The article describes the process of formalizing the eschatological teaching among the Old Believers and attempts to refute it by Church hierarchs. The focus is on the doctrine of the ultimate destinies of the world, which gained significant support among opponents of church reform in the latter half of the 17^th century. The study demonstrates the con tinuity of ideas and the evolution of the views of the authors who explored in their works the theme of the reign of the Antichrist in the world and affirmed the idea that only the defenders of the old rite are able to serve the guarantors of the salvation of mankind. The authors built their arguments on quotations from the Holy Scriptures and their interpretations in patristic literature, explaining the facts of modern reality through them. Such constructions appeared quite convincing to the Russian population's religious consciousness, resulting in an increasing number of supporters of the Old Believer doctrine, turning the intra-church movement into a broad religious and social one. The fight against schism became relevant not only for the Church but also for secular authorities since the defenders of the old rite used the doctrine of the ultimate destinies of the world to justify their opposition towards governing bodies and solutions to social and political issues proposed by them. The Church battled against the Old Believers in alliance with the authorities. Council resolutions and legislative acts evidence this. The article concludes by arguing that the Church and authorities in the 17^th – 18^th centuries saw the main threat in the dissemination of the teachings of the Old Believers in handwritten propaganda texts, which necessarily contained a statement about the possible accession of the Antichrist in Russia. However, no attempts by the Church hierarchs to rebut the eschatological teaching of the defenders of the old rite were successful, and the religious-social movement only continued to grow. Both sides believed that eschatology played an essential role in the ideological confrontation between the Church and the Old Believers, substantiating the right to oppose the innovations brought into ritual and liturgical practice due to the reform.

The article is written mainly on the materials of military court cases from the Russian State Military Historical Archive, as well as regulatory and legislative sources. The author examines property crimes within the Russian army from a socio-cultural perspective. The author concludes that the tools and practices that served as constraints in plundering money and resources have evolved over several decades. The practice of intimidation and capital punishment, which originated under Peter I, very quickly proved to be uneffective. As a result, by the middle of the 18th century, a system was formed so that, aside from the usual financial liability of the perpetrators, criminal and disciplinary penalties, it was effectively complemented by the principle of the command vertical liability in the matter of compensation for damage, which gave it a special corporate character. A specific attitude towards damage also facilitated this. The claim arose from a specific military unit, not from the treasury. This damage could not be forgiven even by the emperor. Measures such as sequestration of the culprit’s real estate and extending material claims to their heirs further reinforced the corporate identity of the regiment’s property.

M. M. Speransky’s reform projects and notes are integral to understanding the historical development of the Russian state in the early 19^th century. They provide valuable insight into the functioning of the Russian Empire’s institutions and its modernization. These documents cover the whole range of socio-political, economic and institutional problems, strategic goals, tactical guidelines, the most important directions, successive and distinctive features of the transformative policy of the two reigns – Alexander I and Nicholas I, as well as give an idea of the specifics of reform activities of the managerial elite of this time. “A truly statesman”, Speransky was highly esteemed as a statesman by his peers due to his merging of theoretical expertise and practical administrative skills. This article delves into Speransky’s perspectives on the institutional status of the Committee of Ministers within the power structure of the Russian Empire in the first third of the 19^th century. It illustrates that his viewpoint on the Committee’s role changed based on the reform program's objectives, domestic and foreign political contexts, and strategic goals. Initially, Speransky acknowledged the Committee's role in state administration, but later during the reign on Alexander I contemplated its abolition due to overlapping functions with the State Council and the Senate. Ultimately, he proposed its transformation and integration with the Committee of Ministers.

The article delves into the problem of Russian public debt and the interaction of its financial administration with foreign creditors in the first third of the 19^th century. Existing literature appears to lack a comprehensive overview of the negotiations between the Russian government and foreign banks for loans during this period, in contrast to the wealth of publications on government and railway securities in the later part of the 19^th and early 20^th centuries. The primary objective of the author is to present projects of external loans and the makeup of creditors in connection with the empire’s public credit policy during the period of instability resulting from wars and revolutions in the early 19^th century. To accomplish this, the author references sources such as the Finance Committee journals in the Russian State Historical Archive and materials from the Collection on the History of Finance in Russia in the Manuscript Department of the Russian National Library. Of particular significance is the correlation between Russia’s foreign loans, facilitated by Ludwig Stieglitz (court banker since 1828), and the activities of his company, L. N. Stieglitz and Co., which held a prominent position in Russia owing to its trade volume. Information gleaned from sources regarding both successful and unsuccessful foreign loans to Russia suggests that during tumultuous periods in capital markets due to the wars of the early 19^th century and revolution of 1830, the government received offers not only from top bankers but also from firms with weaker credit. The Russian financial administration, for its part, sought to maintain stable long-term ties with traditional markets, with the best of foreign financiers. The author also underscores the pivotal link between the mediation of Russian state credit and the foreign trade activities of Ludwig Stieglitz's firm. In 1831, Hamburg capitalists proposed utilizing the entire exported government copper, rather than the customs revenues of the Russian Baltic ports, as collateral for a loan, with the stipulation that the copper be handled by L. Stieglitz's trading house. Commencing at least in 1838, Stieglitz initiated the dispatch of substantial quantities of copper to his personal account and to a joint account with the Rothschild frѐres, Paris; the Rothschild frѐres evolved into world bankers and substantial metal traders (copper and nickel) and invested in the transport infrastructure of many countries, including Russia, by the mid-19^th century. And despite the growth of London's financial importance since the beginning of the 19^th century and the gradual decline of Amsterdam, attempts by British competitors to undermine the monopoly position of the bankers Hope and Co. in the issue of Russian loans in the early 1830s did not meet with success.

The monetary circulation of the Russian Empire in the 1st half of the 19^th century went through several stages: from silver monometallism to the assignation monetary system and back to silver monometallism. The assignation monetary system, established in 1812, represented a unique phenomenon of world monetary circulation. The issue of internal circulation of foreign coins persisted throughout this period. Despite the prohibition of the internal circulation of foreign coins at the inception of the first silver monometallism in 1810, this regulatory decree was not consistently enforced, leading to the illicit circulation and accumulation of foreign coins. The 1830s emerged as a pivotal period during which the challenges associated with internal circulation significantly disrupted monetary turnover. Notwithstanding these obstacles, the financial management, led by Finance Minister E. F. Kankrin, demonstrated reluctance to implement drastic measures. The analysis concludes that the financial management under E. F. Kankrin did not perceive the circulation of foreign coins as a substantial threat to the Russian monetary system and exhibited hesitation in pursuing radical interventions, save for certain individuals aligned with Emperor Nicholas I.

The author examines the problem of authority abuse by officials of peasant self-government bodies in the Tomsk Governorate. While numerous studies have explored this topic, they have usually relied on statistical reports and materials from ethnographic expeditions as primary sources. Unfortunately, periodicals have been underutilized as historical sources due to the challenges of collecting and processing substantial amounts of information. Consequently, valuable insights into the maladministration of local authorities have been overlooked, as newspapers contain a wealth of related data. To address this gap, the author of the article studied all 1 111 issues of the daily newspaper “Life of Altai” from 1911 to 1914. Among these issues, 109 (10 %) contained publications about officials, including volost foremen, volost clerks, village headmen, village clerks, sotskii, and desyatskii. Only five of these notes had positive characteristics, while the rest discussed minor shortcomings and gross violations. The article concludes that the newspaper’s accusatory publications drew attention to the problem of providing personnel for local peasant selfgovernment. Officials were forced to publish refutations and adjust their behavior to maintain their positions. In cases of gross and repeated abuses, higher authorities ordered inspections, the results of which, as a rule, dismissed the peasants from their positions. The author proved that the newspaper “Life of Altai” was an effective means of combating abuses by rural and volost officials.

The article delves into the strategy and implementation of economic development in the eastern regions of Russia from the pre-war five-year plans to the “Kosygin reform”. It highlights the substantial growth in the importance of these regions in the national economy during this period. However, historical perspectives on the long-term consequences of the “Eastern shift” in the production and population proportions vary. Some researchers believe that such a course met and meets the fundamental interests of the country. Others dispute this, attributing it to excessive geopolitical ambitions and a distorted understanding of the economy’s actual needs. Based on the historiographic analysis and documentary sources, the author offers an interpretation of why the authorities prioritized the advanced economic development of the eastern territories and how they executed this strategy. It is concluded that implementation of such a course has led to a radical change in the territorial structure of production. At the same time, as the period under review drew to a close, the focus shifted from advanced development to sustaining the achieved level, resulting in a deceleration of economic growth in the eastern regions. This was primarily ascribed to the decreasing efficacy of the “socialist economic system” and the ruling elite's persistent aversion to reforming economic institutions. One overarching argument posited in the article is that there was a substantive “shift of productive forces” towards the East in the broader context of the Soviet era, coinciding with the period of the “take-off” of the Soviet industrial system. The foregoing allows us substantiating the relationship between high rates of economic growth and “intensive economic development” of the eastern regions of the country.

The article discusses the significance of leveraging historical experiences to address contemporary societal challenges, particularly the technological impact on science cities, the holistic development of human capital, and the cultivation of humanitarian resources for Russian scientific advancement. The primary objective of this work is to study in dynamics the historical and cultural aspects of the club movement, offering a comprehensive portrayal of the scientific community's life in Novosibirsk Akademgorodok during the 1960s to 1980s. Employing the problem-chronological method, an interdisciplinary approach, and the discourse of a new scientific trend of anthropology of scientific life, this study has yielded results that contribute to a broader understanding of the aforementioned subject matter. The initial stage of the club movement in 1960s was characterized by pronounced processes of sociocultural adaptation (fulfillment of the social order for communication) and political engagement aligning with scientific pursuits. In 1970s and 1980s, the club movement underwent institutionalization, integrating itself into the socio-cultural space of Akademgorodok. About 40 clubs were established, including the clubs “Under Integral”, “Babylon”, ISC Club, “Sigma”, “Sage”, “Vertical”, “Grazia”, “Aesthetics of Clothes”, as well as thematic clubs of interest. Evidencing a democratic character, the club movement in Akademgorodok served to uphold the image of Soviet science and culture. Although the Soviet state regulated the forms of political participation, the club movement was generally supported by cultural policy actors. The mobilization trend encapsulated by “Science – Culture – Art” can be interpreted as a historical and cultural blueprint of the club movement of Novosibirsk Akademgorodok, strengthening the scientific and organizational principles of the establishment of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences “Science – Personnel – Production” in 1960–1980.

The article elucidates a lesser-known facet of the eminent Soviet historian Boris Fedorovich Porshnev, whose acclaim stemmed from the publication of a study on popular movements in France before the Fronde in 1948. Choosing the path to science, B. F. Porshnev, as it turns out, tried to interpret Pushkin’s legacy on the eve of the centennial anniversary of the poet's death (1937). Upon scrutinizing Boris Porshnev’s handwritten records in the context of his life, it was ascertained that the historian had laid the groundwork, amassed copious material, and had clearly intended to pen and publish an extensive treatise on the oeuvre of A.S. Pushkin. . He had outlined a prospective publication in eleven overarching principles, which he intended to expound upon. Boris Porshnev was looking for a connection between the artistic side and the socio-political views of the poet. B. F. Porshnev was interested in the “historical foundations” of Pushkin’s work and its main themes. It seems that in formulating his 11 theses and answering the question “what about Pushkin?”, he followed the already officially declared stereotypical image, the rapidly emerging canon. The authorities envisaged leveraging the cultural capital of yore, and the historian appeared to cautiously navigate this nascent trajectory. The fundamental tenets of B. F. Porshnev’s depiction of Pushkin are as follows. Pushkin is not just a contemporary figure, but also aligned with socialism. He enjoys popularity and possesses international appeal. Examination of his works is imperative. Previous interpretations of the poet were incorrect. Two themes predominate in Pushkin’s work: the people as the creator of history and revolution. Pushkin is an implacable enemy of autocracy. The romantic idealization of revolution (rebellion), designed to subvert autocracy, is supplanted by disenchantment and the conviction that a triumphant revolution is viable in the West, where it was executed by the bourgeoisie, but impossible (“reckless”) in Russia. Pushkin ascribed the failure of the Russian revolution to the resilience of autocracy and the incapacity of the fading nobility to foment a revolution. This explication of the reasons for the revolution’s failure is deemed inaccurate. The actual cause, unbeknownst to the poet, is the absence of a proletariat in Russia.

The article analyzes the materials of the discussion of the monograph by A. B. Ranovich, “Essays of the History of the Ancient Hebrew Religion”, submitted in 1939 for defense as a doctoral thesis. These materials, previously held in the archives of the USSR Higher Attestation Commission, have not been widely circulated in the scholarly community. It is imperative to introduce these materials into academic discourse to aid in the study of the development of Soviet historical science. The materials shed light on A. B. Ranovich’s role in advancing the Soviet model for studying early Christianity. They reveal that his initial attempt to obtain the degree of candidate of sciences was unsuccessful in 1935, and he finally attained the degree in 1938. In March 1939, he successfully defended his dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences at a meeting of the Academic Council of the Faculty of History of Moscow State University. Moreover, the materials illustrate the intricate process of forming the Soviet canon of formation theory and the functioning mechanisms of the community of Soviet historians of antiquity. Specifically, Ranovich’s defense of his doctoral dissertation highlights the conflict between Moscow and Leningrad scholars, with both organizational and conceptual dimensions. The critique of Ranovich’s dissertation by V. V. Struve brings to light a new stage of debate on the formational affiliation of ancient Eastern societies, a fundamental question for Soviet historical science in the 1930s. This debate aligns with the longstanding dispute between Academician N. M. Nikolsky and V. V. Struve, wherein the deputy editor-in-chief of JAH took the position of Academician N. M. Nikolsky.

The article analyzes the letters of specialists in Russian history of the 17^th – 19^th centuries who sent correspondences to their colleagues in Moscow. The reason these letters are being analyzed is because, due to the distance and communication methods available at the time, correspondence was the main way for Siberian scholars to communicate with the representatives of the important scientific centers, to stay updated on the latest research trends and discoveries. During this era, authors were comparatively unrestricted in their statements, and their internal and external interactions were diverse and significant. Historians from Siberia and Moscow used to correspond on scientific and organizational matters through letters. The topics of discussions included participation in scientific conferences, invitations, opportunities for business trips, publications, cooperation, and reviews. The scholars shared their professional thoughts, ideas, and plans, characterized the sources they found and analyzed, expressed hypotheses and explained preliminary conclusions, reported the outcomes of research, and sometimes talked about the progress in their research projects and the development in their understanding of scientific problems. The letters often described events in the scientific careers of the authors. The content and emotional tone of the correspondence were significantly influenced by the author's character and relationship with the addressee. The letters often contained information of both scientific and personal nature. Sometimes, Siberian scientists requested assistance and help from their colleagues from the capital. The article concludes that letters were a reliable and effective communication channel among the professional community of historians. They were used to convey scientific, business, and occasionally personal information. The recipients of these letters were typically scholars from Moscow who were older in age and higher in status. As a reference group, they played a significant role in determining the specifics of the letters addressed to them.

The article addresses the challenges associated with research in the field of gender and women’s history in Kazakhstan over the last decade. Primarily, historians have focused on women’s history, examining topics such as the role of women in traditional Kazakh society, the women’s emancipation in the USSR, women’s daily life, family and marriage relations, and women’s education. There remains a lack of clear differentiation between women’s studies and gender studies in historical works in Kazakhstan, as most authors use these terms synonymously. A significant portion of the research on the women’s and gender history of Kazakhstan is based on archaeology, ethnography, and the theme of “women and war”. However, in recent years, there has been a transition towards gender history, led by the scientific school of Professor Roza Zharkynbayeva from Al-Farabi Kazakh National University. Professor Zharkynbayeva’s work critically analyzes gender roles and power hierarchies regarding such topics as women and the Second World War, the heroism of women in the rear, women’s toponymy, women’s museums, and history textbooks. The article presents the results of bibliographic research that organizes the contributions of Kazakhstani scientists on women and gender issues.