Suchergebnisse

The authors analyze the memoirs of an Orenburg Cossack troop's lieutenant colonel, Nikolai Vasilyevich Agapov (1821 - ?) Records of a Cossack in Military Service, which he wrote following his retirement (supposedly, in the 1880 – 1890s). The memoirs reflect the versatile world of Cossack life in the 19th century, which helps construct the system of spiritual bases of Cossack culture. The authors consider the work in question a valuable source for the study of extreme conditions of everyday camp life of Orenburg Cossacks. The original of the manuscript is kept in the State Archive of Orenburg Region in the private fund of S.N. Sevastyanov. The complete text of the naïve narrator was first published in 2013. When quoting N.V. Agapov's manuscript, the authors preserve the individual features of his writing. ; Анализируются воспоминания подполковника Оренбургского казачьего войска Николая Васильевича Агапова (1821 – ?) «Записи служивого казака», созданные им после выхода в отставку (предположительно в 1880–1890-е гг.), которые передают многогранный мир казачьей повседневности XIX в., позволяют выстроить систему духовных координат казачьей культуры. Авторы считают, что сочинение является ценным источником по изучению экстремальных условий повседневной походной жизни оренбургских казаков.Оригинал рукописи хранится в Государственном архиве Оренбургской области в личном фонде С. Н. Севастьянова. В полном объеме текст наивного автора впервые опубликован отдельным изданием в 2013 г. При цитировании рукописи Н.В. Агапова сохраняются особенности авторского письма.

Статья посвящена археографической экспедиции известного башкирского политика и ученого Ахмет-Заки Валидова (1890-1970), известного в западной историографии под турецким псевдонимом Ахмедзаки Велиди Тоган, в Ферганскую долину, организованной Казанским университетом в 1913 г. Рассмотрены причины и маршрут поездки, проведен анализ наиболее важных рукописных книг, обнаруженных ученым в личных библиотеках среднеазиатских интеллигентов. Все письменные источники, встретившиеся ему, условно можно разделить на две группы: жизнеописания местных мусульманских святых и исторические сочинения времен Кокандского ханства. По ним Валидов написал свои работы «Восточные рукописи в Ферганской области» и «Некоторые данные по истории Ферганы XVIII столетия». Среди значимых находок более раннего периода - рукопись «Благодатное знание» и перевод Корана на тюркский язык, относящийся к X в. Сделан обоснованный вывод, что ранняя исследовательская деятельность А.-З. Валидова сыграла большую роль в выявлении и изучении новых источников, содержащих ценные сведения по политической истории, этнографии и духовной культуре народов Центральной Азии, в особенности киргизов, казахов и узбеков.DOI 10.14258/izvasu(2018)2-14 ; The article is devoted to the archaeographic expedition of the famous Bashkir politician and scientist Ahmetzaki Validov (1890-1970), known in Western historiography under the Turkish pseudonym Ahmed Zeki Velidi Togan, to the Fergana Valley, organized by the Kazan University in 1913. The consideration is given to the reasons and a route of the trip, the analysis has been conducted of the most important handwritten books found out by the scientist in personal libraries of the Central Asian intellectuals. All written sources that he encountered can be conditionally divided into two groups: biographies of local Muslim saints and historical works of the times of the Kokand Khanate which Validov used to write his works "Oriental Manuscripts in the Fergana Region" and "Some Data on the History of Fergana in the 18th Century". Among the significant findings of an earlier period are the manuscript "Blessed Knowledge" and the translation of the Koran into the Turkic language, dating back to the 10th century. The conclusion is made that the early research activity of A.-Z. Validov played a great role in identifying and studying new sources containing valuable information on the history of the peoples of Central Asia, especially the Kirghiz, Kazakhs and Uzbeks.DOI 10.14258/izvasu(2018)2-14

The article presents one of the masterpieces of Renaissance Ferrara illumination – the Breviary of Ercole I d'Este (1502–1505). This manuscript was created during the active development of printing, and this fact underlines its special status and importance for the customer, and also demonstrates the stability of artistic traditions at the Ferrara court. At the same period – the first years of the 16th century – the artistic language of the Early Renaissance was changed for completely different traditions of the High Renaissance art. First of all, it was expressed in the leading role of classical motifs. The Breviary of Ercole I demonstrates the development of the classical tradition in Ferrara illumination. The article presents the manuscript in the context of the court culture of Renaissance Ferrara, providing the stylistic and iconographic analysis of the manuscript decor. The creation of the Breviary of Ercole I reflected the identity of his customer, Duke Ercole I d'Este, who contributed to the development of the humanistic culture in Ferrara. At the same time, Ercole I was a very religious man, and his personal religiosity became an important virtue of a ruler. Matteo da Milano, a representative of the Lombard school of book illumination, characterized by the classical ornamental decoration, created the most impressive elements of the manuscript decor. Besides him, there were other artists to decorate the Breviary, but their miniatures are more connected with the 15th century local tradition. In the art of Ferrara, the classical tradition took part of the «politics of magnificence». The abundance of classical motifs in this manuscript, thus, could be the goal of the customer who wished to glorify himself in this special way.

"The History of Bukhara", written by Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ja'far Narshakhi (943-944 CE, with some addendums from 12th c. translators) has long been used as the main source for the study of Central Asian political, economic, urban and socio-cultural life in the early medieval period. The previous research on Central Asian urbanity emphasizes the role of the sedentary population of the cities in the larger Soghdiana region. Using Narshakhi's narrative as the main source, this paper investigates how the symbiotic relation of nomadic Turks and sedentary Sogdians impacted the emergence and the rise of pre-Islamic and Islamic Central Asian cities, and how this influence was manifest in such cities as Bukhara. By viewing Narshakhi's narrative in the light of Byzantine and Chinese sources, and comparing the different translations of the manuscript, this new paper sheds light on the nomad-sedentary relationship of Central Asian people in the urban milieu and beyond. This new perspective on Narshakhi's narrative will advance the readers' understanding of that nomad-sedentary relationship which is present in the political debates between modern-day Uzbeks and Tajiks – those who have inherited the civilization of medieval Central Asia. ; «История Бухары», написанная Абу Бакром Мухаммадом ибн Джафаром Наршахи (943–944 гг. н. э., с некоторыми добавлениями от переводчика12-го вв.), уже давно используется в качестве основного источника для изучения политических и экономических событий, городской и социально-культурной жизни Центрально Азиатских городов в раннем средневековье. Предыдущие исследования по урбанизации в Центральной Азии подчеркивают роль оседлого населения городов в регионе Согдиана. Используя манускрипт Наршахи в качестве основного источника, автор статьи рассматривает, как симбиотическое отношение кочевых Турок и оседлых Согдийцев повлияло на возникновение и рост доисламских и исламских Центрально Азиатских городов и как это взаимовлияние отражалось в урбанистической морфологии городов Централной Азии в примере Бухара. «История Бухары» в свете Византийских и Китайских источников проливает свет на отношения кочевников и оседлого населения в городской среде и за ее пределами. Эта новая перспектива книгу Наршахи будет способствовать пониманию особенности кочевого и оседлого отношения, которое присутствует в политических дебатах между современными узбеками и таджиками – те, кто унаследовал цивилизацию средневековой Средней Азии.

K. Ermishina's review of Teresa Obolevich's Semyon Frank, Lev Karsavin and the Eurasians (Pontifical University of John Paul II, Krakov, 2020) highlights the strengths and shortcomings of Obolevich's presentation of the figures of the Eurasinist movement. The author of review states that a thorough investigation of Eurasianism should not only be conducted on the basis of personal letters exchanged by members of the movement living in different locations, but that is necessary to incorporate formal manuscripts and published work for proper research of the movement and its authors, since only articles and books fully express the ideas of the Eurasianists. The author of review does not support the research position, refers Frank to "Russian European" and the Eurasianists as the deniers of Western culture. The review highly appreciates Obolevich's work with archival sources and the use of rich personal correspondence from the archives of Russia, Europe and the United States.

The purpose of this study is a textual analysis of a Russian translation of a Polish pamphlet, a parody of the prayer "Our Father", which was found among documents from 1671–1673 in the archive of the Ambassadorial Chancery (Posol'skii prikaz). The actual source of the translation was not found, but since any study of a translated text must include an analysis of its connection with the original, it was first of all necessary to pay attention to the known copies of the Polish pamphlet "Ojcze nasz krolu polski Janie Kazimierzu" ("Pacierz dworski"), since one of its now most probably lost copies was translated into Russian. "Ojcze nasz krolu polski Janie Kazimierzu" is a Polish political parody from the middle of the 17th century (probably 1665), directed against King John II Casimir Vasa. The article investigates the history of its creation, describes its form, content, and genre, discusses its literary value, the Polish tradition of parodying religious texts, and analyzes the versions of the pamphlet. As a result, it was possible to reveal some new details about the anonymous author and the time when the work was written, the number and character of the preserved copies, the correlation between manuscript variants and their later editions. A comparative analysis of seven different textual variants of the Polish pamphlet made it possible to find a version which is textually – and perhaps even genetically – close to the Russian translation (a copy of the family saga "Sylva rerum Szyrmów"). Particular attention is paid to the interpretation of Polish translation parody in mid-17th century Russian culture, the possible reasons why this Polish political pamphlet caught the attention of the Russian translator (reader), and the functional transformation of the occasional political pamphlet into a parody with a political theme and a more explicit humoristic component. The appendix provides a parallel publication of the Polish pamphlet from the family saga "Sylva rerum Szyrmów" and the Russian translation from the archive of the Ambassadorial Chancery. ; Enlish title: A Polish Parody of "Our Father" from the Middle of the 17th Century and its Russian Translation: in Search of an Unknown Polish Source

The present article studies the early notes by Andrej Belyj (1899). The
manuscript was partially published by A.V. Lavrov; however, fragments, which
contained mathematical formulae and equations used by Andrey Belyj to prove his
ideas, were omitted. Young Boris Bugaev was under a strong infl uence of his father,
professor N.V. Bugaev, whose theory of 'arhythmology', that combined maths, logic
and philosophy, resonated not only with the world of science, but also with the
Russian culture of the early 20th century. Among Bugaev's followers was P. Florenskij,
who developed professor's idea in his thesis On the Peculiarities of Flat Curves as
Places of Interrupted Discontinuity (1904). Lena Szilard points out that there is a
strong connection between Andrej Belyj's literary articles and P. Florenskij's works
on maths. Relevance of the published material is supported by continued interest of
researchers to both the 'Andej Belyj and Pavel Florenskij' issue and works by V. Khlebnikov, whose 'zaum' also has strong links to maths. The extract from Anrej Belyj's
notes is preceded by a brief introduction, which reviews papers on B. Bugaev's diaries
for the year 1899 and summarizes L. Szilard's articles comparing Andrej Belyj's
literary works, P. Florenskij's philosophy and V. Khlebnikov's 'zaum'. The published
notes contain B. Bugaev's argument on lyric and epic explanations of the essence
of things in art and his idea that the two approaches are connected with subjective
and objective methods respectively. Andrej Belyj proves that the predominance
of emotions in a literary work cannot be used as a criterion for attributing it to 'lyric' and 'subjective' and shows how the value of an artistic work can be assessed using
mathematical equations.

Within the framework of the writer associations' archives digitization project 'Transcript': Politics and Literature. The Digital Archive of Literary Organizations of the 1920s-1930s a significant array of questionnaires of proletarian writers was studied. The source is stored in the Department of Manuscripts of A.M. Gorky Institute of World Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences. At the moment, the project executors have digitized the questionnaires filled out by members of the Moscow Association of Proletarian Writers (MAPW), All-Russian Association of Proletarian Writers (RAPW), All-Soviet Association of Proletarian Writers (SAPW), Russian Association of Proletarian Writers (RAPW) and presented on the project's website. The documents from RAPW fund were allocated separately. We have found information about the delegates of the First Congress of Proletarian Writers, held from April 28 to May 8, 1928 in Moscow. While analyzing the questionnaires, valuable information about the biographies and works of writers whose names were not included in encyclopedias and reference books was obtained. In terms of the sociology of the literary process the answers given by the respondents indicate important characteristics of those who had to build the culture of the socialism country. These questionnaires form the Big Data, representing the 'average' biography of the proletarian writer, the main actor of the literary process of 1920-1930. The generalized characteristic brings out specific features of the mass literature phenomenon in the context of the Soviet project, which was implemented by the proletarian literary associations. The statistical data open up prospects for further research of literary processes of this period in the anthropology field. The analyzing of the sources stored in the funds of proletarian writers' associations will allow not only to see the actor of the literary process, but also to get closer to understanding the mass writer and mass literature of the Soviet era phenomenon.

The female image presented in the small painting "Allegory of Music" by Filippino Lippi (Gemaeldegalerie, Berlin) is most likely associated with the plot of a theatrical performance played out in 1475 in Pesaro on the occasion of the wedding of Costanzo Sforza and Camilla of Aragon. Th e similarity of the attributes of the heroine with the attributes of the muse Erato, who greeted the newlyweds, was pointed out by A. Warburg, who placed two images, the Filippino board and an illustration from the Vatican manuscript containing the text of the wedding performance, next to each other in his "Mnemosine Atlas". It is impossible to substantiate this version with documents, but the Florentine artist, who nominally interprets the plot differently from the anonymous northern Italian miniatur-ist, could be familiar with the description of the celebration, known not only from illustrated lists, but also from printed brochures. Th e origins of the "Allegory of Music" are traditionally traced to a wedding commission — on the occasion of the marriage of Giovanni Vespucci and Namicina Nerli in 1500 — which also included paired spalliers depicting "History of Lucretia" and "History of Virginia" by San-dro Botticelli and a panel by Piero di Cosimo displaying bacchanalia. Th e present article advances arguments in favor of this version, building on other episodes of cooperation between Botticelli and Filippino Lippi, both between the two of them and with the two intermarried Florentine families. Th e painting in question contains elements that may indicate its connection with the wedding ritual. It is impossible to establish how all the listed panels were arranged in the interior. How-ever, on the whole, this alleged ensemble, designed in the all'antica style, could be thought of as a glorification of sublime and chaste love. Th e theme, traditional for the decoration of the matrimonial bedroom, is eleborated simultaneously in brutal scenes from Roman history, which in Florentine artistic culture were laden with explicit republican connotations, as well as in small-scale mythological "poetry", that soft ens political accents and, moreover, can be associated with a magnificent princely wedding, glorifying the nobility of the newlyweds.

The purpose of this study is a textual analysis of a Russian translation of a Polish pamphlet, a parody of the prayer "Our Father", which was found among documents from 1671–1673 in the archive of the Ambassadorial Chancery (Posol'skii prikaz). The actual source of the translation was not found, but since any study of a translated text must include an analysis of its connection with the original, it was first of all necessary to pay attention to the known copies of the Polish pamphlet "Ojcze nasz krolu polski Janie Kazimierzu" ("Pacierz dworski"), since one of its now most probably lost copies was translated into Russian. "Ojcze nasz krolu polski Janie Kazimierzu" is a Polish political parody from the middle of the 17th century (probably 1665), directed against King John II Casimir Vasa. The article investigates the history of its creation, describes its form, content, and genre, discusses its literary value, the Polish tradition of parodying religious texts, and analyzes the versions of the pamphlet. As a result, it was possible to reveal some new details about the anonymous author and the time when the work was written, the number and character of the preserved copies, the correlation between manuscript variants and their later editions. A comparative analysis of seven different textual variants of the Polish pamphlet made it possible to find a version which is textually — and perhaps even genetically — close to the Russian translation (a copy of the family saga "Sylva rerum Szyrmów"). Particular attention is paid to the interpretation of Polish translation parody in mid-17th century Russian culture, the possible reasons why this Polish political pamphlet caught the attention of the Russian translator (reader), and the functional transformation of the occasional political pamphlet into a parody with a political theme and a more explicit humoristic component. The appendix provides a parallel publication of the Polish pamphlet from the family saga "Sylva rerum Szyrmów" and the Russian translation from the archive of the Ambassadorial Chancery. DOI:10.31168/2305-6754.2018.7.2.4 ; Цель исследования — текстологический анализ русского перевода польского памфлета-пародии на молитву «Отче наш», обнаруженного среди документов Посольского приказа 1671–1673 гг. Источник перевода в архивном деле не найден. Изучение сохранившихся списков польского памфлета "Ojcze nasz krolu polski Janie Kazimierzu" ("Pacierz dworski") показало, что именно он является оригиналом русского перевода. Эта польская политическая пародия на молитву, написанная «на случай» и направленная против короля Яна II Казимира Вазы, датируется серединой XVII в. (вероятно, 1665 г.). В статье реконструируется история ее создания, дается формально-содержательная и жанровая характеристика, обсуждается ее художественная ценность в контексте польской традиции пародирования религиозных текстов, анализируются редакции и варианты памфлета. В результате нам удалось пролить свет на новые данные, касающиеся вопросов авторства текста и времени создания сочинения, количества и характера сохранившихся списков, соотношения рукописных вариантов и позднейших их изданий. Сравнительный анализ семи вариантов польского памфлета позволил обнаружить версию, текстуально и, возможно, даже генетически близкую русскому переводу (список из домашней хроники Ширмов "Sylva rerum Szyrmów"). Особое внимание в статье уделяется осмыслению положения польской переводной пародии в русской культуре середины XVII в., а также возможных причин внимания русского переводчика (читателя) к польскому политическому памфлету. Результатом трансмиссии польского текста в Россию становится его функциональная трансформация из политического в «курьезный», с более выразительной смеховой доминантой. В приложении публикуется польский памфлет из домашней хроники Ширмов с разночтениями по другим шести спискам и русский перевод из архива Посольского приказа. DOI:10.31168/2305-6754.2018.7.2.4

Поступила в редакцию: 27.12.2019. Принята к печати: 14.07.2020. ; Submitted: 27.12.2019. Accepted: 14.07.2020. ; В 1916 г. Ф. Сологуб в рамках гастролей с лекцией «Россия в мечтах и ожиданиях» посетил Урал: в феврале — Уфу и Челябинск, в октябре — в Екатеринбург и Пермь. Лекция была посвящена провиденциальной роли символизма в истории, в ней утверждалась его необходимость и насущность, но ввиду обстоятельств войны акцент был смещен в сторону патетических рассуждений о русском мессианизме и «русской» темы в классической поэзии и поэзии модернизма. В настоящей статье восстанавливаются подробности поездки поэта по Уралу, детали организации его выступлений на местах, анализируются отклики провинциальной прессы (газеты «Уфимская жизнь», «Зауральский край», «Голос Приуралья», «Пермская жизнь» и др.), дополненные документами, хранящимися в архиве Ф. Сологуба в Рукописном отделе ИРЛИ РАН (письма, открытки, телеграммы, конспекты и черновики лекции, рукописи стихотворений). Особое место уделено газетным статьям, фельетонам, развернутым откликам на выступления. Большинство из представленных авторов посчитали мысли Сологуба несвоевременными, неуместными, не имеющими отношения к военной и предреволюционной действительности. Каждый из авторов вольно или невольно создал информационный повод для выражения собственной точки зрения и общей точки зрения редакции на «мечты и ожидания» в нестабильное для страны время. Также в статье впервые публикуются выдержки из писем Сологубу поэта и публициста С. В. Виноградова и журналиста и публициста И. С. Ушакина. Устанавливается, что одно из стихотворений Сологуба было написано на Урале во время путешествия в поезде. ; In 1916, Fyodor Sologub visited the Urals as part of a tour with the lecture Russia in Dreams and Expectations. He came to Ufa and Chelyabinsk in February and to Yekaterinburg and Perm in October. The enthusiastic and patriotic lecture was dedicated to the providential role of symbolism in world history. It claimed that the existence of symbolism was essential and necessary, however, in view of the circumstances of war, the emphasis shifted towards emotional reflection on Russian messianism. This article restores the details of the tour, the organisation of local performances, and analyses the reaction of the provincial press to the lecture (newspapers Ufimskaia Zhizn', Zauralski Kray, Golos Priural'ia, Permskaia Zhizn', etc.). These materials are supplemented by documents kept in the Sologub archive of the Institute of Russian Literature of the RAS (letters, postcards, telegrams, lecture notes, and manuscripts of poems). Special attention is paid to newspaper articles, feuilletons, and detailed reactions to Sologub's performances. Most of the authors considered Sologub's thoughts to be untimely, irrelevant, and not related to military and pre-revolutionary reality. The lecture was an opportunity for them to explain their own points of view on "dreams and expectations" of Russia. The article contains previously unpublished excerpts from letters to Sologub from Sergey Vinogradov and Ivan Ushakin. In addition, it is established that one of Sologub's poems was written in the Urals. ; The work is part of research project 19-78-10095 "Industrial Identity of Russian Territories: The Regional Communities and Discourse of Urals in the Culture of the 18th–20th Centuries" supported by a Russian Science Foundation grant. ; Исследование выполнено за счет гранта Российского научного фонда (проект № 19-78-10095 «Индустриальная идентичность территорий России: уральские региональные сообщества и дискурс об Урале в культуре XVIII–XX вв.»).

This article focuses on the participation Bashkirs took in the development of Transvolga Region. The lands in Samara Province were the most western ones in Russia where the Bashkir population lived compactly. Historical studies of the region and the population living there between the eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth centuries refer to documents of central and local archives, manuscripts of the Russian National Library, etc. Critical analysis of sources and historiography and the application of modern techniques of local and ethnic history allows the author not only to solve research problems, but also look at the past while constructing historical and cultural memory. In the "imperial period", the problem of correlating the ethnic and local history was complicated by the resettlement of peoples in different territories over considerable distances. The transformation of Volga Region into an internal Samara province of the empire, on the one hand, was due to the mobilisation of part of the estates of Bashkir lands, which occurred both forcibly and voluntarily. On the other hand, the loss by the Bashkirs of mostly remote and underutilised Transvolga estates was compensated for by receiving the status of a military service class, the presence of self-government, and the possibility of modernising the economy, culture, and life. As a result, the territories of the ethnos's settlement were preserved and expanded, its undoubted numerical growth took place, amounting to more than a tenfold increase over two centuries nationwide. In the middle of the nineteenth century, about 50 thousand Bashkirs lived in Transvolga Region. The author provides a definition of the "imperial people" on the basis of active participation in the genesis of the empire, especially in the process of including "peripheral lands". The Bashkirs are certainly an "imperial people" and Samara Transvolga Region is one of the "peripheral lands" included in the economic, political, and multicultural space of the Russian Empire, which was important for the further development of the entire multi-ethnic country. ; Статья посвящена участию башкир в освоении Заволжья. Земли в Самарской губернии были самыми западными в России, где компактно проживало башкирское население. Изучение вопросов истории этого края в XVIII — первой половине XIX в. и обитавших на них жителей обеспечено документами центральных и местных архивов, Отдела рукописей Российской национальной библиотеки, другими источниками. Критический анализ источников и историографии, использование современных приемов локальной и этнической истории позволяют обратиться к прошлому народов региона при конструировании их исторической и культурной памяти. В «имперский период» проблема соотношения этнической и локальной истории усложняется в силу расселения народов на значительные расстояния и по разным территориям. Установлено, что превращение Заволжья во внутреннюю губернию империи (Самарскую), с одной стороны, произошло за счет мобилизации части вотчинных башкирских земель, происходившей как принудительно, так и добровольно. С другой стороны, утрата башкирами в основном отдаленных и малоиспользуемых заволжских владений была компенсирована получением статуса военно-служилого сословия, наличием самоуправления, возможностью модернизации хозяйства, культуры и быта. Как результат, сохранились и даже расширились территории расселения этноса, произошел его несомненный численный рост. В Заволжье в середине XIX в. проживало около 50 тыс. башкир. За два столетия в масштабах всей России произошло более чем десятикратное увеличение их численности. При определении «имперских народов» по признаку активного участия в генезисе империи, особенно в процессе включения в нее окраинных земель, к их числу, безусловно, относятся башкиры. В свою очередь, Самарское Заволжье оказалось среди «имперских окраин», с участием в том числе башкир, включенных в хозяйственное, административное, поликультурное пространство России, что имело большое значение для дальнейшего развития всей многонациональной страны.

Submitted: 20.05.2020. Accepted: 28.09.2020. ; Поступила в редакцию: 20.05.2020. Принята к печати: 28.09.2020. ; Статья посвящена участию башкир в освоении Заволжья. Земли в Самарской губернии были самыми западными в России, где компактно проживало башкирское население. Изучение вопросов истории этого края в XVIII — первой половине XIX в. и обитавших на них жителей обеспечено документами центральных и местных архивов, Отдела рукописей Российской национальной библиотеки, другими источниками. Критический анализ источников и историографии, использование современных приемов локальной и этнической истории позволяют обратиться к прошлому народов региона при конструировании их исторической и культурной памяти. В «имперский период» проблема соотношения этнической и локальной истории усложняется в силу расселения народов на значительные расстояния и по разным территориям. Установлено, что превращение Заволжья во внутреннюю губернию империи (Самарскую), с одной стороны, произошло за счет мобилизации части вотчинных башкирских земель, происходившей как принудительно, так и добровольно. С другой стороны, утрата башкирами в основном отдаленных и малоиспользуемых заволжских владений была компенсирована получением статуса военно-служилого сословия, наличием самоуправления, возможностью модернизации хозяйства, культуры и быта. Как результат, сохранились и даже расширились территории расселения этноса, произошел его несомненный численный рост. В Заволжье в середине XIX в. проживало около 50 тыс. башкир. За два столетия в масштабах всей России произошло более чем десятикратное увеличение их численности. При определении «имперских народов» по признаку активного участия в генезисе империи, особенно в процессе включения в нее окраинных земель, к их числу, безусловно, относятся башкиры. В свою очередь, Самарское Заволжье оказалось среди «имперских окраин», с участием в том числе башкир, включенных в хозяйственное, административное, поликультурное пространство России, что имело большое значение для дальнейшего развития всей многонациональной страны. ; This article focuses on the participation Bashkirs took in the development of Transvolga Region. The lands in Samara Province were the most western ones in Russia where the Bashkir population lived compactly. Historical studies of the region and the population living there between the eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth centuries refer to documents of central and local archives, manuscripts of the Russian National Library, etc. Critical analysis of sources and historiography and the application of modern techniques of local and ethnic history allows the author not only to solve research problems, but also look at the past while constructing historical and cultural memory. In the "imperial period", the problem of correlating the ethnic and local history was complicated by the resettlement of peoples in different territories over considerable distances. The transformation of Volga Region into an internal Samara province of the empire, on the one hand, was due to the mobilisation of part of the estates of Bashkir lands, which occurred both forcibly and voluntarily. On the other hand, the loss by the Bashkirs of mostly remote and underutilised Transvolga estates was compensated for by receiving the status of a military service class, the presence of self-government, and the possibility of modernising the economy, culture, and life. As a result, the territories of the ethnos's settlement were preserved and expanded, its undoubted numerical growth took place, amounting to more than a tenfold increase over two centuries nationwide. In the middle of the nineteenth century, about 50 thousand Bashkirs lived in Transvolga Region. The author provides a definition of the "imperial people" on the basis of active participation in the genesis of the empire, especially in the process of including "peripheral lands". The Bashkirs are certainly an "imperial people" and Samara Transvolga Region is one of the "peripheral lands" included in the economic, political, and multicultural space of the Russian Empire, which was important for the further development of the entire multi-ethnic country.

International audience ; In the mid-19th century, Emperor Alexander II was carrying out large scale liberal reforms in Russia. In the course of these reforms, a problem was put forward about public preservation of historical monuments and archaeological sites as national cultural heritage. A step to this direction was undertaken in 1859 when the Imperial Archaeological Commission (IAC) was organized in Saint-Petersburg. Over the second half of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, the Commission remained the single State body concerned with archaeology and protection of sites and monuments on the territory of Russian Empire. In its activities, this Institution combined scientific research, organizational, monitoring and controlling functions. In the present monograph mainly created by the collective of the Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, the history of the first archaeological institution in Russia is systematically presented and analysis of its activities proposed for the first time. The organization of IAC was preceded by a long process of formation of the interest of the Russian society to the archaeology. The immediate precursor of IAC was the "Office of Archaeological Researches" founded in 1841 by the Minister for Home Affairs Lev Perovsky (1796–1856). The activities of the Office were concerned with investigations of archaeological sites of Kerch and Bosporos, Chersonesos, kurgans in the surroundings of Vladimir and Suzdal and settlements of the Golden Horde on the Volga River. During this period, the main principles which afterwards lay in the foundation of IAC were established. After the death of Lev Perovsky, the investigations were entrusted to Count Sergey Stroganov (1794–1882). The result of this appointment was that the assistant of Lev Perovsky and his nephew Count Alexey Uvarov (1824–1884), who planned to stand himself at the head of Russian archaeology, left Saint-Petersburg and moved to Moscow where in 1864 he founded the Moscow Archaeological Society in opposition to the Imperial Archaeological Commission. The confrontation between two Institutions however became actually a stimulus for the progressive advancement of the science and protection of monuments of antiquity. In 1857, Sergey Stroganov proposed to organize the "Main Archaeological Commission". That project became the basis of IAC, the statute of which was approved on February 2, 1859, by Emperor Alexander II. That statute secured for the Commission the right to conduct "earthen excavations", monitoring of the discoveries of hoards and archaeological objects in Russia and supervision over building activity at archaeological sites. The principles underlying the foundation of IAC were partly oriented to France and its "Commission des Monuments Historiques" (1837). The experience of the activities of IAC was used in organizing archaeological institutions in some European countries (Austria, Italy). The activity of IAC may be subdivided through three periods connected with its chairmen: 1859–1882 when Sergey Stroganov was the chairmen of IAC, 1882–1886 when it was headed by the Director of the Imperial Hermitage Museum Alexander Vasil'chikov (1832–1890), and 1886–1918 when the Commission was directed by Count Alexey Bobrinskoy (1852–1927). Originally, the staff of the Commission consisted of eight persons. In the activity of the Commission, such famous historians and archaeologists took part as Ivan Zabelin (1859–1876), Vladimir Tiesenhausen (1825–1902) and Nikodim Kondakov (1876–1891). Initially, the Commission was housed in the palace of Stroganov in Nevsky Prospect in Saint-Petersburg. The activities of the Commission have established the system of regulation of archaeological researches in Russia, which with several alterations existed until the beginning of the 21st century. This system was based on the "Otkryty list" (laissez-passer) as individual authorizations for researchers to conduct excavations with the indispensable submission of a report to the archives of the Commission. This practice has initiated the creation of the unique corpus of sources for the archaeology, architectural monuments and sites of different nations and modern states of East-Central Europe and Asia. The main activity of the Commission in 1859–1886 included excavations of sites of the Scythian culture and Classical Greek antiquities on the Taman Peninsula, in the Crimea (Kerch, Bosporos) and on some other territories, now in Ukraine. Nevertheless, the widespread opinion that the Commission studied exclusively the Classical and Scythian antiquities is incorrect: already then the first investigations in Siberia, Central Asia were conducted as well as studies of sites of the Bronze and Stone ages in Northern Russia. The finds came predominantly to the collections of the Imperial Hermitage Museum in Saint-Petersburg and Historical Museum in Moscow. Another important responsibility of the Commission was the acquisition of monetary hoards and treasures of historical objects found on the territory of Russian Empire. The first investigator of hoards was a curator of the Hermitage collections Julian Iversen (1859–1900). Simultaneously, the Commission consulted the restoration and conservation activities of the Ministry of Home Affairs, primarily for the monuments of the defensive architecture and church buildings. For that purpose, the staff of the Commission included a representative of the Academy of Arts Feodor Solntsev (1859–1892). Protection of the monuments of archaeology also was an important task of the Commission. In 1866, Sergey Stroganov achieved the prohibition of treasure-hunting in Russia. The Commission, as the central state institution, actively collaborated with provincial Statistic Committees and Archive Commissions in the field of studies and protection of local monuments and sites. During the chairmanship of Alexander Vasil'chikov, the reforms of the Commission's activities were prepared. These reforms took place already under Count Alexey Bobrinskoy. In 1886–1887, an interdisciplinary program for studies of Slavic-Russian archaeology, the eastern Black-Sea region, Siberia etc. was developed. During that period, the Commission was moved to an office in the Winter Palace in Saint-Petersburg. On March 11, 1889, Emperor Alexander III approved by his decree the exclusive right of the Commission to conduct archaeological excavations and to license their execution on state and public lands. Simultaneously, the Commission, together with the Academy of Arts, was charged with supervision over restoration and protection of objects of art and architectural monuments. In 1890, the "Regulations for the Archaeological Commission and Academy of Arts on the order of consideration of petitions about restoration of historical monuments" were approved. Beginning with 1894, special sessions of IAC began to consider projects of restorations an conservations. The main specialists of IAC in the branch of restoration were Petr Pokryshkin (1870–1922), Konstantin Romanov (1882–1942) and Dmitry Mileev (1878–1914). The Commission got also Vladimir Suslov (1857–1921), Nikolay Sultanov (1850–1908), Ieronim Kitner (1839–1929) and Georgy Kotov (1859–1942) to take part in the architectural restorations. These activities resulted in establishment of standards of modern scientific restoration, using primarily the archaeological approach, which are efficacious even in the 21st century. Among the most successful restoration projects of IAC, noteworthy are the Church of the Transfiguration of the Saviour on the Nereditsa hill near Novgorod, Church of the Transfiguration of the Saviour at Berestovo in Kyiv, the Saint Boris and Gleb church at Kolozha in Grodno, the Saint George church in Yuryev-Polskoy, Cathedral of the Dormition of Mother of God in the Moscow Kremlin, Ipatyevsky Monastery in Kostroma, Ferapontov Monastery in Vologda region, Bakhchisarai Palace in Crimea, Smolensk and Pskov city walls etc. Among the most important problems of IAC in the restoration issues were its relations with the Russian Orthodox Church. As early as 1893, the Ober-Procurator of the Holy Synod Konstantin Pobedonostsev (1827–1907) confirmed that restoration of churches must be conducted with permission of the Commission, however in practice many churches were disfigured by illiterately made repairs. Part of the difficulties proceeded from contradictions in Russian law. Notwithstanding the fact that the Commission had succeeded in developing an algorithm of its relations with the clergy, during the World War I, under the conditions of the general crisis of the Russian State and society, the Synod attempted to withdraw religious monuments from the public control.The new objectives and expansion of the geography of researches of IAC demanded a new staff of the Commission. That approval was received in 1888 and 1902. The membership of the Commission included Alexander Spitsyn (1858–1931), Nikolay Veselovsky (1848–1918), Vasily Latyshev (1855–1921), Boris Farmakovsky (1870–1928) and others. Alexey Bobrinskoy actively used his right of appointment of corresponding members and honorary members of the Commission. Among the corresponding members appointed in 1886–1917 were Vladimir Stasov (1824–1906), Vasily Radlov (1837–1918), Dmitry Samokvasov (1843–1911), Innokenty Lopatin (1839–1909), Alexander Bertier-Delagard (1842–1920), Alexander Lappo-Danilevsky (1863–1919), Yulian Kulakovsky (1855–1919), Nikolay Pantusov (1849–1909), Valentin Zhukovsky (1858–1919), Vladimir Malmberg (1860–1921), Sergey Zhebelev (1867–1941), Emil Roesler (?–?), Alexey Markov (1858–1920), Nikolay Marr (1864–1934), Mstislav Farmakovsky (1873–1946), Alexander Malein (1869–1938) and others. There was yet another category of assistants of the Commission — supernumerary members. They included Nikolay Pokrovsky (1848–1917) — an expert on Christian archaeology and Orthodox art, Vladimir Antonovich (1834–1908), Bohdan Khanenko (1849–1917), Ernst von Stern (1859–1924), Mikhail Rostovtsev (1870–1952), Alexey Shirinsky-Shikhmatov (1862–1930), Feodor Braun (1862–1942), Nikolay Bulychev (1852–1919) et al.In 1909, the 50th anniversary of the Commission and 25th anniversary of the activities of its chairman Alexey Bobrinskoy became something like summing up of the results of the works of IAC. The special role of the Commission is noteworthy regarding the studies of Scythian and Greek and Roman antiquities. The commission excavated about fifty 'Royal' kurgans containing rich Scythian burials from which the artistic gold objects are housed now in the Special Treasury of the State Hermitage Museum in Saint-Petersburg. Studies of Bosporan sites were continued: the Commission was in charge of the Kerch Museum of Antiquities which directed the archaeological excavations in this region. The museum was headed by Alexander Lyutsenko (1807–1884), Stepan Verebryusov (1819–1884), Fedor Gross (1822–1897), Karl Dumberg (1862–1931) and Vladislav Shkorpil (1853–1918). Funerary catacombs, important Classical, Jewish and Christian antiquities were here discovered. Since 1888, according to an order of Emperor Alexander III, IAC was entrusted with the direction of researches in the area of the Tauric Chersonesos and its surroundings. Karol Kościuszko-Waluszyński (1847–1907) was appointed the head of the excavations in Chersonesos. During the later years, the excavations were directed by Robert Loeper (1865–1918) and Leonid Moiseev (1882–1946). Under the direction of the Archaeological Commission, living blocks, buildings and necropolis dated to the Classical, Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine periods had been discovered and investigated, as well as several dozens of Christian churches and basilicas. In 1902, the systematic excavations of Olbia began under the direction of Boris Farmakovsky, and in 1904 – the archaeological researches of Berezan Island began under the direction of Ernst von Stern. An expansive project came to be that of excavations in 1908–1914 of one of the first medieval stone church of Eastern Europe — the Church of the Tithe in Kyiv conducted under the direction of Dmitry Mileev. During the period of 1890–1914, the Commission was financing altogether up to twenty expeditions annually throughout more than fifteen provinces and regions of Russian Empire. It must be noted however that the level of understanding of archaeological evidence gained remained behind its accumulation. In the field of the archaeology of the Stone Age, the studies of the Commission revealed several important Neolithic sites of Eastern Europe. In 1905, Alexander Spitsyn discovered a Paleolithic site at Borshevo, Voronezh region. The same researcher also wrote in 1915 a synthetic and generalizing work on the Russian Paleolithic where he had summarized the results of archaeology of the Early Stone Age in Eastern Europe and comprehensively characterized the sites of Caucasus and Siberia. Nevertheless, it must be noted here that the major researches on the Stone Age were carried out the sphere of activities of the Commission.During investigations of archaeological sites of Siberia separated by thousands kilometers from the scientific centers of European Russia, the Commission maintained close relations with local archaeologists and ethnologists directing their efforts and licensing their excavations. At the funds and on the instructions of the Commission, the archaeological sites of Siberia were studied since the 1860s by Vasily Radlov (1837–1918), Dmitry Klements (1848–1914), Alexander Adrianov (1854–1920) and other scholars.Members of the Commission participated personally in investigations of antiquities of the Caucasus and Ciscaucasia. In 1887, Dmitriy Bakradze (1826–1890) proposed a program of archaeological exploration of the area of Sukhumi, and in 1889 IAC carried out description and photographing of objects of Georgian Christian art from sacristies of churches and monasteries in Georgia. Since 1892, Nikolay Marr conducted longstanding investigations of the ancient Armenian capital Ani, medieval towns, fortresses and churches (Dvin, Akhtamar). Simultaneously, the explorations of sites of the Bronze and Middle Ages (dolmens, the Maikop kurgan and the Koban culture) were carried out through the efforts of Nikolay Veselovsky and Emil Roesler.The initiative of studies of architectural and archaeological monuments in Central Asia also mainly belongs to IAC. In 1900s–1915, IAC just kept under control the works in this region, gathered and distributed local collections and stray finds through museums. Photographing of architectural, ethnographic and historical monuments was conducted. The first archaeological excavations are connected with the names of Nikolay Pantusov who investigated in 1860s–1890s Christian Nestorian cemeteries near the Syr-Darya River, and Nikolay Veselovsky who continued archaeological and architectural researches since 1884 until the beginning of the 20th century. In 1890 and 1896, Valentin Zhukovsky observed several archaeological sites. In the 1880s, Alexey Bobrinskoy and Vladimir Antonovich developed a program of interdisciplinary research in the field Slavic and medieval archaeology on the territory of Ukraine. Excavations of kurgans were started in the Dnieper River region, Bielorus' and Novgorod region. At Gnezdovo near Smolensk, the Commission organized in 1890s-1900s excavations of kurgans and the settlement which initiated researches in the Viking Age in Eastern Europe. The systematization of mediaeval Slavic archaeology was proposed by Alexander Spitsyn. Of note is the IAC's contribution to studies of mediaeval archaeological sites of Eastern Europe. These included the Malaya Pereshchepina hoard found in 1912 — the supposed funerary complex of Khan Kubrat, excavations of the settlement of Mayatskoe conducted by Nikolay Makarenko (1877–1938) in 1908–1909, sites of Ugro-Finnish and Baltic tribes — Lyadinsky and Lyutsinsky necropolis investigated in 1889–1891 by Evdokim Romanov (1855–1922), Vladimir Sizov (1840–1904), Vladimir Yastrebov (1855–1899) et al. The archaeology of the region of Perm of the 8th-9th centuries and sites of the Vyatka region also were included in the sphere of interests of IAC, inter alia due to the fact that a very rich collection of local archaeological materials belonged to Sergey Stroganov. Alexander Spitsyn proposed the first archaeological periodization of the Perm and Kama regions local history and distinguished a number of local archaeological cultures. By 1917, the Commission was a serious academic institution both in the branch of architectural and archaeological researches. It became the organizing centre of Russian archaeology actively collaborating with public structures and planning new directions of researches. It is exactly inside the academic community rather than at the communistic authority after the October 1917 that the idea sprang up to transform the Commission into the "Academy of Archaeological Sciences" in order to focus efforts of its members exclusively onto the scientific sphere. In October of 1918, Anatoly Lunacharsky (1875–1933) approves the new regulations of the Russian State Archaeological Commission. Nikolay Marr became its chairman whereas Alexey Bobrinskoy had to emigrate. On April 19, 1919, the decree on the foundation of the Russian Academy for the History of Material Culture was signed by the chairman of the Bolsheviks government Vladimir Ulyanov. In the early August, elections to the new Academy took place. The Academy was housed in the Marble Palace in Petrograd. We should regard August 7, 1919, as the first day of the Academy for the History of Material Culture and the last day of the history of the Archaeological Commission.On the basis of the Imperial Archaeological Commission and Academy for the History of Material Culture the modern archaeological institutions of Russia have emerged. The practices established by the Commission were put into the foundation of the present-day regulation of archaeological researches and the system of protection of archaeological sites. The experience of the Commission undoubtedly indicates that the protection of the cultural heritage may be effective only in the case where it is carried out within an academic system. The protection and restoration of historical monuments must be subdued to scientific goals and architectural researches. The role of IAC manifested in the establishing national archaeological and site protection systems of the European and Asiatic countries which once constituted the Russian Empire. The editorial activities of IAC have been reflected in 65 titles of periodicals and nonperiodicals: Reports of IAC, Proceedings of IAC, and Materials on the Archaeology of Russia etc. Nikodim Kondakov's publication "Russian Hoards" (1896) and Yakov Smirnov's "Oriental Silver" (1909) are special contributions to the Art history. The materials of IAC kept in the Manuscript and Photographic departments of Scientific archives of the Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint-Petersburg (9,030 files and over 100,000 photographic imprints and negatives) conceal unique possibilities for future scientific discoveries and constitute an invaluable contribution of the Commission to studies and preservation of archaeological and cultural heritage of the World.

Licevoj letopisny'j svod of Ivan the Terrible is a major monument of the Old Russian written tradition of the 16th century which completed a centuries-long history of Old Russian chronicling. Stories on miracle-working icons in its multileveled system were included into a vast historical context and acquired a new publishing tone. The author aims to determine the role of icons of the Virgin Mary in Old Russia in Licevoj letopisny'j svod and how episodic and semantic memory about them is preserved.The arrival of a large number of transferred and displayed icons as well as the ones painted by hermits in Russia was a characteristic feature of the late 14th – early 15th centuries. Stories of icons developed into an established narrative form in the print culture of the 16th century and chronicling played significant role in the literary process of the epoch. This fact can be explained by the establishment of the ideology of autocracy, which was based (among other things) on the phenomenon of miracle-working icons.In the structure of Licevoj letopisny'j svod, there are stories that stand out among others, and they are those of three miracle-working icons, namely, the Theotokos of Tikhvin (1383), the Theotokos of Vladimir and the Theotokos of Kolocha (1413). It is noteworthy that these three legends found in Licevoj letopisny'j svod contain subjects connected with the names of Dmitry of the Don's three sons: Vasily, the Grand Prince of Moscow, Yuri of Zvenigorod and Andrei of Mozhaysk. This without a doubt granted them an official status in the historiographical narrative.What makes the legends in Licevoj letopisny'j svod stand out is the combination of two texts: verbal and visual. The illustrators of Licevoj letopisny'j svod added to the written text, not following it completely at times yet complying with the existing cultural tradition. The chronicle's interpretation of the stories was different for all of the abovementioned icons. The Story of the Meeting of the Theotokos of Vladimir was most likely written specially for Licevoj letopisny'j svod. One of the peculiarities of the text is its poly-figural architectonic which is congenial to the structure of Licevoj letopisny'j svod, demonstrating its connection with the history of Licevoj letopisny'j svod. It was only in the late 15th – early 16th century that the story of the miraculous manifestation of Theotokos of Tikhvin in Novgorod in 1393 appeared as an independent legend. In Licevoj letopisny'j svod it is represented as a short, chronicled account borrowed from Voskresenskaya letopis' and, according to a textological analysis, from Library Manuscript II. The brevity of the story of Theotokos of Tikhvin in the Licevoj letopisny'j svod is a characteristic feature of the monument, testifying to scant knowledge of the event during the entire 15th century. These circumstances make the rise of the importance of the icon even more meaningful. The analysis of the chronicle's history of Theotokos of Tikhvin demonstrates that its political cult grew in the 16th century, and Licevoj letopisny'j svod played a decisive role in the process. The plot describing the manifestation of the icon of Theotokos to a common villager on the Kolocha River around Mozhaysk is documented in a majority of Russian chronicles. The expansive chronicle history of Theotokos of Kolocha spreads over the period from the 15th to the 17th century. The form and content of chronicle articles on Theotokos of Kolocha are varied, which is conditioned by the aim and orientation (including both political and ideological ones) of various chronicles. According to textological analysis, Theotokos of Kolocha was transferred into Licevoj letopisny'j svod from Nikonovskaya letopis' retaining all the peculiarities of the chronicle. The role of Theotokos of Kolocha was considerably less pronounced in the political mythology of Ivan the Terrible's epoch, which is supposedly due to the fact that the text bore semantic memory of the struggle between minor appanage princes of Mozhaysk and the grand princes.Consequently, the three legends of miracle-working icons in Licevoj letopisny'j svod had different sources. The chronicle's writing in the second half of the 16th century was another stage in the history of the text's well-known subjects. The analysis of stories about icons enabled the author to reveal a number of features in the formation of Licevoj letopisny'j svod, to specify its connections with Voskresenskaya letopis' and Nikonovskaya letopis' and the chronicle of 1560 and to determine the role of the legendary "biographies" of icons in the structure of Licevoj letopisny'j svod. ; Лицевой летописный свод (ЛЛС) — монументальный памятник древнерусской книжности XVI в. — завершил многовековую историю древнерусского летописания. Сказания о чудотворных иконах в его многоуровневой системе повествований включались в широкий исторический контекст и обретали новые акценты публицистического звучания. Определить, каково положение в структуре ЛЛС сюжетов о явлении богородичных икон на Руси, каким образом сохраняется в них эпизодическая и семантическая память, — цель настоящей статьи.Приходом на Русь большого числа перенесенных, явленных и писанных пустынниками икон ознаменован период конца XIV — начала XV в. Повествования об иконах складывались в устойчивую содержательную форму в книжной культуре XVI в., и летописание в литературном процессе сыграло конструктивную роль. Этот факт объясняется формированием идеологии самодержавия, которая опиралась и на феномен чудотворного образа.В структуре ЛЛС выразительный повествовательный ряд представляют сюжеты о трех чудотворных иконах: Тихвинской (1383) (СТИ), Владимирской (1395) (СВИ) и Колочской (1413) (СКИ). Примечательно, что три сказания, представленные в ЛЛС развитыми сюжетами, связаны с именами трех сыновей Дмитрия Донского: Василия Московского, Юрия Звенигородского, Андрея Можайского, что, безусловно, обеспечивало им официальный статус в историографическом повествовании.Особенностью сказаний в ЛЛС является сочетание двух текстов: вербального и визуального. Миниатюристы ЛЛС «дописывали» словесный текст, иногда отступая от него и придерживаясь сложившейся культурной традиции. Летописные истории этих повествований сложились по-разному. «Повесть о сретении Владимирской иконы», вероятно, была специально написана для ЛЛС. Одна из особенностей текста СВИ заключена в его многофигурной архитектонике, которая конгениальна структуре ЛЛС, что лишний раз указывает на ее связи с историей происхождения свода. Рассказ о чудесном явлении в Новгородских пределах Тихвинской иконы в 1393 г. только в конце XV — начале XVI в. начал складываться в самостоятельное сказание. В ЛЛС оно представлено в виде небольшой летописной статьи, заимствованной из Воскресенской летописи, и, как показал текстологический анализ, по списку Библиотечный II. Краткость летописной истории СТИ — примечательная особенность памятника, свидетельствующая о малой известности самого события на протяжении всего XV в., и на таком фоне особенно выразительна картина возвышения Образа. Анализ летописной истории СТИ указывает на укрепление ее политического культа в XVI в., и роль ЛЛС в этом процессе стала решающей. Сюжет о явлении иконы Богородицы простому поселянину на р. Колоча в Можайских пределах зафиксирован практически всеми общерусскими летописными сводами. Богатая летописная история СКИ охватывает период с XV по XVII в. Форма и содержание летописных статей о Колочской иконе разнообразны, что обусловлено целью и направленностью, в том числе политической, идеологической, того или иного свода. Как показал текстологический анализ, СКИ перешло в ЛЛС из Никоновского свода, сохранив все особенности летописной редакции. Звучание СКИ в политическом мифе эпохи Ивана Грозного было заметно приглушено, видимо, из-за того, что текст запечатлел семантическую память о борьбе XV в. можайских удельных княжат с великокняжеским домом.Таким образом, три сказания о чудотворных иконах включены в ЛЛС из разнородных источников. Летописание второй половины XVI в. составило еще один этап в истории текста известных сюжетов. Анализ сказаний об иконах позволил выявить некоторые моменты в практике складывания ЛЛС, уточнить его отношения с Воскресенской и Никоновской летописями, сводом 1560 г., определить роль легендарных «биографий» икон в структуре ЛЛС.