Home – Home – Jornals – Humanitarian sciences in Siberia 2022 number

V.S. Ikonnikov made a review of the critiques of the apocryphal stories in works by Maximus the Greek. The paper objective is to investigate several texts by Maximus the Greek not included mostly into the author’s codes of the learned monk that expose apocryphal contents of certain narratives. Two writings- miniatures, “An answer about the heaven’s epistle” and “Tale of Jesus Christ’s priesthood”, are the theologian responses regarding apocryphal stories. In the first brief statement, Maximus the Greek simply denies the existence of the epistle granted by God. It is known that the original text of “Tale of Jesus Christ’s priesthood” is on manuscript margins of the mid XVI century kept in the Russian State Library (fond 173/I № 57) as an autograph comment for the apocrypha by Theodosius the Jew. In such a context, the literary monument has been preserved as part of other collections of the XVI-XVII centuries. In his tale, Maximus the Greek made three statements contesting Jesus Christ’s priesthood. “The epistle to a certain man” contains the critique of the collected works “Lucidarius” sent to a certain George and translated from German. The article contains assumptions regarding the addressee’s personality, and details of two versions of the Epistle, the Slavic and Troitsk versions, known as parts of the hand-written collections of the late XVI-XVII centuries. The main feature of the Troitsk version consists in inserts of quotations from Lucidarius into the author’s text, likely made by an editor from the XVII century: they accompany the statements of Maximus the Greek and ensure their perception by the reader. The versions differ by the content amount. Another anti-apocryphal writing by Maximus the Greek “The tale of handwritten recording of sins” has been preserved in two versions, its handwriting tradition has been described.

The Petition of 1670 by the Old Believer Monk Avraamii (died 1672) is the most striking polemical work of the early Old Believers, which helped to struggle for abolishing Patriarch Nikon’s church reform. However, the study of the Petition is at an early stage nowadays, the same like a century ago. The main objective is to find out correlation of two known versions of the work. The author supposes that it is crucial to study the handwritten collection by Avraamii “The Christian Secure Shield of Faith” (1667-1669) (Avraamii included its great part in a revised form into the Petition) as well as other writings of the Monk and his associates (Deacon Fedor, Archpriest Avvakum, Geronty of Solovki) also included fragmentally into the Petition. The texts analysis allows confirming the hypothesis expressed previously by researchers that of the two currently known versions of this work the 1^st one should be recognized as the closest to the author’s text. This text version, different from the author’s one, previously published by N.I. Subbotin and most often cited in studies, has signs of purposeful processing. This makes it possible to consider the 2^nd version as a special variant of the Petition. However, the nature of its processing appears to be more complex than was thought previously. It is mainly expressed in rearrangement of the text fragments, and in several meaningful additions. It is proved that the co-creator of the Petition 2^nd version carried out coherent replacement of certain phrases and expressions. But the textological features of the 2^nd version indicate that it better preserved the text of the Petition’s sources in a number of cases. The author suggests that both versions are based on a common protograph, which means that a part of differences in the 2^nd version can be explained by individual manuscripts errors, not by the deliberate will of its creator.

The article discusses the participation and role of Archbishop Afanasy, a prominent hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, in the cases of two representatives of Russian culture of the second half of the XVII century - Peter Artemyev and Grigory Alekseevich Skibinsky. Both converted to the Catholic faith for the opportunity to study at universities in Europe, and after returning to Moscow faced persecution by the church authorities. The research material is a set of documentary and literary-journalistic texts representing a dossier on both church apostates (manuscripts of the late XVII - early XVIII centuries). The study concludes that Afanasy Kholmogorsky, despite his great distance from Moscow events, showed great interest in them and played a role in the affairs of both “apostates from piety”. Although the degree of his involvement was different in each cases. He carried out the supervisory and educational functions assigned to him by the church court in the case of Artemyev, who was exiled to Kholmogory. According to the archbishop’s replies included in the dossier, he regularly informed Patriarch Adrian about his conversations with Artemyev, a prisoner in Kholmogorsky prison, and expressed his negative opinion about the freethinker. Afanasy Kholmogorsky’s interest in the documents on the case of Grigory Skibinsky is evidenced by a note in the posthumous inventory of his library indicating that it contained some materials related to Skibinsky (at least there was his «penitential petition» addressed to Patriarch Adrian about the possibility of returning to the Orthodox Church). The author suggests that Afanasy Kholmogorsky could have become acquainted with Skibinsky case while being in Moscow for church business in 1697-1698. The archbishop’s interest in these materials may be related to the preparation of an extended edition of the book «The shield of faith» by Euphemy Chudovsky, as its curator and editor of the main text was Afanasy Kholmogorsky. Some materials related to cases of Peter Artemyev and Grigory Skibinsky were included in the additions to «The shield of faith».

The article deals with the scientific problem of understanding by the Old Believers in the XVIII century the need to justify their right for resolving issues of dogmatic theology. The first generation of the Old Belief defenders formulated the idea that after starting the church reform in Russia the humanity found itself on the verge of a catastrophe, which was assumed by Christian eschatological teaching. The country was declared to be the last frontier that defended the world from the final conquest by the Antichrist. The Vyg coomunity took advantage of this historical scheme stating that the Antichrist reigned in Russia and only the community existence retained hope to continue the mankind history. Realizing themselves as keepers of the Russian Church traditions, the Vyg community understood that the absence of priests naturally led to the inevitable transformations of the religious life. The article shows that they focused gradually on describing, or rather, forming their own traditions. Under such situation, the Vyg community was forced both to formalize its own traditions and discuss complex theological issues to justify new rules for the community’s religious life. The religious leaders wrote works devoted to solving the problems of dogmatic theology. Certainly, it was not on creating a doctrine system, but only on trying to resolve some theological issues. The analysis of “The Dogmatic Book” content compiled in the Vyg Old Believers community, led to the conclusion that this collection made an attempt to present the Old Believers’ individual works as a part of Orthodox dogmatic theology. This book’s author (Khludov`s collection, State Historical Museum, no. 272) managed to sum up the Vyg community’s views on dogmatic theology characterizing the Old Belief features.

The article introduces a new ego-document - a notebook of the merchant Andrey Konovalov from Turinsk. The notes date back to the mid XVIII century and record mainly the dates of the merchant’s movement along the rivers of Siberia to buy and sell goods. The way laid through Tyumen, Tobolsk, Samorov Yam, Surgut, Narym, Yeniseisk and other cities, but the trip’s ultimate goal was Kyakhta - the Russian-Chinese trade center. The private fur trade was forbidden that time by the state, which sent its caravans to China. Obviously, Andrey Konovalov participated in smuggling furs, so some notes were made with cryptography - transliterated in Latin. Andrei Konovalov’s notebook is one of the earliest ego-documents related to the Siberian merchant class. The records reflect the difficulties of the river route, Baikal storms. There was Chinese fabrics’ trade besides furs. In addition to business records, the book contains several family dates, a list of purchases for oneself (including icons), and a rewritten news on the discovery of Dimitri of Rostov’s relics. The document is preserved as a manuscript in the collection of Vladimir Malyshev Archive of Ancient Relics at the Institute of Russian Literature (Pushkin House) of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The second part of the manuscript is a dictionary of foreign words appeared in the Russian language and drawn from various books of the XVIII century. As a whole, the manuscript demonstrates its owner as an educated person. The publication of Turinsk Merchant’s notebook is preceded by an introductory article, restoring the chronological sequence of the entries with relevant comments. The historical context for understanding the manuscript is provided by the writings of historians and travelers of the XVIII century: Gerard Friedrich Miller, Peter Simon Pallas, Alexander Radishchev; as well as works of modern historians. The notebook gives an idea of the goods exchange at the Russian-Chinese border in Kyakhta, allows to restore the portrait of the notes’ author to some extent, to see the circle of his interests.

Forming the “journalist” profession, professional identity of press figures, development of common goals and objectives, ethical standards of author took place in the second half of the XIX century. During the period under study, journalists in Siberia were representatives of various professions, ranks, and positions. The article objective is to analyze the formation of the “journalist” profession in Siberia during the mentioned period. The research problematics correlate with the direction of “historical professionology”. The article describes approaches to studying professions in historical retrospect, presents definitions of such terms as “profession” and “Siberian journalist”. Persons who possessed literary skills, an ability to white vivid, extraordinary, succinct, but at the same time meaningful texts for newspapers, magazines, to observe the public life, started gradually to cooperate with periodicals. The authors were persons without special education, which was a feature of forming the profession and testified to incompleteness of formation of a regional group, establishing its professional boundaries. The community of journalists recruited figures from other groups of intellectuals into its ranks. The spheres of additional or main but not journalistic professional activity of authors could vary in different years under the influence of both external and internal factors. Some journalists became full-time employees, editors. Others combined journalistic work with another type of activity, which was the specifics of the profession formation. The experience gained in a different field of work favored the development of intellectuals as journalists, successful, active employees of editions. This was especially true for some scientists, teachers, doctors, officials, lawyers. Their closeness to society, interaction with the various groups of population were reflected in newspaper notes. Press employees despite their employment in other fields were recognized by fellow journalists, became members of editorial offices and were perceived as members of the journalistic group.

The paper discusses publishing strategies used by Far Eastern publishing houses at the transition stage from the state to market model (the late 1980s - early 1990s) as well as the book publishing strategies employed in the Russian Far East in the post-Soviet period (mid-1990s - early 2000s). During the transition from the book publishing state to a market model, the leading role in the Russian Far East was assigned to state and institutional publishing houses. The strategies used by them differed from those employed by private publishing houses located in western Russia. In 1986-1991, research institutes were the leaders of the Far Eastern book publishing industry, but in 1990-1991, a significant part of editions produced by Far Eastern publishing houses was science fiction and adventure genres. Therefore, the strategy of the Far Eastern publishing of this period was literary and artistic one. In 1991-1994, universities took over the leading positions in producing literature in the Far East, which indicates the presence of academic strategy. At the same time, children’s book publishing was actively developing, so traditionalist, or universal, strategy became widespread. In post-Soviet period (mid-1990s - early 2000s), since 1994-1995 till the middle of 1996, higher education institutions became the most active participants of the publishing process in the Far East, so the university strategy became decisive. In 1995-1998, concentration of media assets of various enterprises started in the Russian Far East, and some university publishing houses were transformed into publishing and printing complexes and media holdings, thus the external growth strategy was developed. In 1998-2000, the book market of the Far East formed under the effect of specific and mixed strategies, such as the strategy of launching new products on the market, which includes a strategy of focusing, or narrow specialization (regional natural history) aimed at a verified target audience of the publishing house. Since 2001, independent and online strategies have emerged, which made it possible to satisfy customers’ demand and at the same time diminish risks by reducing circulation.

The article discusses the issue of the building program by Ivan III and its place in the art history. To do this the author correlates Ivan’s personality and the list of his architectural works. The issue is studied not in frames of archaeology, but in terms of anthropology, that requires the typological approach application. The author relies on published architectural and religious materials to identify the types-symbols inherent in the Grand Duke’s building activities. Firstly, the paper studies the character and objects of private patronage of such XV century European rulers as bishop of Rome Nicholas V, Cosimo de’ Medici, Francesca Sforza, Jan Zamoyski and others. Many of them needed the state representation effective forms. Therefore, the arts patronage developed more actively during the Renaissance. Then the author turns directly to the activities of Ivan III; notes both possible borrowings and explicit recycling samples of building programs. For example, Ivan III was the patron of architects, who were parts of the New Professionalism in the Renaissance. The Russian ruler invited such architects as Aristotle Fioravanti, Aloisio the Old, Aloisio the New, Antonio Gislardi, Marco Ruffo and Pietro Antonio Solari. They were all representatives of a Renaissance type architect of the post-classical history. The fact of these Italians invitation brought the author to the dilemma of the Grand Duke’s religious and secular character. It was impossible to bypass it as Ivan III was very different from the patrons mentioned above. First of all, he was far from the Renaissance humanism. The paper concludes that Ivan’s building program has a number of unique features: its first half is medieval in style, but by design repeats the new modern trend to represent spectacularly the new power; all architectural objects are full of religious meaning, but, at the same time, it is a common case of typically secular ambitions of the ruler. Sophia Palaiologina and her entourage reinforced the influence of features of the post-classical history in her husband’s program. Therefore, the author considers that only the program’s second half should be regarded equal to its European counterparts. The five symbolic families (“Respect to the memory, deeds and glory of ancestors”, “Honor to the patron Saint”, “Vow and thanksgiving to God”, “Moscow is the third Rome”, “Care for the afterlife”) are the base of the building program typology. Thirty-nine architectural works are compiled at the summary table.

The article analyzes A.H. Chakirov’s activity (1907-1912) in the position of Usinsk border chief, who was responsible to administrate the Russian population in the Usinsk district and control Russian-Tuvan relations. The paper objective is to analyze the content and main directions of Russian-Tuvan relations during Staff Captain A.H. Chakirov’s tenure of office. The study methodology is based on the historicism principle, which allows seeing historical processes and events in their real development and interrelation. The author has used an integrated approach as well as comparative historical analysis of archival sources that provide an objective analysis and assessment of facts related to the investigation in their entirety. The source basis of the article consists of previously unpublished archival documents (reports, correspondence, etc.), which give an opportunity to rediscover main milestones in the border chief’s activities related to Tuva. It is claimed that the border chief initiated the resettlement of Usinsk old-timers to Tuva, and it was a spontaneous process. At the same time, A.H. Chakirov paid low attention to the process of rapprochement in cultural and economic terms. Rather, he was a supporter of forceful pressure, as he sought the establishing Russian guards along the Tannu-Ola ridge, setting a military garrison and expanding the Usinsk border department staff. For the first time in historiography the author described in detail the visit of Khemchik ruler M. Khaidyp to the Usinsk settlement in 1907, some important moments of consultations of Tuvan officials with A.H. Chakirov, as well as the results of the All-Tuvan meeting on Tuva self-determination. A.H. Chakirov did not consider industrial and peasant colonization as a way of peaceful annexation of Tuva to Russia. The situation’s escalation forcing the issue of the Tuva expansion led to the development of a military plan to conquer the region. The main thing for him was “a bayonet in front and a yard behind”.

The historical literature reflects the course and significance of a number of All - Union meetings of business executives in 1931-1936. However, the reasons for convening and analyzing the work of the Meeting of Senior Workers of Heavy Industry (September 20-22, 1934) remained outside the attention of researchers. The tradition of focusing on achievements and successes of the Industrial Project in the 1933-1934 overshadowed the negative phenomena in the Soviet industry, first of all, the scale of producing low-quality products, unprofitability of the heavy industry enterprises’ activity; staff turnover high rates. The country’s leadership understood the danger of maintaining such a situation in industry judging by articles in the Newspaper “Pravda” in September 1934. The precedent of the First All-Union Conference of Workers of Socialist Industry (January 30 - February 4, 1931), initiated by Stalin, suggested the format of using the experience of directors to restore order in the “socialist industry”. The analysis of the Meeting of the Leaders of Heavy Industry proceedings, published in a circulation of 15 thousand copies, allows us to draw a number of important conclusions. Representatives of the top and middle managers of Soviet industry unequivocally spoke out in favor of limiting the interference of party committees in the affairs of enterprises; opposed the assault methods of work generated by voluntarism in planning. Business executives called for expanding the enterprise rights in the fields of wages and technical rationing and establishing material incentives and technical rationing; talked about the need to abandon equalization in the field of wages. “Production commanders” pointed out the connection between the poor quality of manufactured industrial products and the everyday life of representatives of working collectives, engineering and technical personnel who lived, as a rule, in barracks; condemned cases of underfunding of housing construction. In fact, the directors’ requirements formally related to the production process became a challenge to the economic voluntarism course. The Meeting results received the support of the leadership of the People’s Commissariat of Heavy Industry, but, judging by the coverage in Newspaper “Pravda”, drew a cautious response from Stalin.

The everyday context of Akademgorodok, Novosibirsk Scientific Center of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, is considered based on memoirs the first Siberian female academics - P.Y. Kochina, T.I. Zaslavskaya, N.I. Pritvits, R.L. Berg, O.N. Marchuk. The memoirs by M.I. Cheremisina are for the first time introduced into scientific circulation. The everyday life of Akademgorodok is studied from the point of view of women’s social memory using the methodologies of gender history, history of everyday life, history of memory. Important factors in rooting women scholars in the scientific town were prospects in research career, obtaining apartments preserving the capital’s residence, special food supply, freedom and democracy in communication and cultural life. The concentration of intellectuals in Akademgorodok, their daily close communication at work and leisure caused that, firstly, the habitual understanding of the service role of women was already «challenged» by the idea of equal status with men, and secondly, in the rather narrow and isolated space of human contacts of the town, the «load» on marital ties increased. At the background of the food and housing crisis in the country, the everyday life of Akademgorodok is assessed by female scientists in a highly positive way, up to the claims that this is the best place to live in. The idea of creating competitive advantages of the new city of science according to the recipe of using the «matrix» levers of the Soviet command and distribution system for the first decade turned out to be successful.

The Academy of Sciences has consistently maintained a strategy to study Siberia and the Far East throughout its almost three hundred year-old history. Establishing the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1957 according to principles innovative for that time meant a new stage in the state scientific policy implementation. For the first time in the science history, the Siberian Branch united the scientific institution network beyond the Urals both organizationally and territorially. The evolution of developing the academic institutions was from single hospitals to complex research centers of the Siberian Branch of the USSR/RAS Academy of Sciences. Along with the scientific institution creation in the region, the system of academic libraries has been developed to form scientific collections, provide information support for research and engineering, and preserve the historical, cultural and scientific heritage. Establishing and developing the research and publishing activity of SB RAS demonstrate interesting features that indicate, on the one hand, purposeful work to create a regional publishing structure meeting the requirements of the Academy of Sciences, and, on the other hand, the Branch leadership autonomy to realize the idea of creating own publishing house becoming more self-reliant to produce scientific editions. The paper gives comprehensive analysis of structural transformations carried out in the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences in different years, adaptation of means of research information support to changing conditions, which confirms a flexible policy pursued by heads of the department and scientific institutions implementing the transformation tasks in the Academy of Sciences centered on the needs and features of scientific development in the region. The developed information support system for research meets the requirements of the time and contributes to the Siberian science achievements.

The article is devoted to the results of a scientific conference at which the problems of working with ego-documents were discussed. The work of the conference included an educational and scientific block. On the basis of the Yeltsin Center in Yekaterinburg, a series of events was held, designed for a wide audience of high school students, students and teachers of Yekaterinburg universities. The scientific program, organized at the Sinara Center’s lecture hall, consisted of six sessions. The scientific discussion, which developed on the basis of the reports sounded, included a discussion of the issues of methodology, source study and harmonization of historical and literary traditions in the study of a wide range of sources united by the common concept of “ego-documents”.