This article discusses the main facts about one of the leaders of the nomadic Ewenkis of Transbaikalia - Gantimur, who in 1666/67 left Qing empire and got through the process of naturalization in Russia. The author criticizes the narrative that is widespread in the state and local historical works and genealogical writings. According to it, Gantimur belonged to the Manchu ruling elite and allegedly participated in 1655 in the attack on the Russian Komarsky ostrog (fortress), located on the right bank of the Amur. Based on the analysis of a broad range of archival and published sources (petitions of Gantimur and his descendants, reports of Russian explorers and administrators, diplomatic documents drawn up during the Russian-Manchu negotiations) and historical research, it is shown, how this narrative appeared and became prevalent. The author proves that this historical myth does not correspond to real facts and was fabricated by the grandchildren of Gantimur in order to improve their status in the Russian social hierarchy and increase wealth. This article concludes by arguing that Gantimur was not part of the Manchu elite and did not take part in the Manchu campaigns on the Amur river.

The article studies the conflict between secular and church authorities over the collection of extracts from ancient manuscripts and early printed books that were found by the defenders of the Old Belief in order to prove a violation of the tradition of the Russian Church as a result of the reform of the rite and liturgical practice. Quotes from the Holy Scripture, patristic tradition, and writings of church writers constituted the “canon of sacred texts” for the Old Believers, which was, in their opinion, equivalent to the Holy Scripture. Fragments of texts systematized according to the subjects were copied and distributed as manuscripts. By the importance of the problem to overcome schism secular and church authorities joined forces to solve it. This was especially evident in the activities of the Moscow Council of Russian Orthodox Church in 1681-1682. An analysis of the Council Decree allowed us to conclude that in the Proposal to the Council Feodor III Alexeyevich very precisely outlined the jeopardy of the “canon of sacred texts”. The monarch expressed worry of secular authorities about the distribution of manuscripts that increased the influence of Old Believers. In the Response of the Council, it was decided to stop the spread of “false letters” and do it together with the secular authorities. The article draws attention to the fact that the result of efforts of secular authorities was the execution of some Old Believers’ leaders. The church also did not stand aside and published Uvet Duhovnyi. The article shows, what position the author took with respect to the “canon of sacred texts” and how it reflected in his text. It is concluded that Archbishop Afanasy tried to convince readers that the Old Believer`s manuscripts, “bogomerzkie pisanye tetradki” (heretical handwritten notes), which contained extracts from the Holy Scripture and patristic tradition, had nothing in common with the true meaning of sources. Consequently, they could not argue the deviation of the reformers from the tradition of the Russian Church. The Archbishop Afanasy insisted that only “madness” could explain the doctrine of the defenders of the Old Belief.

The article discusses the problem of establishing a permanent diplomatic mission of Peter I in the Sublime Porte. At the initiative of the envoy E. I. Ukraintsev, an article, enabling the tsar to send an ambassador for a permanent residence in Istanbul, was included in the Treaty of Constantinople (1700). After the envoy’s departure, only the Non-diplomatic ministers of the Ambassadorial prikaz (chancellery), namely translator S. F. Lavretsky, podyachy (clerk) Gr. Yudin (died in December 1700) and interpreter D. Petrov, stayed in the Ottoman capital. Translator S. Lavretsky became the head of the Russian diplomatic mission. In 1701, a messenger M. Larionov arrived in Istanbul with the tsar’s charter. According to it translator and podyachy had to stay in Istanbul until the arrival of the plenipotentiary ambassador with ratification. On the basis of the archival documents stored in the RGADA (Moscow), the author analyzes the activities of diplomatic missions in 1700-1701. The main task of the translator and the ambassador was to inform the Russian government about the political situation in the Ottoman Empire. Peter I sent the main forces of his state to the war with the Swedes, so he needed peace on the southern borders. The translator and podyachy maintained contact with ministers of the Sublime Porte, the Jerusalem Patriarch, agents, etc. They also monitored the preparation of the Sublime Porte for the arrival of the Russian plenipotentiary ambassador. Information collected from various sources regarding the situation in Istanbul, Crimea and other parts of the Ottoman Empire, as well as Western Europe, they sent to the Ambassadorial prikaz. The activities of Russian diplomats in 1700-1701 largely corresponded to the functions of the ambassadorial secretary (charge d’affaires).

For the first time in historiographe the article reconstructs the personal history of Kirill Alekseevich Naryshkin. This research is based on the personal and private letters of Naryshkin to the Tsar and Prince Alexander Menshikov. The former are extracted from various documentary collections, first of all, “Letters and Papers of Peter the Great”, the latter are found by the author in the Russian Archive of Ancient Acts and have not been studied before. The reconstruction is focused on the history of the career that was built by K. A. Naryshkin during the first one and a half decades of the 18th century. He successfully and efficiently ruled over the northwestern counties of Russia, solving the difficult tasks of endowing the Russian army, reorganizing garrison regiments, mapping and supervising fortifications on the adjoining lands of Ingria and eastern Estonia as a chief commandant (ober-komendant). However, after being appointed to the post of Moscow governor in 1716, the career of Naryshkin collapsed. Problems at work, tensions with the Senate, harassment by investigative and administrative authorities coincided with a personal drama - the death of his wife and serious property losses. The author both in the context of the general administrative situation of the era, and in line with the then established system of informal ties surrounded by Tsar Peter analyzes the reasons for the collapse of a capable and energetic manager.

The article analyzes one of the problems of interparty interaction in Russia in 1917-1924, which was not studies either intentionally or occasionally by Russian or foreign scholars. The subject of the research is the admission of socialists, who quit other parties, to the RSDLP(b) - RCP(b): more specifically who resigned the membership of Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (of Internationalists), Mensheviks, Right and Left wings of Party of Socialist-Revolutionaries, Socialist-Revolutionaries-autonomists, Union of Socialists-Revolutionaries Maximalists, Party of Revolutionary Communism, anarchists and so on. Based on the wide range of published materials, including data from the central and local periodicals, as well as unique archival sources that were added to the ever-growing aggregate of scientific knowledge for the first time, the article investigate, when, how and on what conditions former members of socialist parties (so-called “vykhodets”) were accepted for the RSDLP(b) - RCP(b) membership. The authors conclude that during 1917-1924 the conditions of admitting to Bolshevik Party changed crucially. At different moments, the Communist leadership solved different problems allowing former socialists to join the Bolshevik ranks. In 1917-1919 the admission of former socialists was initiated in order to rise the number of members of the RSDLP(b) - RCP(b), and the target audience mainly consisted of revolutionaries who had extensive experience in party and social work. After the October Revolution in 1917, the entering former members of the other parties to the Bolshevik party was considered as a tool of splitting and fragmentation of socialist parties and groups that were opponents and / or competitor for the Bolsheviks. Since the end of 1919, the admission of socialists to the RCP(b) had been gradually lost its significance as a source of recruiting and transformed mainly into an instrument for the destruction of the Mensheviks and Party of Socialist-Revolutionaries, as well as a mechanism for the adoption and incorporation of small groups with socialist and communist orientation. Since 1921, the admission of former socialists to the RCP(b) actually ceased to play the role into the process of increasing membership, but became one of the most important implement of degrading and defeating the Mensheviks and Party of Socialist-Revolutionaries. From the beginning of 1924, it was used exclusively as a factor of discrediting the socialists.

The article focuses on the problem of social and economic status of Russian émigrés in Shanghai in 1922-1925, in particular from the arrival of the Siberian flotilla to the beginning of the May Thirtieth Movement. Based on previously unexplored official records from the Shanghai Municipal Archive (SMA), Shanghai Municipal Police Files (SMPF) and the detailed research of the press, the author manages to significantly supplement the portrait of Russian émigrés’ life during the above period. The wider source base of this research, as compared those that are available for an earlier period of 1917-1922, allows us to describe the social and economic status of the émigrés in more precise terms. Statistical information from the Municipal Council of the Shanghai International Settlement evidences a high unemployment rate among the émigrés (according to the police records, it reached 71,4 % among employable men). Obviously, the humanitarian aid from the government and city communities could not satisfy needs of the unemployed. 1) At the end of 1924, Shanghai press reported the case when the Russians were sleeping in the houses without roof near the Chapei railway; 2) Shanghai was able to provide free food only for 2280 Russian refugees. However, according to statistics dated October 9, 1923 and February 1, 1924, the number of unemployed men and women reached 3 500. This means that not all Russians in Shanghai were provided with a minimum of food. As compared to 1917-1922, problems of women and street kids also persisted but due to public support child begging stopped although problems of women continued to exist until the communists came to power in Shanghai. “Russian prostitution” even became part of the Shanghai’s historical memory. A special problem during the period of 1922-1925 was poor sanitation in areas where Russian cadets lived as a result of harsh living conditions and low social and economic status (this situation wasn not recorded in the anniversary editions of Khabarovsky and Siberian Cadet Corps).

The article studies the process of changing religious policy in the context of socio-political reforms of the 1980s; analyzes the factors that contributed to the soviet religious policy and the impact of the policy’s changes on the religious life of the 1990s. It discusses the period when Russian society was continuing to looking for a consensus on the role of religion in the public and political spheres. Based on the state archives materials (The State archive of the Russian Federation and The Russian State archive of modern history) this research aims to identify the functions of the Union and Republican Councils for religious Affairs as the key institutions implementing religious policy. The author comes to the conclusion that the 1980s religious policy was manifested in the conceptual rethinking of the place of religion in everyday discourse. Changes in religious policy have caused not only a development of the relationship between the state and the faithful. They contributed to the new phenomena of soviet society, for example, certain religious groups, previously recognized as “extremist”, have become actively involved in the legal field and “normal” social activities. An important event was the celebration a millennium since the 988 Baptism of Rus’ when Gorbachev received Patriarch Pimen and other Holy Synod members inside the Kremlin. The transition to new forms and methods of interaction with religious institutions was realized. The faith reemerged into the public sphere and believers engaged in charity, education, mission and publishing. As a result of the resurgence of religious freedom and the democratization of the legal regulation regarding religious organizations was the adoption in 1990 of the new law “On freedom of conscience and religious organizations”.

The paper gives a brief overview of infrared (IR) imaging techniques and the cases of their applying to the study of ancient manuscripts and objects of cultural heritage. The method of IR reflectography is used in fine art research, which allows the visualization of details hidden by the paint layers with the help of a scanner. There are also the cases, when IR reflectography is implemented into papyrology with the purpose to make ancient papyri, that turned dark-brown, more legible. Thermography is also used both in studies of cultural heritage and written documents, such as research of bookbinding and supports. Multispectral analysis is a well-proven method of text visualization and digital restoration of ancient manuscripts, which usually is applied in palimpsest decipher. Than the paper considers the method that includes part of IR spectrum is hyperspectral analysis. It is also used in papyrology. Finally, the author observed method of near-infrared imaging (NIRI) and its use for different purposes of the source studies. The paper concludes by arguing the relevance of near-infrared analysis of paper-based historical documents as a key-element of source study. NIRI allows researchers to obtain digital copies of watermarks and investigate corrections of the text made with different inks. The paper provides reader with the technical recommendations on basic NIRI equipment. To sum up, the author declares that there is a possibility for NIRI to become an everyday routine practice for researchers in near future due to its ability to provide a basic analysis of paper, watermarks and ink.

This article raises the question about job functions and the range of duties performed by a special category of serving people in Siberia called interpreters. The analysis is based on a sample text of the oath intended to a servant, who is appointed to work as an interpreter in the Yakutsk region. The oath procedure looks as follows: the service person verbally swore honestly faithfully discharge the duties and then had to kiss the cross. This document significantly supplements the traditional range of sources used by historians to study cross-cultural and interlanguage communication as part of the process of colonization of Siberia. The text of oath is dated 1665/1666 and contains a mention of the voivode of the Yakut town. It clearly demonstrates the full breadth of duties of the Siberian interpreter. Description of his work includes military, fiscal (collecting fur tribute) and intermediary functions in various communicative situations. The role and importance of the translation service appear to be especially vital because of their responsibility for the adequacy of the translation of Russian messages to foreigners and vice versa.

The article deals with the history of the first series of the archaeographic expeditions of the Russian Academy of Sciences to Buryatia, carried out in the late 1950s - early 1960s on the initiative of the academician M. N. Tikhomirov, in accordance with the resolution of the Department of Historical Sciences of the USSR Academy of Sciences. They are known to have proved the prospects of further archaeographic work in Siberia. Six letters of the participants of the expeditions to Buryatia in 1959-1962 V. B. Pavlov-Silvansky and A. I. Rogov to the Chairman of the Archaeographic Commission academician M. N. Tikhomirov, preserved in the collection of the latter, are published. They are classified as semibusiness: the style of correspondents is mostly informal, the features required for office documentation are absent, and the main content is purely business in its nature. The letters contain important data on the history and character of the expedition itself, on the relationship with the Moscow and Ulan-Ude colleagues, on the old believers - the keepers and owners of priceless pieces of ancient Russian writing and printing, cooperation with which remains the most important direction of the archaeographic research work also at the present stage. As a result of the expeditions, a small collection of handwritten and early printed books of the 16th - early 20th centuries was formed. At first, the acquired items were accumulated in the scientific library of the Archaeographic Commission, where they were initially examined. Brief descriptions of the book acquisitions were published in the Archaeographic yearbooks. Later, it was decided to transfer this collection of manuscripts and books to the Siberian Department of the Archaeographic Commission (Novosibirsk) and add it to the Trans-Baikal regional collection of the State Public Scientific and Technical Library of the SB RAS (SPSTL SB RAS). The Appendix presents the information on the findings of these expeditions, provides inventory numbers and storage ciphers of SPSTL SB RAS based on the selected data from the descriptions of the Archaeographic yearbooks.

The paper discusses the new monograph, published in 2019 by V. A. Artamonov, well-known researcher of the Petrine epoch. His book is dedicated to studying the military conflict between Russia and Ottoman empire in 1710-1713. The author shows clearly that Ottoman Sultan Ahmed III and his commander in chief Mehmed Pasha had no plan of any invasions to Russia, but wanted just return to the borders before 1696 in the Priazovye region. Peter I, planning his expedition to Moldavia in 1711, did not take to consideration the experience of Austrian and Polish campaigns against Ottomans in the end of the 17th century. This led to encirclement and blockade of the Russian army by the Ottoman forces on the Pruth river (July 9-12, 1711). Under these conditions Peter I could not make a decision to fight, but preferred to negotiate peace, although Russian army was quite able to defeat enemy. The Ottoman side willingly agreed to make peace, which was supported by giving almost 300.000 Rubles to commander in chief Mehmed Pasha and his staff. After that Russia lost some fortresses in the Priazovye region and political influence on the Christian peoples under Ottoman rule in the Balkans. This monograph could be highly recommended for academic scholars, teachers and students of higher education institutions.