, p. 32].

Due to the individual connection with the monarch through his Muslim image, the" fallen " baptized Tatars could rightfully consider themselves Muslims. After all, all social groups of society depended on the monarch in the state. And since the sovereign is a "secret Muslim", and we are" apostate " baptized Muslim Tatars, then no one can resist the monarch's will, the royal manifesto on religious freedom and consider "apostates" non-Muslims. Thus, the Muslim image of the sovereign was a guarantee that the" fallen " baptized Tatars could return to Islam with full right, that they were Muslims.

The appearance of the Muslim image of the Russian emperor was associated with a number of historical circumstances. First, after the disappearance of the Tatar khanates, the Tatar state idea was partly transferred to the Russian tsar, and he was called "the great god, the white khan" (Mikhailova and Korshunova, 1998, p.21). Secondly, the Tatar community of state and appanage peasants was subordinate to the emperor [Sagitova, 1992, p. 113], and Tatar peasants, like Russians, were characterized by faith "in the tsar father, intercessor and guardian, guardian of truth and justice" [Danilov, Danilova, 1996, p.35]. Therefore, it is quite natural that the "apostate" baptized Tatars perceived the actions of the authorities, who returned their petitions with the "Highest Refusal", as not a royal decision [Mozharovsky, 1880, p. 132]. In 1870, the priest P. Vostokov noted on this occasion that the intercessors of D. Elkhovoozernaya "did not believe the decision and assured everyone that this decision was not a Royal one, but a deception, and that their petition was not reported to the Sovereign Emperor" [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch.213, l. 87ob. -88]. Priest A. Baratynsky and Simbirsk governor Baron I. O. Velio also wrote about this in 1866 [Materials on History..., 1936, p. 272]. In such a situation, the actions of the authorities did not so much hinder the desire of the "apostate" baptized Tatars to become Muslims, but rather convinced the "apostates" that they were Muslims from their point of view. Thus, the Simbirsk governor I. P. Dolgovo-Saburov wrote in an official paper dated March 10, 1875:: "According to the information gathered, most of them are sure that this measure (the expulsion of instigators - A. K.) is the last one, and that after that the government, seeing their commitment to Mohammedanism, will abandon efforts to join them to Orthodoxy" [GAO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 213, l. 95 vols].

IDENTITY MARKERS OF BAPTIZED TATARS WHO CONVERTED TO ISLAM

The reconstruction of the Tatar-Muslim identity of the" apostate " baptized Tatars was based on their awareness of the unconditional interdependence of ethnic (Tatar) and confessional (Muslim) identities. Awareness of their ethnic identity by the baptized Tatars was an important prerequisite for the development of this process.

One of the forms of manifestation of ethnic identity among the baptized Tatars was their Tatar names. Numerous sources show that baptized Tatars usually had two names: Christian, received at the time of baptism from an Orthodox priest and recorded in the metric book, and Tatar, given by their parents. The Christian name symbolized belonging to the Orthodox Church. In ofi-

page 50

in official documents - revision fairy tales, passports, recruitment lists - baptized Tatars were called by Orthodox names. The Tatar name was associated by the authorities with belonging to Muslims, and therefore baptized Tatars could not be referred to in official documents by Tatar names.

Nevertheless, in everyday life, baptized Tatars usually used Tatar, rather than Christian names, which they perceived as Russian and, accordingly, did not correspond to their ethnic identity. This is evidenced by the materials of acts of inquiry, interrogation protocols, decisions of the Simbirsk ecclesiastical Consistory, relations of county police departments, reports of parish priests, volost boards, and district police officers for 1866-1894. Out of 25 mentions, in 22 cases, the Christian name was regarded by baptized Tatars as Russian [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. xr. 70, 149, 155, 181, 213, 244, 332, 456; f. 340, op. 9, ed. hr. 11, 14]. At the same time, the" apostates " emphasized that they are addressed with Russian names, while they call themselves Tatar names. For example, during the testimony of February 24, 1866, the peasant D. Bolshye Tarkhany spoke about himself: "They call me Leonty Ivanov in Russian, but my name is Abdrakhman Abrahimov." In the same way, 14 more of his fellow villagers presented themselves [GAO, F. 340, op. 9, ed. hr. 11, l. 6-7]. One of the Akimov brothers, who was under investigation in 1841 for disobedience to the authorities, said about himself that "in Russian his name is Danila Akimov, and in Tatar-Yumagul Bikzhanov", and his brother confessed that "in Russian his name is Nikolai Akimov, and in Tatar Zyabir Bikzhanov" [GAUO, f. 115, op. 26, ed. chr. 1, l. 16-18].

Representatives of the civil authorities, in contrast to the baptized Tatars, calling the names they received at baptism Christian or Russian, used these definitions as synonyms, thus giving these names a confessional meaning. At the same time, the church authorities more often regarded baptismal names as Christian. Thus, in the decision of the Simbirsk Ecclesiastical Consistory of 1872 it was written:"...Subject the peasant Khaibula Dyaminev to the exhortation, and "in Russian "(crossed out in the source - A. K.) by the Christian name..."[GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. chr. 217, l. 32].

Already in the conditions of "falling away", the Tatar name, in addition to the function of ethnic differentiation, became a form of expression of the confessional identity of baptized Tatars and a symbol of their ethno-confessional unity with Muslim Tatars. In contacts with the spiritual and secular authorities, the "apostate" baptized Tatars presented themselves with Tatar names and claimed that they did not know their Russian names [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 213, l. 104ob. -105], and if they called them, they said that their real name was not Russian, and Tatar. For example, an" absconder "from the village of Byurgany introduced himself during the interrogation: I am" Biktemir Bikiev, not Ivan Yegorov " [GAUO, f. 340, op. 7, ed. chr.1, l. 15]. In petitions addressed to the emperor and to various government departments, the "fallen away" baptized Tatars were signed with Tatar names [Materials on History..., 1936, p. 245, 271; GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 70, l. 3; ed. hr. 213, l. 2-6, 19 - 19ob.], thus emphasizing their belonging to the Muslim religion. In most cases, they regarded their non-Christian names as Tatar. Thus, out of 38 references, in 31 cases the names were evaluated as Tatar and only in seven cases - as Muslim [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, units of xp. 70, 149, 155, 181, 212, 213, 217, 244, 332, 456; f. 340, op. 8, ed. hr. 1].

At the beginning of the 20th century, official authorities were forced to refer to "illegal" Muslims by their Tatar names. The priest of the village of Kirtelei wrote on October 26, 1905:: "Even their Russian names they do not like and hide, during, for example, recruitment for serving military service, they do not go to the official's call with Russian names, and only to the call with Tatar names they soon immediately respond" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. xr. 807, L. 57 vol.].

Documents show that the baptized Tatars who converted to Islam began to call themselves Muslims. March 10, 1875 in relation to the Bishop of Simbirsk epar-

page 51

kii governor I. P. Dolgov-Saburov, discussing measures to combat the apostate movement, wrote that there was no distraction, since the "apostates" consider themselves Mohammedans and reject the baptism performed on them [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 213, l. 102]. Similar cases were reflected in many reports of police officers, police officers, priests and volost boards [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 149, l. 134ob.; ed. hr. 213, l. 106 - 106 ob.; ed. hr. 332, l. 4; f. 108, op. 5, units of hr. 31, l. 25; op. 1, units of hr. 50, l. 158, 167-170 vol.; f. 340, op. 9, units of hr. 11, l. 6-7; f. 134, op. 7, units of hr. 456, l. 19; f. 117, op. 6, units of hr. 1, l. 32 vol., 33 vol. - 34, 44 vol., 47 vol., 56; units of hr. 2, l. 5-5ob., bob.; units of hr. 9, l. 17 - 21; units of hr. 14, l. 19-20; op. 7, units of hr. 9, l. 5, 9 vol.; op. 8, units of hr. 7, l. 3, 11; units of hr. 29, l. 3; units of hr. 38, l. 9; units of hr .40, l. 24 vol.; units of hr. 42, l. 4 vol.; units of hr. 244, l. 4-4 vol., 10 vol.; op. 9, units of hr. 1, l. 6, 12; units of hr. 11, l. 4 vol. - 7 vol..].

Calling themselves Muslims, the baptized Tatars treated their Orthodox origin differently. For example, the baptized Tatars of d. Trekh-Boltaevo in 1874, according to the testimony of the priest M. Lebedev, "decided to stubbornly stand on their own and without any hesitation prove that they do not remember how they were baptized, or do not recognize themselves as baptized Tatars at all, or that the clergy mistakenly recorded them in the metric books" [GAO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 213, l. 57].

At the same time, the "apostate" Burgans recognized their Orthodox origin. In 1869. they said about themselves: "... from the baptized Tatars... of the Mohammedan faith " [GAUO, f. 108, op. 1, ed. chr. 50, l. 79-85, 92]. Similar statements were made from the mouths of some" apostate " baptized Tatars of the villages of Polevye Bikshiki, Soroka Saidaki, Chichkanovo and Buinka [GAUO f. 340, op. 9, ed. hr. 14, l. 8-9; ed. hr. 20, l. 3; f. 117, op. 8, ed. hr. 9, l. 4-4ob.; units of hr. 244, l. 4 ob., 10; f. 340, op. 9, units of hr. 595, l. 8-9]. Tukhvetulla Aibetov, a peasant of d. Trekh-Boltaevo, during an interrogation in 1875, frankly confessed that he was "a Muslim who had apostatized from Orthodoxy" [GAUO, f. 108, op. 5, ed. chr. 31, l. 25].

Other baptized Tatars, although they recognized their Orthodox origin from Christian parents, did not consider themselves Baptized. Timerbulat Tugeev, krestyanin D. Nizhny Naradbash, said that he came from the baptized Tatars and was called Semyon Nikolaev according to the Revision fairy tales, "but whether he was baptized or not, he does not know" and "does not consider himself baptized, since he submitted a petition to the sovereign emperor." His fellow villager Biktagir Neametullov "responded that although he comes from the baptized Tatars, he does not recognize himself as such" [GAUO, f. 340, op. 10, ed. xr. 6, l. 1-2 vol.].

Some of the" apostate " baptized Tatars did not consider themselves Orthodox Christians, but also their parents and ancestors. Thus, the baptized Tatar Ivan Yegorov from the village of Byurgany "responded at the inquest that he and his father were not of the Christian faith, but were in Mohammedanism" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 149, l. 134 vol.]. Gerasim Mikhailov, a peasant of the village of Burgany. Stary Chekursky, in 1867, showed that " neither their fathers nor they themselves were ever Orthodox, they did not perform rites in the church..."[GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 149, l. 174 vol.]. In the same year, Pyotr Mikhailov, a resident of the village of Bikmurasy, said that "he belongs to the Mohammedan faith and was not baptized, just as his father was not baptized, and why he is called baptized, he does not know" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 149, l. 213 vol.].

In petitions, the" apostate " baptized Tatars, as a rule, proved that neither they nor their ancestors were baptized and always professed the Muslim faith, and the fact that they bore Russian names was a historical mistake, a misunderstanding. Therefore, petitions always indicated that the petitioners were Muslims and never "fell away" from Orthodoxy [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 70, l. 1ob.; ed. hr. 213, l. 2-2 ob., 19 ob. -20; ed. hr. 456, l. 2 - 2 vol.; Materials on the history of Tataria..., 1936, pp. 244-245, 274-278]. Such an interpretation of their conversion to Islam by the" apostate "baptized Tatars and their denial of their Orthodox origin went against the opinion of the Orthodox Church, which believed that the baptized Tatars had "fallen away" from Christianity and therefore were on the right path.-

page 52

they were breaking the law. Dean A. Baratynsky described how on January 7, 1866, representatives of the baptized Tatars of the villages of Utyamyshevo, Burgany, Pimurzino, Cherepanovo and Chikildym came to him and said: "We are not going to the Tatar faith alone, but as a whole district" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 70, l. 1]. This understanding of conversion to Islam reflects the awareness of the "apostate" baptized Tatars of their ethnic and confessional reunification with the Muslim Tatars.4
According to P. Uert, in 1866, for the baptized Tatars, "a turning point, a turning point, came, because it required a clear and decisive answer to the question:" Who are you by religion?" And this could not but affect the ethnic identity, since the concepts of "Tatar" and" Muslim" were extremely closely associated; usually Tatars called themselves Muslims, and Islam was often called the Tatar faith " [Uert, 1994, p.110]. This tendency, noted by P. Uert, to associate the religious question with the ethnic identity of the "apostate" baptized Tatars was associated with the process of restoring their Tatar-Muslim identity.

On the one hand, this process developed as the awareness of ethnic unity with Muslim Tatars by the "apostate" baptized Tatars, which entailed the need for confessional unity. For example, the" apostates "of the village of Staroe Chekurskoe in 1867 replied to the priest:" They will not lag behind other apostates from Christianity, [because] Mohammedanism is more akin to Christianity for them as natural Tatars and living among Tatars " [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 149, l. 75]. Pyotr Mikhailov, a baptized Tatar named D. Bikmurasy, told the priest A. Baratynsky in 1868: "He will not perform Christian rites like a natural Tatar, because he wants to practice the Mohammedan faith together with others, which is more akin to them in the nature of their life among the Muslim Tatars" [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 149, l. 277]. On the other hand, the "apostates" were aware of the fundamental incompatibility of the confession of the Orthodox faith with their ethnic identity, and perceived the Muslim religion as an integral part of it [GAUO, f. 117, op. 6, ed. hr. 1, l. 33 vol.; op. 8, ed. hr. 38, l. 9 vol.; ed. hr. 244, l. 10 vol.; op. 9, ed. hr. 11, l. 4-5]. Thus, in 1866, the Byurganovo volost board reported that the baptized Tatars of the villages of Nizhny Naradbash and Siushevo "do not want to baptize their children, because they, being of Tatar origin, intend to be worshippers of Islam" [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch.70, l. 35]. The Stulkin nobles in 1880 confessed to the priest in a private conversation: "We do not treat the rites offered to us with contempt, but do not perform them solely out of habit and tribal inclination to profess the Mohammedan law" [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. chr. 345, l. 3 - 4 on the subject of religion]..].

In fact, the awareness of the "fallen" baptized Tatars as Tatars became a sufficient reason for them to consider themselves Muslims. On July 19, 1868, a baptized Tatar named Ivan Yegorov told a court investigator: "Biktimir Bikiev, not Ivan Yegorov... at least 25 years old... I do not know whether I was baptized or not, and I do not remember that, but I am a Tartar and hold the Mohammedan faith; I do not hold any other faith" [GAU, f. 340, op. 8, ed. chr.1, l. 15]. The Akimov brothers, who were baptized Tatars, answered in the same way at the investigation on March 20, 1842: "They said nothing more, except that they agreed to be exiled to Siberia, rather than move to the village of Studenets, because they are not baptized, but Tatars..."[GAUO, f. 115, op. 26, ed. chr. 1, l. 69].

4 It is interesting that in the 70s of the XIX century, the ethnonym "Chuvash" was used among the Molkeyev Kryashens. D. M. Iskhakov, based on sources, showed that the Chuvash component was present in the Molkeyev Kryashens. At the same time, N. I. Zolotnitsky in the XIX century gave a different explanation for this fact: according to the stories of a local resident, local baptized Tatars began to be called Chuvash because the clergy who baptized them "found it difficult to interpret Christian dogmas and alienate them from the Muslim Tatars, instilled in them that through baptism they ceased to be Chuvash." Tatars and turned to the Chuvash" [Iskhakov, 1993, p. 135].

page 53

Among the" apostate " baptized Tatars, there is also a slightly different understanding of the relationship between ethnic and confessional identities. If in the cases mentioned above, the "apostates" thought: "I am a Tatar, therefore a Muslim", then the following example demonstrates the awareness of the inverse relationship. In 1868, Khusnetdin Izmailov, a baptized Tatar, was interrogated. Soroka Saidaki, spoke: "I have a daughter who was born before the petition, so she is baptized, and her name is Marya in Russian, and she is only 4 years old, and if I become a complete Tatar, then she will also be a Tatar, and if not, then she will be Orthodox" [GAU, f. 340, op. 9, ed. hr. 20, l. 4]. It is clear from the confession that if my father converts to Islam, he will be "completely" and "completely" Tatar. For him, being a Muslim means "truly" being a Tatar. In this regard, the awareness of X is very significant. If he does not convert to Islam and does not become a "real" Tatar, then his daughter, without becoming a Muslim, will be Orthodox, but not Tatar. Thus, the fullness of the ethnic identity of the" fallen " baptized Tatars was determined through their confessional affiliation. Consequently, it was necessary to return to the Muslim faith not only because it is a Tatar faith and it is more characteristic of Tatars, but also because without it one cannot become a "full-fledged" Tatar.

With such a view of the relationship between Tatar and Muslim identities, the rejection of the Mohammedan faith was impossible and in some cases was perceived as tantamount to death. The daughter of the" apostate "Tatar Fakharnis Vagapov in 1891, when asked by the priest N. Diamidov to reunite with the Orthodox Church, said:" I don't know if I was baptized, but I have never been a Christian, since my infancy and until now I live according to the rules of the Mohammedan faith, I have not heard my name until now, but I have never been a Christian. It was always called Faharnisa. At present, I am about 40 years old, I have been married to a Mohammedan for 16 years, I have seven children who are brought up according to the Mohammedan law. How can I now betray the Mohammedan [faith] and be a Christian, when I don't know a word of Russian? Where will I go then? What will I do? Where will I live? My husband will refuse me, my family and friends will turn away. No, no matter how much you persuade me, no matter how much you frighten me, I will never agree to be a Christian, it is better to die." 134, op. 7, ed. hr. 501, l. 12-13]. Physical death seemed less terrible than social isolation. Apparently, the Orthodox priests were right when they noted that the" apostate "baptized Tatars were characterized by a stronger "fanaticism" towards the Muslim faith than the Muslim Tatars [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 639, l. 30; ed. ch. 816, l. 16; units of hr. 807, l. 31, 57-57 vol.; units of hr. 70, l. 107; [Brief note..., 1897, p. 24; Chicherina, 1905, p. 84]. Only instead of the word "fanaticism" it would be more accurate to say - "zeal in faith" [Baltanova, 1991, p. 48].

In the process of restoring the Tatar-Muslim identity, such typical Tatar forms of material culture as eating horse meat, wearing a skullcap, and wearing a skullcap became particularly important in the minds of the "fallen" baptized Tatars. The Orthodox clergy, who saw in the long hair, beard, and cap of their charges a true commitment to Orthodoxy, made a lot of efforts to eradicate skullcaps and the national costume of the Tatars among the kryashens [Mukhametshin, 1977, p.110]5. Thus, in 1866, a serious conflict occurred between the "fallen" baptized Tatars, who refused to baptize newborns, and the Orthodox priests who came to exhort them in the village of Bolshye Tarkhany. At the exhortation, the Tatars appeared in skullcaps, and the priest demanded to remove them. But the Tatars refused to comply with the demand. Then, at the request of the priest, the deacon tried to remove the skullcap from Alexey Sergeev, and the latter hit the deacon in the temple and threatened to teach him how to do it.-

5 Muslim Tatars never parted with skullcaps [Vorobyov, 1959, p. 263].

page 54

In the village of Bolshye Kibyak-Kozi, Kazan province, in 1866, "when the police chief ordered one of the peasants to take off his skullcap, he told the police officer some impertinent things" (Zagidullin, 1990, p. 74]. At the beginning of the 20th century, S. V. Chicherina wrote that the skullcaps worn by" apostate " baptized Tatars became a sure sign of the hopelessness of their return to the bosom of the Orthodox Church [Chicherina, 1905, p.91].

For the baptized Tatar Pud Filippov, a peasant named D. Chikildym, the practice of Islam consisted not only in observing the Muslim fast, but also in eating horse meat [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 181, l. 43] 6. And in the petition of the" fallen away " baptized Tatars, d. One of the proofs of their profession of Islam in the Elkhovoozernaya Church in 1889 stated: "For more than 100 years, none of our ancestors accepted baptism, did not visit Christian churches, and never hesitated even to wear the national Tatar costume" [GAU, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 456, l. 2] The" apostate " baptized Tatar Andrey Petrov (Shahvedulla Khamidullov), in order to confirm that he was a Muslim, wore Tatar clothes [GAUO, f. 134, op. 7, ed. ch. 332, l.4, 12-12ob., 28].

In the second half of the XIX - beginning of the XX century, a group of" fallen " baptized Tatars was named tatarsymaki (ny) [Nikolsky, 1920, p. 214], which means "like Tatars" [Tatarsko - Russian..., 1966, p.495]. This word referred to a well-defined group of Muslims formed in the second half of the XIX century from among the baptized Tatars. The name tatarsymak became a peculiar result of the completion of the process of restoring the Tatar-Muslim identity among the" fallen " baptized Tatars.

* * *

In the Volga-Ural historical and ethnographic region, the Islamization of baptized Tatars during the study period led to the following consequences. Their "apostasy" was associated with the process of ethnic consolidation of the Tatars, and the transition to Islam meant the restoration of the Tatar-Muslim identity and way of life. In the understanding of the "apostate" baptized Tatars, Islam was a religion more appropriate to their " natural "(ethnic) origin, and the return to Islam (re-Islamization) was understood as an ethno-confessional reunion with Muslim Tatars. At the same time, the very recognition of themselves as Tatars was a sufficient reason for the "apostates" to consider themselves Muslims.

list of literature

Amirkhanov R. U. Nekotorye osobennosti razvitiya narodnogo obrazovaniya u tatar v dooktyabrskom period [Some features of the development of national education among Tatars in the pre-October period]. Kazan, 1992.

Baltanova G. R. Islam in the USSR: analysis of foreign concepts. Kazan: Kazan University Publishing House, 1991.

Brian-Bennigsen F. Mission activity in the Volga region / / Tatarstan. 1994. N 1 - 2.

Burbank D. Empire and Civil Society. Imperial construction of Russia and the Soviet Union // Imperial system of Russia in the regional dimension (XIX-XX centuries). Collection of scientific articles, Moscow, 1997.

Vorob'ev N. I. Kazan Tatars. Ethnographic study of the material culture of the pre-October period. Kazan: Tatgosizdat Publ., 1959.

Glukhov M. The fate of the Seyumbeki Guards. Kazan, 1993.

Grigoriev A. N. Christianization of non-Russian nationalities as one of the methods of the national-colonial policy of tsarism in Tataria (from the half of the XVI century to February 1917). Issue 1. Kazan, 1948.

Mentalitet i agrarnoe razvitie Rossii (XIX - XX vv) [Mentality and agrarian development of Russia (XIX-XX centuries)]. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 1996.

6 Horse meat among the baptized Tatars was widely consumed in some villages of the northern part of Zakazan and Eastern Zakamye (Mukhametshin, 1977, p. 137).

page 55

Dimitriev V. D. Rasprostranenie khristianstva i chuvashskiye narodnye massy v period feodalizma [The spread of Christianity and the Chuvash people's Masses in the period of feudalism]. 86. Cheboksary, 1978.

Zagidullin I. K. K voprosu otpadeniya kreshchennykh tatar Kazanskoi gubernii v moslomstvo 1866 goda [On the question of the fall of the baptized Tatars of the Kazan province into Islamism in 1866]. Kazan, 1990.

Iskhakov D. M. Kryasheny: istoriko-etnograficheskiy ocherk [Kryashens: a historical and ethnographic essay]. 1994. N 5 - 6.

Iskhakov D. M. K etnicheskoi i etnokul'turnoi differentiatsii tatars [On ethnic and ethno-cultural differentiation of Tatars]. Kazan, 1991.

Iskhakov D. M. From the Muslim nation to the Tatar nation. 1995. N 9 - 10.

Iskhakov D. M. Tatars (a popular essay on ethnic history and demography). Naberezhnye Chelny, 1993.

Iskhakov D. M. Tatars. A brief ethnic history. Kazan, 2002.

Iskhakov D. M. Ethnographic groups of Tatars of the Volga-Ural region (principles of selection, formation, settlement and demography). Kazan, 1993.

A brief note on the foreigners of the Volga-Kama region / / Simbirsk Diocesan Vedomosti. 1.01.1897. N 1.

Kudryashov G. E. Dynamics of polysyncretic religiosity. Cheboksary, 1974.

Kuzeev R. G. Peoples of the Volga region and the Southern Urals. Ethnogenetic view of history, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1992.

Materials for geography and statistics collected by General Staff officers. Simbirsk Province, Part 1, St. Petersburg, 1865.
Materials on the history of Tataria in the second half of the XIX century, Part 1. Moscow-L., 1936.

Mikhailova S. M., Korshunova O. N. Traditions of mutual influence of cultures of the peoples of the Volga region. Kazan: Fan Publ., 1997.

Mozharovsky A. F. Vozraschenie khoda missionerskogo dela i prosveshchenie v Kazanskom kraj s 1552 po 1867 godu [Presentation of the course of missionary work and education in the Kazan Region from 1552 to 1867].
Mukhametshin Yu. G. Tatary-kryasheny [Tatars-kryashens]. Istoriko-etnograficheskoe issledovanie material'noi kul'tury (seredina XIX - nachalo XX V.) [Historical and ethnographic research of material culture (mid-19th-early 20th centuries)].
Nikolsky N. V. Collection of historical documents about the peoples of the Volga region. Kazan, 1920.

Some features of the social structure of the Volga Tatars in the era of nation formation (late XIX - early XX centuries) // Otechestvennaya istoriya. 1998. N 5.

Prokofiev K. K istorii prosveshcheniya inorodtsev v Kazanskom kray v XVIII v. [On the history of education of foreigners in the Kazan region in the 18th century]. 1905. N 2.

Runovsky N. Ocherki istorii prosveshcheniya inorodtsev Volzhsko-Kamskogo kraya v svyazi s istorii perevoda na ikh yazyke do pervoi poloviny XIX v. [Essays on the History of education of foreigners of the Volga-Kama Region in connection with the history of translation in their language until the first half of the XIX century]. 1901. N 11.

Sagitova L. V. Istoricheskie korni i osobennosti idei natsional'nogo vozrozhdeniya u russkikh i tatar (postanovka problemy) [Historical roots and features of ideas of national revival among Russians and Tatars (problem statement)]. Kazan, 1992.

Stefanenko T. Etnopsychologiya [Ethnopsychology], Moscow: Akademicheskiy proekt Publ., 1999.
Tatar-Russian dictionary, Moscow, 1966.
Tatars of the Middle Volga Region and the Urals, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1967.

Chicherina S. V. U privolzhskikh inorodtsev [Among Volga foreigners]. Travel notes. St. Petersburg, 1905.

Uert P. Otpadenie kreshchennykh tatar [The fall of the baptized Tatars]. 1995. N 1 - 2.

Permanent link to this publication: