Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. “I put this story in order

Tatishchev Vasily Nikitich (1686 – 1750), Russian statesman, historian. He graduated from the Engineering and Artillery School in Moscow. He took part in the Northern War of 1700-21, carried out various military and diplomatic assignments of Tsar Peter I. In 1720-22 and 1734-37 he managed state-owned factories in the Urals, founded Yekaterinburg; in 1741-45 - Astrakhan governor. In 1730 he actively opposed the supreme leaders (Supreme Privy Council). Tatishchev prepared the first Russian publication of historical sources, introducing into scientific circulation the texts of Russian Pravda and Code of Laws of 1550 with a detailed commentary, and laid the foundation for the development of ethnography and source studies in Russia. Compiled the first Russian encyclopedic dictionary ("Russian Lexicon"). He created a generalizing work on Russian history, written on the basis of numerous Russian and foreign sources - “Russian History from the Most Ancient Times” (books 1-5, M., 1768-1848). “Russian History” by Tatishchev is one of the most significant works throughout the entire history of Russian historiography. Monumental, brilliantly and accessiblely written, this book covers the history of our country from ancient times - and right up to the reign of Fyodor Mikhailovich Romanov. The special value of Tatishchev’s work is that the history of Russia is presented here IN ITS COMPLETENESS - in aspects not only military-political, but religious, cultural and everyday!

| | (0)

• Genre:
• Tatishchev Vasily Nikitich (1686 – 1750), Russian statesman, historian. He graduated from the Engineering and Artillery School in Moscow. He took part in the Northern War of 1700-21, carried out various military and diplomatic assignments of Tsar Peter I. In 1720-22 and 1734-37 he managed state-owned factories in the Urals, founded Yekaterinburg; in 1741-45 - Astrakhan governor. In 1730 he actively opposed the supreme leaders (Supreme Privy Council). Tatishchev prepared the first Russian publication of historical sources, introducing into scientific circulation the texts of Russian Pravda and Code of Laws of 1550 with a detailed commentary, and laid the foundation for the development of ethnography and source studies in Russia. Compiled the first Russian encyclopedic dictionary ("Russian Lexicon"). He created a general work on Russian history, written on the basis of numerous Russian and foreign sources, “Russian History from the Most Ancient Times” (books 1-5, M., 1768-1848). “Russian History” by Tatishchev is one of the most significant works in the entire history of Russian historiography. Monumental, brilliantly and accessiblely written, this book covers the history of our country from ancient times - and right up to the reign of Fyodor Mikhailovich Romanov. The special value of Tatishchev’s work is that the history of Russia is presented here IN ITS COMPLETENESS - in aspects not only military-political, but religious, cultural and everyday! Adaptation from Late Slavic - O. Kolesnikov (2000-2002)
• | | (0)

• Genre:
• Tatishchev Vasily Nikitich (1686 – 1750), Russian statesman, historian. He graduated from the Engineering and Artillery School in Moscow. He took part in the Northern War of 1700-21, carried out various military and diplomatic assignments of Tsar Peter I. In 1720-22 and 1734-37 he managed state-owned factories in the Urals, founded Yekaterinburg; in 1741-45 - Astrakhan governor. In 1730 he actively opposed the supreme leaders (Supreme Privy Council). Tatishchev prepared the first Russian publication of historical sources, introducing into scientific circulation the texts of Russian Pravda and Code of Laws of 1550 with a detailed commentary, and laid the foundation for the development of ethnography and source studies in Russia. Compiled the first Russian encyclopedic dictionary (“Russian Lexicon”). He created a general work on Russian history, written on the basis of numerous Russian and foreign sources, “Russian History from the Most Ancient Times” (books 1-5, M., 1768-1848). “Russian History” by Tatishchev is one of the most significant works in the entire history of Russian historiography. Monumental, brilliantly and accessiblely written, this book covers the history of our country from ancient times - and right up to the reign of Fyodor Mikhailovich Romanov. The special value of Tatishchev’s work is that the history of Russia is presented here IN ITS COMPLETENESS - in aspects not only military-political, but religious, cultural and everyday!

Tatishchev came to the main work of his life as a result of a confluence of a number of circumstances. Realizing the harm caused by the lack of a detailed geography of Russia and seeing the connection between geography and history, he found it necessary to first collect and consider all historical information about Russia. Since foreign manuals turned out to be full of errors, Tatishchev turned to primary sources and began to study chronicles and other materials. At first he had in mind to write a historical work (“in a historical order” - that is, an author’s analytical work in the style of the New Age), but then, finding that it was inconvenient to refer to chronicles that had not yet been published, he decided to write in a purely “chronicle order” ( on the model of chronicles: in the form of a chronicle of dated events, the connections between which are outlined implicitly).

As Tatishchev writes, he collected more than a thousand books in his library, but he could not use most of them, because he spoke only German and Polish. At the same time, with the help of the Academy of Sciences, he used translations of some ancient authors made by Kondratovich.

• Excerpts from Herodotus' "History" (chapter 12).
• Excerpts from the book. VII “Geography” by Strabo (chapter 13).
• From Pliny the Elder (chap. 14).
• From Claudius Ptolemy (ch. 15).
• From Constantine Porphyrogenitus (chap. 16).
• From the books of northern writers, Bayer's work (chapter 17).

The Sarmatian theory occupies a special place in Tatishchev’s ethnogeographical ideas. Tatishchev’s etymological “method” illustrates the reasoning from Chapter 28: the historian notes that in Finnish the Russians are called Venelain, the Finns - Sumalain, the Germans - Saxolain, the Swedes - Roxolain, and identifies the common element “Alain”, that is, the people. He identifies the same common element in the names of the tribes known from ancient sources: Alans, Roxalans, Raklans, Alanors, and concludes that the language of the Finns is close to the language of the Sarmatians. The idea of ​​the kinship of the Finno-Ugric peoples already existed by the time of Tatishchev.

Another group of etymologies is associated with the search for Slavic tribes in ancient sources. In particular, only Ptolemy, according to Tatishchev’s assumptions (chapter 20), mentions the following Slavic names: agorites and pagorites - from mountains; demons, that is, barefoot; sunsets - from sunset; zenkhs, that is, grooms; hemp - from hemp; tolistobogs, that is, thick-sided; tolistosagi, that is, thick-bottomed; maters, that is, seasoned; plesii, that is, bald; sabos, or dog sabos; defense, that is, harrow; sapotrenes - prudent; svardeni, that is, svarodei (making swaras), etc.

Tatishchevskie news

A special source study problem is posed by the so-called “Tatishchev news”, which contains information that is not in the chronicles known to us. These are texts of varying length, from one or two added words to large integral stories, including lengthy speeches of princes and boyars. Sometimes Tatishchev comments on these news in notes, refers to chronicles unknown to modern science or not reliably identified (“Rostovskaya”, “Golitsynskaya”, “Raskolnichya”, “Chronicle of Simon the Bishop”). In most cases, the source of original news is not indicated by Tatishchev at all.

A special place in the array of “Tatishchev news” is occupied by the Joachim Chronicle - an inserted text, equipped with a special introduction by Tatishchev and representing a brief retelling of a special chronicle telling about the most ancient period of the history of Rus' (IX-X centuries). Tatishchev considered the author of the Joachim Chronicle to be the first Novgorod bishop Joachim Korsunyanin, a contemporary of the Baptism of Rus.

In historiography, the attitude towards Tatishchev's news has always been different. Historians of the second half of the 18th century (Shcherbatov, Boltin) reproduced his information without checking the chronicles. A skeptical attitude towards them is associated with the names of Schlözer and especially Karamzin. This latter considered the Joachim Chronicle to be Tatishchev’s “joke” (that is, a clumsy hoax), and resolutely declared the Raskolnichy Chronicle “imaginary.” Based on a critical analysis, Karamzin identified a whole series of specific Tatishchev news and quite consistently refuted them in the notes, without using them in the main text of the “History of the Russian State” (the exception is the news of the papal embassy to Roman Galitsky in 1204, which penetrated into the main text of the second volume due to a special set of circumstances).

It is interesting that many skeptics (Peshtich, Lurie, Tolochko) do not at all accuse Tatishchev of scientific dishonesty and invariably emphasize that in Tatishchev’s time there were no modern concepts of scientific ethics and strict rules for the design of historical research. “Tatishchevskie News”, no matter how one treats it, does not represent a conscious mystification of the reader, but rather reflects the outstanding independent research, by no means simple-minded “chronicle-writing” activity of the historian. Additional news is, as a rule, logical links missing from the sources, reconstructed by the author, illustrations of his political and educational concepts. The discussion around the “Tatishchev news” continues.

The problem of “minus text” of Tatishchev’s work

The formulation of the problem, as well as the term itself, belong to A.V. Gorovenko. This researcher calls “minus-text” news that Tatishchev does not have, although it is available in the Ipatiev and Khlebnikov Chronicles (in this terminology, additional Tatishchev news, respectively, represents “plus-text”). The main body of the Tatishchev text between 1113 and 1198. goes back to the chronicle of the same type as the well-known Ipatievskaya and Khlebnikovskaya. If Tatishchev's source was of better quality than the two chronicles of the same type that have come down to us, then why does Tatishchev's text contain not only additions, but also large gaps, as well as a huge number of defective readings, including a number of rather comic ones? There is no answer to this question yet from supporters of the reliability of Tatishchev’s news.

Sources for parts two to four of the History

Tatishchev's chronicle sources are characterized by him in Chapter. 7 parts of the first “History”.

The first edition of this text has also been preserved, which has a number of differences, as well as characteristics of the sources, preserved only in the German translation.

Armchair manuscript

In the first edition, the list of sources is not mentioned at all. According to Tatishchev’s description, he received it in 1720 from the library of Peter I and became the basis of the entire collection, this is a chronicle “with faces”, brought to 1239, but the ending is lost. Briefly outlines the events before Yuri Dolgoruky, then in more detail.

According to Tikhomirov, this chronicle is lost. According to Peshtic and V.A. Petrov, this is the Laptev volume of the Face Vault, brought up to 1252. It was also assumed that we are talking about the same illustrated copy of the Radzivilov Chronicle (see below).

Tolochko is inclined to doubt its existence or suggest that the phrase “with faces” does not mean that the vault is illustrated, but the presence in it of descriptions of the appearance of the characters included by Tatishchev in “History”.

Schismatic Chronicle

According to Tatishchev, he received it in Siberia from a schismatic in 1721; it was a copy of an ancient manuscript on parchment, ending in 1197 and containing the name of Nestor in the title. Taking into account modern terminology, in 1721 Tatishchev was not actually in Siberia, but in the Urals. The manuscript, if it existed at all, is lost.

According to optimists, this is an unknown edition of the Kyiv Chronicle. In particular, B. A. Rybakov identified many unique news from this chronicle (186 news for the 12th century) and traced them mainly to the “Chronicle of Peter Borislavich.”

According to A.P. Tolochko, the proportionality of the volumes of Tatishchev’s additional news and the text of the Ipatiev Chronicle is deeply logical and is explained by the peculiarity of Tatishchev’s creative manner: his additions recreated the causal relationship between events.

Tolochko argues that a number of readings of “Russian History” for the 12th century cannot go back to Ermolaev’s list, but reflect another list of the Ipatiev Chronicle, close to Khlebnikov’s. Tolochko declares this hypothetical list to be the Schismatic Chronicle, claiming that all Tatishchev’s information indicating the antiquity of this manuscript is a hoax. According to Tolochko, the second chronicle of the Khlebnikov type, actually used by Tatishchev and passed off as “Raskolnicha,” was actually in the library of Prince D. M. Golitsyn along with the Ermolaev Chronicle and the “Chronicle” of Feodosius Sofonovich, and all these three manuscripts were of Ukrainian origin and contained in the title the name of Nestor as a chronicler. However, without exception, all textual observations of Tolochko, which allegedly pointed to Tatishchev’s use of the “second chronicle of the Khdebnikov type,” were consistently refuted

Königsberg Manuscript

A copy of the Königsberg Chronicle, now known as the Radzivilov Chronicle, was made for Peter I. This copy is kept in the NA Library (7/31/22).

Continues until 1206, but the end is mixed. This description is quite consistent with the original.

According to A.P. Tolochko, even in cases where Tatishchev refers to clearly identifiable chronicles (for example, the Radzivilovskaya), he makes obvious mistakes.

Golitsyn manuscript

According to the textual analysis of S. L. Peshtich and A. Tolochko, this is the Ermolaev copy of the Ipatiev Chronicle, which in the 1720s was in the library of D. M. Golitsyn, where Tatishchev met him. According to another opinion (M. N. Tikhomirov, B. A. Rybakov), this is a special edition of the Kyiv Chronicle, close to the Raskolnichi and different from the edition of all copies of the Ipatiev Chronicle.

An important argument in favor of Tatishchev’s integrity is the fact that all known manuscripts of the Ipatiev Chronicle contain both the Kyiv and Galician-Volyn Chronicles. However, as N.M. Karamzin noted, Tatishchev knew only the Kiev, but not the Galician-Volyn chronicle.

Tatishchev notes that the Golitsyn manuscript was completed in 1198, and 19 years later some additions were made out of order. In the first surviving version of the description of the chronicles, Tatishchev says that this manuscript contained something from Stryikovsky. This phrase was removed from the final version.

According to modern ideas, the gap between the end of the Kyiv and the beginning of the Galician-Volyn chronicle was 5-6 years. However, in the margins of the Ermolaevsky list there is an indication of a gap of 19 years, and a reference to the similarity with the text of Stryikovsky.

According to Tolochko, Tatishchev accepted the text of the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle in the Ermolaevsky list as a work dependent on the Polish historian Stryikovsky (for both texts contained praise for Roman Mstislavich), and did not consider it necessary to get acquainted with it in detail and make a copy. Later, he did not have the opportunity to turn to D. M. Golitsyn’s library.

Kirillovsky manuscript

Started with the translation of the Chronograph from the creation of the world, continued until Ivan the Terrible.

According to Tikhomirov, this is the Degree Book, according to Peshtic, accepted by Tolochko - the second part of the Lviv Chronicle.

Novgorod manuscript

According to Tatishchev, it is called Vremnik, includes the Law of the Yaroslavs and has an inscription about its composition in 1444; taken by a historian from a schismatic in the forest and given to the Academy of Sciences Library. Now known as the Academic copy of the Novgorod First Chronicle, junior edition, which actually contains the Russian Truth. According to B. M. Kloss, the Tolstoy copy of the same chronicle was created by a scribe in the library of D. M. Golitsyn in the late 1720s.

Pskov manuscript

This manuscript combines the texts of the Novgorod Fifth (with some additions) and the Pskov First Chronicle and was preserved in the Library of AN 31.4.22 with Tatishchev’s notes; the Pskov text ends in 1547. . According to Tatishchev, it ends in 1468. The Pskov news was not used by Tatishchev.

Krekshinsky manuscript

According to Tatishchev’s description, it continues until 1525, includes genealogies, and differs from the Novgorod one in the composition of news and in dating.

According to Peshtic, this is a list of the Russian Vremennik and the Resurrection Chronicle. According to Ya. S. Lurie, this is the Novgorod edition of the Degree Book. According to Tolochko, this is the Chronicle of Krivoborsky, known as the Chertkovsky list of the Vladimir chronicler and published in volume XXX PSRL.

Nikon's manuscript

According to Tatishchev, this is the “Chronicle of the Resurrection Monastery,” signed by the hand of Patriarch Nikon and continued until 1630. Its beginning is similar to Raskolnichy and Koenigsberg, and before 1180 it is close to Golitsyn.

It is known that the texts of parts 3 and 4 of the “History” were based on the Academic XV list of the Nikon Chronicle (received by the Academy of Sciences Library from the collection of Feofan Prokopovich in 1741), a copy of which, on behalf of Tatishchev, was made between 1739 and 1741, while the manuscript was divided into two volumes, it contains notes from Tatishchev.

Nizhny Novgorod manuscript

According to Tatishchev’s description, it ends in 1347, and is at least 300 years old. Tatishchev reported about his discovery in a letter dated September 12, 1741.

According to M. N. Tikhomirov, this is the Alatyr list of the Resurrection Chronicle, which is incomplete her text. According to modern data, the manuscript dates back to the third quarter of the 16th century and was actually completed before 1347.

Yaroslavl manuscript

Purchased from a peddler in the square and donated to the English Royal Society. Has many additions from the death of Dmitry Donskoy. According to Tolochko, identical to Rostovsky, who is mentioned in the notes.

Manuscripts of Volynsky, Khrushchev and Eropkin

According to A.P. Tolochko, several manuscripts from Volynsky’s library have survived, including a number of chronicles of the 17th-18th centuries, but the required texts are not there. The texts of the Eropkin Chronicle are close to “Tales of the Beginning of Moscow”. The Khrushchev Manuscript is a copy of the Khrushchev Degree Book with a number of additions from the 17th century.

History of the 17th century

In the “Pre-Notice” to the first part, Tatishchev mentions a number of other sources dating back to the history of the 17th century, most of which have been preserved and are identified. However, among them are:

Editions

The first two parts of volume I of “History” were published for the first time in - . in Moscow by G.F. Miller (volume I part, facsimile in pdf and volume I part II, facsimile in pdf). Volume II was published in the city (volume II, facsimile in pdf), volume III - in 1774 (volume III, facsimile in pdf) (volumes II-III of this edition include the second part of the “History”), volume IV (third part of the “History”) - in 1784 (Volume IV, facsimile in pdf), and the manuscript of the fourth part of the “History” was found by M.P. Pogodin only in 1843 and published as Volume V of the General. ist. and other Russians. in 1848 (Volume V, facsimile in pdf).

Moreover, only the first and second parts were basically completed by the author. The third and fourth parts underwent only initial processing and were based primarily on the Nikon Chronicle with individual additions.

Even before publication, Tatishchev’s work was known to a number of contemporary historians. Some of Tatishchev’s preparatory work was kept in Miller’s briefcases after his death. In addition, a number of Tatishchev’s materials were used by the publishers of the Radzivilov Chronicle in 1767 to supplement its text.

The complete academic edition of Tatishchev's History (including the previously unpublished first edition) was published in 1962-1968 and republished in 1994. In this edition, volume I included the first part, volumes II-III - the second published edition of the second part, volume IV - the first edition of the second part, volume V - the third part, volume VI - the fourth part, volume VII - some preparatory materials. The volumes contain discrepancies, commentaries, as well as an archaeographic review of Tatishchev’s manuscripts, prepared by S. N. Valk.

Published in 2003 by AST Publishing House and available online (Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3), the three-volume edition of “History” was prepared in a spelling close to modern. The preparatory materials (published earlier in Volume VII) in this edition are called the fifth part of “History”.

• Tatishchev V. N. Collected works. In 8 vols. M.-L., Science. 1962-1979. (reprint: M., Ladomir. 1994)
  • T.1. Part 1. 1962. 500 pp. (includes articles by A. I. Andreev “Works of V. N. Tatishchev on the history of Russia”, pp. 5-38; M. N. Tikhomirov “On Russian sources of “Russian History”, pp. 39-53 ; S. N. Valka “On the manuscripts of the first part of “Russian History” by V. N. Tatishchev, pp. 54-75)
  • T.2. Part 2. Ch. 1-18. 1963. 352 pp.
  • T.3. Part 2. Ch.19-37. 1964. 340 pp.
  • T.4. First edition of part 2 of “Russian History”. 1964. 556 pp.
  • T.5. Part 3. Ch.38-56. 1965. 344 pp.
  • T.6. Part 4. 1966. 438 pp.
  • T.7. 1968. 484 pp.
  • T.8. Small works. 1979.
• Tatishchev V. N. Notes. Letters. (Series “Scientific Heritage”. Vol. 14). M., Science. 1990. 440 pp. ( includes correspondence related to work on the History)

Notes

Gorovenko A.V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: “Dmitry Bulanin”, 2011. "P. 294-303.

Y. S. Lurie. The history of Russia in chronicles and the perception of modern times

Tolochko A. “Russian History” by Vasily Tatishchev: sources and news. - Moscow: New Literary Review; Kyiv: Kritika, 2005. 544 p. Series: Historia Rossica. ISBN 5-86793-346-6, ISBN 966-7679-62-4. Discussion of the book: http://magazines.russ.ru/km/2005/1/gri37.html Magazine room | Critical Mass, 2005 N1 | Faina Grimberg - Alexey Tolochko. “Russian History” by Vasily Tatishchev

Gorovenko A.V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: “Dmitry Bulanin”, 2011. “Tatishchevsky News” is dedicated to the four final chapters of the second part: p. 261-332.

Gorovenko A.V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: “Dmitry Bulanin”, 2011. P. 421-426 (Addendum 6. Did Tatishchev have a “second list” of the Ipatiev Chronicle? The origin of articles 6652 and 6654 of Tatishchev’s “chronicle code”). pp. 426-434 (Addendum 7. Farewell to the Raskolnichy Chronicle. On textual evidence of Tatishchev’s use of the second chronicle of the Khlebnikov type, presented by A.P. Tolochko).

A. V. Zhuravel. “A liar, a chatterbox and a laugher,” or Another murder of Tatishchev

See, for example: S. L. Peshtic. Russian historiography of the 18th century. L., 1965. Part 1. P. 261.

Gorovenko A.V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: “Dmitry Bulanin”, 2011. P. 313-320

Tolochko 2005, p.53; Tatishchev V.N. Collection. Op. T.1. M.-L., 1962. P.47, 446

Gorovenko A.V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: “Dmitry Bulanin”, 2011. - p. 307.

Tolochko 2005, p.285-286

Tolochko 2005, pp. 166-169

Tolochko 2005, p.153

Tolochko 2005, p. 103, 142-143, 159-166

however, A.P. Tolochko discovered a Polish translation of the Ipatiev Chronicle (“Annales S. Nestoris”), made at the beginning of the 18th century by Metropolitan Lev Kishka, where the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle is also missing (Tolochko 2005, pp. 116-134)

Tatishchev V.N. Collection. Op. T.7. M., 1968. P.58

PSRL, vol. II. M., 1998. Discrepancies from the Ermolaevsky list, p. 83 of separate pagination

Tolochko 2005, p.108, 115

Tatishchev V.N. Collection. Op. T.1. M., 1962. P.47

Tolochko 2005, p.58

Tolochko 2005, p.60; for a description of the manuscript, see Pskov Chronicles. PSRL. T. V. Issue. 1. M., 2003. P. XX, L-LI

Tatishchev V.N. Collection. Op. In 8 volumes. T.3. M., 1964. P.309

Tolochko 2005, p.65-68

Tatishchev V.N. Notes. Letters. M., 1990. P.281

Tolochko 2005, p.170-177

Tolochko 2005, p.180-182

Tolochko 2005, p.185-190

> Alphabetical catalog Download all volumes in Djvu

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, collected and described thirty years later by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Download Download Download Download Download Download

• Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part one
• Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two
• Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book two
• Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book three
• Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four
• Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book five, or according to the author, part four of the ancient Russian chronicle

Download all volumes in Pdf Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, collected and described thirty years later by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, collected and described thirty years later by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Download

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two

Download

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book two

Download

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book three

Download

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four

Download

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book five, or according to the author, part four

Download Download all volumes from BitTorrent (PDF) Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, collected and described thirty years later by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, collected and described thirty years later by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book two

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book three

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book five, or according to the author, part four

Download all volumes from BitTorrent (DjVU) Russian History from the most ancient times with tireless labors, collected and described thirty years later by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan Governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, collected and described thirty years later by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book two

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book three

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four

Russian history from the most ancient times with tireless labors, thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan governor, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book five, or according to the author, part four

A major historical work by the Russian historian V.N. Tatishchev, one of the most important works of Russian historiography of the second quarter of the 18th century, a significant stage in its transition from the medieval chronicle to the critical style of narration.

The “History” consists of four parts; some sketches on the history of the 17th century have also been preserved.

• Part 1. History from ancient times to Rurik.
• Part 2. Chronicle from 860 to 1238.
• Part 3. Chronicle from 1238 to 1462.
• Part 4. Continuous chronicle from 1462 to 1558, and then a series of extracts about the history of the Time of Troubles.

Only the first and second parts are relatively completed by the author and include a significant number of notes. In the first part, the notes are distributed among the chapters; the second, in its final edition, contains 650 notes. There are no notes in the third and fourth parts, except for the chapters on the Time of Troubles, which contain some references to sources.

Introduction

Russian History (full title of the first edition: “Russian History from the most ancient times, thirty years later, with tireless labor, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Astrakhan Governor Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev”) is a major historical work by the Russian historian Vasily Tatishchev, one of the most important works of Russian historiography the second quarter of the 18th century, a significant stage in its transition from the medieval chronicle to the critical style of narration.

1. Work on “History”

Tatishchev came to the main work of his life as a result of a confluence of a number of circumstances. Realizing the harm caused by the lack of a detailed geography of Russia and seeing the connection between geography and history, he found it necessary to first collect and consider all historical information about Russia. Since the foreign manuals turned out to be full of errors, Tatishchev turned to primary sources and began to study chronicles and other materials. At first he had in mind to write a historical work (“in a historical order” - that is, an author’s analytical work in the style of the New Age), but then, finding that it was inconvenient to refer to chronicles that had not yet been published, he decided to write in a purely “chronicle order” ( on the model of chronicles: in the form of a chronicle of dated events, the connections between which are outlined implicitly).

As Tatishchev writes, he collected more than a thousand books in his library, but he could not use most of them, because he spoke only German and Polish. At the same time, with the help of the Academy of Sciences, he used translations of some ancient authors made by Kondratovich.

In 1739, Tatishchev brought a work to St. Petersburg, on which he worked, according to him, for 15-20 years (linking the beginning of work with the so-called Cabinet Manuscript and the personalities of Peter I and Ya. V. Bruce), and organized public readings while continuing to work above it and subsequently, “smoothing out the language” (the first edition, preserved for the second part in the list of 1746, was written in a language stylized as the Old Russian language of chronicles, the second was “translated” into the language of the 18th century) and adding new sources. Moreover, the author managed to carry out such a “translation” only for the second part.

Without special training, Tatishchev could not produce impeccable scientific work, but in his historical works, his vital attitude to scientific issues and the associated breadth of outlook are valuable.

Among Tatishchev's more private scientific achievements are the discovery and publication of Russian Pravda and Code of Laws of Ivan the Terrible (1550). Tatishchev constantly connected the present with the past: he explained the meaning of Moscow legislation by the customs of judicial practice and memories of the mores of the 17th century; Based on personal acquaintance with foreigners, he understood ancient Russian ethnography and explained ancient names from the lexicons of living languages. As a result of this connection between the present and the past, Tatishchev was not at all distracted by his work from his main task. On the contrary, these studies expanded and deepened his historical understanding.

The author's employment with public service did not allow him to devote much time to studying history. Only from April 1746, when Tatishchev was under investigation and living in his village of Boldino, was he able to increase his activity. However, his death on July 15, 1750 interrupted this work.

The “History” consists of four parts; some sketches on the history of the 17th century have also been preserved.

Part 1. History from ancient times to Rurik.

Part 2. Chronicle from 860 to 1238.

Part 3. Chronicle from 1238 to 1462.

Part 4. Continuous chronicle from 1462 to 1558, and then a series of extracts about the history of the Time of Troubles.

Only the first and second parts are relatively completed by the author and include a significant number of notes. In the first part, the notes are distributed among the chapters; the second, in its final edition, contains 650 notes. There are no notes in the third and fourth parts, except for the chapters on the Time of Troubles, which contain some references to sources.

3. Sources of the first part of the “History”

The first part includes information from ancient times to Rurik.

Excerpts from Herodotus' "History" (chapter 12).

Excerpts from the book. VII "Geography" of Strabo (chapter 13).

From Pliny the Elder (chap. 14).

From Claudius Ptolemy (ch. 15).

From Constantine Porphyrogenitus (chap. 16).

From the books of northern writers, Bayer's work (chapter 17).

The Sarmatian theory occupies a special place in Tatishchev’s ethnogeographical ideas. Tatishchev’s etymological “method” illustrates the reasoning from Chapter 28: the historian notes that in Finnish the Russians are called Venelain, the Finns - Sumalain, the Germans - Saxolain, the Swedes - Roxolain, and identifies the common element “Alain”, that is, the people. He identifies the same common element in the names of the tribes known from ancient sources: Alans, Roxalans, Raklans, Alanors, and concludes that the language of the Finns is close to the language of the Sarmatians. The idea of ​​the kinship of the Finno-Ugric peoples already existed by the time of Tatishchev.

Another group of etymologies is associated with the search for Slavic tribes in ancient sources. In particular, only Ptolemy, according to Tatishchev’s assumptions (chapter 20), mentions the following Slavic names: agorites and pagorites - from mountains; demons, that is, barefoot; sunsets - from sunset; zenkhs, that is, grooms; hemp - from hemp; tolistobogs, that is, thick-sided; tolistosagi, that is, thick-bottomed; maters, that is, seasoned; plesii, that is, bald; sabos, or dog sabos; defense, that is, harrow; sapotrenes - prudent; svardeni, that is, svarodei (making swaras), etc.

4. Tatishchevskie news

A special source study problem is posed by the so-called “Tatishchev news”, which contains information that is not in the chronicles known to us. These are texts of varying length, from one or two added words to large integral stories, including lengthy speeches of princes and boyars. Sometimes Tatishchev comments on these news in notes, refers to chronicles unknown to modern science or not reliably identified (“Rostovskaya”, “Golitsynskaya”, “Raskolnichya”, “Chronicle of Simon the Bishop”). In most cases, the source of original news is not indicated by Tatishchev at all.

A special place in the array of “Tatishchev news” is occupied by the Joakim Chronicle - an inserted text, equipped with a special introduction by Tatishchev and representing a brief retelling of a special chronicle telling about the most ancient period of the history of Rus' (IX-X centuries). Tatishchev considered the author of the Joachim Chronicle to be the first Novgorod bishop Joachim Korsunyanin, a contemporary of the Baptism of Rus.

In historiography, the attitude towards Tatishchev's news has always been different. Historians of the second half of the 18th century (Shcherbatov, Boltin) reproduced his information without checking the chronicles. A skeptical attitude towards them is associated with the names of Schlozer and especially Karamzin. This latter considered the Joachim Chronicle to be Tatishchev’s “joke” (i.e., a clumsy hoax), and resolutely declared the Schismatic Chronicle “imaginary.” Based on a critical analysis, Karamzin identified a whole series of specific Tatishchev news and quite consistently refuted them in the notes, without using them in the main text of the “History of the Russian State” (the exception is the news of the papal embassy to Roman Galitsky in 1204, which penetrated into the main text of the second volume due to a special set of circumstances).

In the second half of the 19th century, S. M. Solovyov and many other authors began to “rehabilitate” Tatishchev, systematically drawing on his news as going back to chronicles that have not reached us. At the same time, the historian’s conscientious errors were also taken into account. The encyclopedic dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron characterizes the state of the issue at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. in the following way:

“Tatishchev’s integrity, previously questioned due to his so-called Joachim Chronicle, now stands above all doubt. He did not invent any news or sources, but sometimes unsuccessfully corrected his own names, translated them into his own language, substituted his own interpretations, or compiled news similar to the chronicles from data that seemed reliable to him. Citing chronicle legends in a corpus, often without indicating sources, Tatishchev ultimately gave, in essence, not history, but a new chronicle corpus, unsystematic and rather clumsy.”

In the 20th century, supporters of the reliability of Tatishchev’s news were A. A. Shakhmatov, M. N. Tikhomirov and especially B. A. Rybakov. This latter proposed a very large-scale concept, which assigned a special role in the formation of Tatishchev’s corpus of the lost “Schismatic Chronicle” (with the reconstruction of political views and even the biography of its alleged author). Skeptical hypotheses regarding the majority of “Tatishchev’s news” were put forward by M. S. Grushevsky, A. E. Presnyakov, S. L. Peshtich (to whom belongs the honor of a detailed study of the manuscript of the first edition of Tatishchev’s work, written in the “ancient dialect”), Y. S. Lurie . In 2005, the Ukrainian historian A.P. Tolochko published a voluminous monograph in which he refutes the reliability of all “Tatishchev’s news” without exception and claims that references to Tatishchev’s sources are consistently mystified. From the point of view of A.P. Tolochko, almost all the sources REALLY used by Tatishchev have been preserved and are well known to modern researchers. A similar (and even more uncompromising) position is taken by the Russian historian A.V. Gorovenko. If A. P. Tolochko recognizes the reality of Tatishchev’s Raskolnichy Chronicle, although he declares it a Ukrainian manuscript of the 17th century (a chronicle of the “Khlebnikov type”, close to Golitsyn), then A. V. Gorovenko considers the Raskolnichy Chronicle a Tatishchev hoax and sharply polemicizes with his Ukrainian colleague, refuting his textual argument. Supporters of the reliability of "Tatishchev's news" also subjected A.P. Tolochko's monograph to sharp criticism, although from completely different positions.

It is interesting that many skeptics (Peshtich, Lurie, Tolochko) do not at all accuse Tatishchev of scientific dishonesty and invariably emphasize that in Tatishchev’s time there were no modern concepts of scientific ethics and strict rules for the design of historical research. “Tatishchevskie News”, no matter how one treats it, does not represent a conscious mystification of the reader, but rather reflects the outstanding independent research, by no means simple-minded “chronicle-writing” activity of the historian. Additional news is, as a rule, logical links missing from the sources, reconstructed by the author, illustrations of his political and educational concepts. The discussion around the “Tatishchev news” continues.

5. The problem of “minus text” of Tatishchev’s work

The formulation of the problem, as well as the term itself, belong to A.V. Gorovenko. This researcher calls “minus-text” news that Tatishchev does not have, although it is available in the Ipatiev and Khlebnikov Chronicles (in this terminology, additional Tatishchev news, respectively, represents “plus-text”). The main body of the Tatishchev text between 1113 and 1198. goes back to the chronicle of the same type as the well-known Ipatievskaya and Khlebnikovskaya. If Tatishchev's source was of better quality than the two chronicles of the same type that have come down to us, then why does Tatishchev's text contain not only additions, but also large gaps, as well as a huge number of defective readings, including a number of rather comic ones? There is no answer to this question yet from supporters of the reliability of Tatishchev’s news.

6. Sources of the second to fourth parts of the “History”

Tatishchev's chronicle sources are characterized by him in Chapter. 7 parts of the first “History”.

The first edition of this text has also been preserved, which has a number of differences, as well as characteristics of the sources, preserved only in the German translation.

6.1. Armchair manuscript

In the first edition of the list of sources (1739) it is not mentioned at all. According to Tatishchev’s description, he received it in 1720 from the library of Peter I and became the basis of the entire collection, this is a chronicle “with faces”, brought to 1239, but the ending is lost. Briefly outlines the events before Yuri Dolgoruky, then in more detail.

According to Tikhomirov, this chronicle is lost. According to Peshtic and V.A. Petrov, this is the Laptev volume of the Face Vault, brought up to 1252. It was also assumed that we are talking about the same illustrated copy of the Radzivilov Chronicle (see below).

Tolochko is inclined to doubt its existence or suggest that the phrase “with faces” does not mean that the vault is illustrated, but the presence in it of descriptions of the appearance of the characters included by Tatishchev in “History”.

Russian historian, geographer, economist and statesman, founder of Stavropol (now Togliatti), Yekaterinburg and Perm.

Childhood and youth

Vasily Tatishchev was born in Pskov into a noble noble family. The Tatishchevs came from the Rurikovich family, or more precisely, from the younger branch of the Smolensk princes. The family lost its princely title. Since 1678, Vasily Nikitich’s father was listed in the government service as a Moscow “tenant” and at first did not have any land holdings, but in 1680 he managed to obtain the estate of a deceased distant relative in the Pskov district. Both Tatishchev brothers (Ivan and Vasily) served as stewards (the steward was responsible for serving the master's meal) at the tsar's court until his death in 1696. After that, Tatishchev left the court. The documents do not contain evidence of Tatishchev’s studies at school. In 1704, the young man was enlisted in the Azov Dragoon Regiment and served in the army for 16 years, leaving it on the eve of the end of the Northern War with the Swedes. Participated in the capture of Narva, in the Prut campaign of Peter I against the Turks. In 1712-1716. Tatishchev improved his education in Germany. He visited Berlin, Dresden, Breslavl, where he studied mainly engineering and artillery, and kept in touch with General Feldzeichmeister Ya.V. Bruce and carried out his instructions.

Development of the Urals

At the beginning of 1720, Tatishchev received an appointment to the Urals. His task was to identify sites for the construction of iron ore plants. Having explored the indicated places, he settled in the Uktus plant, where he founded the Mining Office, which was later renamed the Siberian Higher Mining Authority. On the Iset River, he laid the foundation for present-day Yekaterinburg, indicated the place for the construction of a copper smelter near the village of Yegoshikha - this was the beginning of the city of Perm. In the region, he launched activities to build schools and libraries, which after his death existed without fundamental changes for 158 years.

Tatishchev had a conflict with an entrepreneur, an expert in mining. He saw the construction and establishment of state-owned factories as an undermining of his activities. To investigate the dispute that arose between Tatishchev and Demidov, military officer and engineer G.V. was sent to the Urals. de Gennin. He found that Tatishchev acted fairly in everything. According to a report sent to Peter I, Tatishchev was acquitted and promoted to advisor to the Berg Collegium.

From 1724 to 1726 Tatishchev spent time in Sweden, where he inspected factories and mines, collected drawings and plans, brought a lapidary to Yekaterinburg, met many local scientists, etc. In 1727, he was appointed a member of the coin office, which then subordinated the mints. Tatishchev began work on a General Geographical Description of all of Siberia, which, due to lack of materials, he left unfinished, writing only 13 chapters and an outline of the book. The conflict with Biron’s proteges and the discontent of local influential persons who took advantage of Tatishchev’s individual abuses of power led to his recall and then putting him on trial. In 1734, Tatishchev was released from trial and again appointed to the Urals as head of state-owned mining factories “for the reproduction of factories.” From July 1737 to March 1739 headed the Orenburg expedition.

In January 1739, Tatishchev arrived in St. Petersburg, where a whole commission was set up to consider complaints against him. He was accused of “attacks and bribes,” failure to perform, etc. The commission arrested Tatishchev in the Peter and Paul Fortress and in September 1740 sentenced him to deprivation of his ranks. The sentence, however, was not carried out. During this difficult year for Tatishchev, he wrote his instructions to his son - the famous “Spiritual”.

Writing "Russian History"

The fall of Biron again brought forward Tatishchev: he was released from punishment and in 1741 he was appointed to Astrakhan to manage the Astrakhan province, mainly to stop the unrest among the Kalmyks. The lack of necessary military forces and the intrigues of the Kalmyk rulers prevented Tatishchev from achieving anything lasting. When she ascended the throne, Tatishchev hoped to free himself from the Kalmyk commission, but he did not succeed: he was left in place until 1745, when he was dismissed from office due to disagreements with the governor. Having arrived in his village of Boldino near Moscow, Tatishchev did not leave her until his death. Here he finished his famous “Russian History”.

Work on writing a work on native history began in the early 1720s. and actually became the main business of life. Having taken up writing the work, Tatishchev set himself several tasks. Firstly, to identify, collect and systematize the material and present it in accordance with the chronicle text. Secondly, explain the meaning of the collected material and establish the causal relationship of events, compare Russian history with Western, Byzantine and Eastern history.

Tatishchev’s work on writing “Russian History” proceeded rather slowly. Having begun to study and collect materials in 1721, the scientist in November 1739 presented to the Academy of Sciences “An Introduction to Russian Histories,” written in an ancient dialect. Arriving in St. Petersburg in 1739, Tatishchev showed his “Russian History” to many, but the work did not meet with approval. Resistance was provided by the clergy and foreign scientists. He was accused of freethinking. Then Tatishchev sent his “Russian History” to the Novgorod Archbishop Ambrose, asking him “to read and correct it.” The archbishop did not find “anything contrary to the truth” in Tatishchev’s work, but asked him to reduce controversial issues. Discouraged by attacks from the church and not feeling support from the Academy of Sciences, Tatishchev did not dare to protest openly. Not only the questions of church history that he raised served as a reason for rejecting the work, but also the dominance in the Academy of Sciences of foreign scientists, mainly Germans by origin.

V.N. Tatishchev turned to P.I. for help. Rychkov, a prominent historian, geographer, and economist of that time. Rychkov reacted with great interest to the work of Vasily Nikitich. Having retired to his Boldino estate after numerous wanderings and exiles, Tatishchev continues to work purposefully on writing “Russian History”. By the end of the 1740s. refers to Tatishchev’s decision to begin negotiations with the Academy of Sciences about the publication of his work. The majority of members of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences were favorably disposed. This is explained by the change in the general situation in the country. Elizaveta Petrovna came to power. National science in her person gained state support. His work was first published during the reign of Catherine II.

Structure and summary of “Russian History”

“Russian History” by Tatishchev consists of five books, which include four parts. Tatishchev's first book is divided into two parts. The first part is entirely devoted to the characteristics and history of the various peoples who inhabited the East European Plain in ancient times. The second part of the book is devoted to the ancient history of Rus'. Its scope covers 860-1238. Particular attention is paid to the issue of the role of Varangian influence on the development and formation of the ancient Russian state. In the second, third and fourth parts of “Russian History” Tatishchev conducts his narrative in chronological order. The second part of the work has the most finished appearance. The fact is that Tatishchev not only wrote it in an ancient dialect, but also translated it into his contemporary language. This, unfortunately, was not done with subsequent material. This part is also significant because in addition to it, Tatishchev compiled notes, where he gives comments on the text, which make up approximately a fifth of what was written. Tatishchev never brought the fourth part of his work to the planned time frame (1613), finishing the narrative in 1577. Although materials about later events were found in Tatishchev’s personal archive, for example, about the reign of Fyodor Ioanovich, Vasily Ioanovich Shuisky, Alexei Mikhailovich and etc.

Source base of “Russian History”

Tatishchev collected and kept the manuscripts he needed for his work. This is “The History of Kurbsky about the Kazan Campaign...; Popov, Archimandrite of the Trinity Monastery, from the reign of Tsar John II to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich; About Pozharsky and Minin, about 54 Polish times...; Siberian history...; Stories written in Tatar”, etc. The scientist had many sources, not in a single copy or version (in particular, Tatishchev had the story of the Kazan campaign not only under the authorship of A. Kurbsky, but also as a work by an unknown author). Tatishchev did not copy and rewrite ancient sources, but strived for their critical understanding. Many documents used by Tatishchev in his work on “Russian History” did not reach subsequent generations of scientists and, most likely, were forever lost to science. Tatishchev processed the works of foreign authors containing information on Russian history. in his classification of historical sources used by Tatishchev in his work, he singled out chronicles, ancient legends, writings of various historical figures, biographies, as well as “marriages and coronations.”

Other writings

In addition to the main work of V.N. Tatishchev left a large number of essays of a journalistic nature: “Spiritual”, “Reminder on the sent schedule of high and low state and zemstvo governments”, “Discourse on the universal audit” and others. “Spiritual” (ed. 1775) gives detailed instructions covering the entire life and activity of a person (landowner). She treats about upbringing, about different types of service, about relationships with superiors and subordinates, about family life, estate and household management, and the like. The “Reminder” sets out Tatishchev’s views on state law, and the “Discourse,” written on the occasion of the 1742 audit, indicates measures to increase state revenues.

An unfinished explanatory dictionary (up to the word “Klyuchnik”) “Lexicon of Russian Historical, Geographical, Political and Civil” (1744-1746) covers a wide range of concepts: geographical names, military affairs and navy, administrative and management system, religious issues and the church , science and education, the peoples of Russia, legislation and court, classes and estates, trade and means of production, industry, construction and architecture, money and monetary circulation. First published in 1793 (M.: Mining School, 1793. Parts 1-3).

Historical significance of the works

Vasily Tatishchev is rightly called one of the fathers of Russian historical science; he is the author of the first “Russian History from Ancient Times,” which is one of the most significant works for the entire existence of Russian historiography.

Tatishchev used “Russian History” as the basis for his works, I.N. Boltin and others. Thanks to Tatishchev, such historical sources as “Russian Truth”, Code of Laws of 1550, and “State Book” have reached us. They were published after Tatishchev's death thanks to Miller's efforts. With his research, Tatishchev laid the foundation for the formation of historical geography, ethnography, cartography and a number of other auxiliary historical disciplines. In the course of his scientific and practical activities, Tatishchev became increasingly aware of the need for historical knowledge for the development of Russia and sought to convince “the powers that be” of this. According to N.L. Rubinstein, “Russian History” by V.N. Tatishcheva “summed up the previous period of Russian historiography... for a whole century ahead.”

Kuzmin A.G. Tatishchev. M., 1987.

Rubinshtein N.L. Russian historiography. M., 1941.

Sidorenko O.V. Historiography IX-beg. XX centuries National history. Vladivostok, 2004.

Shakinko I. M. V. N. Tatishchev. - M.: Mysl, 1987.

Yukht A.I. State activities of V.N. Tatishchev in the 20s and early 30s of the 18th century / Responsible. ed. doc. ist. Sciences A. A. Preobrazhensky.. - M.: Nauka, 1985.