Pyotr A Avakov
Southern Scientific Center of Russian Academy of Science, Department of Humanities Researches, Senior Research Associate
Candidate of Historical Sciences (PhD in History)
Address: Rostov on Don, Russia
Address: Rostov on Don, Russia
less
InterestsView All (25)
Uploads
Books by Pyotr A Avakov
Monograph contains the original results of analytical research of the little-studied Sea of Azov and Black Sea direction of Peter the Great’s policy, with which his first innovations and military successes are associated. In 1696–1711, a unique attempt was made in the Northeastern Sea of Azov Region to implement a large-scale colonization project aimed to ensure Russia’s advance into the Black Sea. The conclusion of the Treaty of Constantinople with the Ottoman Empire and the outbreak of the Northern War in 1700 only delayed the implementation of these plans. Within fifteen years, a new administrative-territorial unit with a population of many thousands arose on the shores of the Sea of Azov, the first naval base in the history of Russia was founded and a number of fortresses were built. At the same time, the valuable experience of borderline interaction with the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean Khanate was gained, but an attempt to normalize the conflict-prone situation in the region failed. Due to the tsar’s military defeat in the Prut campaign in 1711, the “Azov project” lost its momentum and for three centuries was overshadowed by Russia’s reverberating victories in the Baltic, which predetermined its historiographical fate. The book is based on a wide range of written and pictorial sources, both published and held in nineteen Russian and foreign archives, museums and manuscript collections of libraries. Many of them are being brought into scholarly circulation for the first time. The publication is intended for historians, local historians, students of humanities and all those interested in the history of Southern Russia and its foreign policy of the Petrine era.
Монография посвящена малоизученному азово-черноморскому направлению политики Петра I, с которым связаны его первые новации и военные успехи. В 1696–1711 гг. в Северо-Восточном Приазовье была предпринята уникальная попытка реализовать масштабный колонизационный проект, призванный обеспечить продвижение России в Черное море. Заключение Константинопольского мира с Османской империей и начало Северной войны в 1700 г. лишь отсрочили воплощение этих планов. За пятнадцать лет на берегах Азовского моря была создана новая административно-территориальная единица с многотысячным населением, основана первая в истории России военно-морская база и построен ряд крепостей. В это же время был получен ценный опыт пограничного взаимодействия с Османской империей и Крымским ханством, но попытка нормализовать конфликтогенную ситуацию в регионе не удалась. Из-за военного поражения царя в Прутском походе 1711 г. «Азовский проект» потерпел крах и на три столетия оказался в тени громких побед России на Балтике, что предопределило и его историографическую судьбу. Книга написана на основе широкого круга письменных и изобразительных источников – как опубликованных, так и хранящихся в девятнадцати российских и зарубежных архивах, музеях и рукописных собраниях библиотек. Многие из них впервые вводятся в научный оборот.
Издание адресовано историкам, краеведам, студентам-гуманитариям и всем интересующимся историей Юга России и ее внешней политики Петровской эпохи.
The original journals of the Crimean campaigns are kept in the Russian State Archives of Ancient Acts. The documents provide the most complete and reliable day by day description of military operations and valuable information on the historical geography and toponymy of Crimea, the Dnieper area and the Azov Sea area. The unique ethnographic data contained in the documents allows to expand the scientific understanding of the daily life and military affairs of the Crimean Tatars and the Nogais of Azov sea area. The journals reflect the role of a pleiad of brilliant of Russian commanders and officers in combat operations. The commanders of Russian troops in the Crimean campaigns were such military leaders as Lieutenant-General Mikhail Leontyev (1735), General-Field marshals Count Burkhard Christoph von Münnich (1736) and Peter Lacy (1737, 1738).
Documents are supplemented by unique cartographic and other graphic materials, most of which are published for the first time. The comments and indexes in the Appendix help to work with the sources published in the collection.
The publication might be of interest for historians and everyone interested in the history of Crimea, the Russian army and international relations of the second quarter of the XVIII century.
Сборник содержит множество неизвестных ранее материалов по истории фортификации, способам реставрации, особенностям приспособления и использования памятников.
Публикуемые материалы сопровождаются большим количеством иллюстраций.
Издание адресовано историкам, краеведам, студентам и всем кто интересуется историей развития военно-инженерного дела.
Papers by Pyotr A Avakov
The article is devoted to a analysis of the works of O.Yu. Kuts on the history of the Don Cossacks of the 17th Century. The historian’s monographs and publications, which are distinguished by their extensiveness, explore issues of the formation of the Cossack community, the features of its social organization and relations with the Russian State. Much attention is paid to the military-administrative structure of the Don Host and regional trade. Research by O.Yu. Kuts shows that the ranks of the Don Cossacks were replenished by the free population of the southern Counties of Russia, who belonged to different social groups (from serfs to boyar children), with the participation of the Turkic element. Contrary to popular opinion in historiography, the flight of serfs to the Don was episodic. According to the observations of the historian, the military and industrial activity of the Cossacks in the Azov Region and on the Black Sea served as an important deterrent to the raiding activity of the Crimean Khanate. The researcher came to the conclusion that the possession of Azov in 1637–1641 played a fatal role in the history of the Don Host, contributed to its weakening and rapprochement with the Russian State.
Historiographic coverage of the southern direction of the policy of Peter I still has many gaps. The epoch-making triumph of the Tsar in the Baltic obscured from researchers his no less grandiose but unsuccessful attempt to solve the Black Sea issue. It is still unclear what place Constantinople occupied in Peter’s plans. The utopian idea of Constantinople liberation from the Agarians fascinated many minds of the Christian world since 1453, and special hopes were invariably pinned on Russia. But were they relevant to the king himself? The forged “Testament of Peter the Great” describes the plans for the expulsion of the Turks from Europe and the conquest of Constantinople. Such expectations really revived during the Russian-Turkish wars of the late 17th and early 18th centuries, not only among the Orthodox population of the Ottoman Empire and the Eastern Orthodoxy church hierarchs, but also in the Catholic and Protestant countries of Europe. At the beginning of the 18th century the Ottoman authorities did not doubt the intention of Peter I to take the throne of the Byzantine emperors, which the emissaries of Charles XII convinced Porta with considerable success. In 1711, rumors about the Tsar’s claims to throne of Eastern Emperor circulated even in some European capitals. An analysis of sources and historiography makes it possible to separate historical myths and reality and determine the difference between the goals of Peter I and the libels of his opponents.
Историографическое освещение южного направления политики Петра I по-прежнему зияет множеством лакун. Эпохальный триумф царя на Балтике заслонил от исследователей его не менее грандиозную, но неудачную попытку решить Черноморский вопрос. До сих пор неясно, какое место в планах Петра занимал Константинополь. Утопическая идея его освобождения из плена «агарян» будоражила многие умы христианского мира с 1453 г., и особые надежды при этом неизменно возлагались на Россию. Но были ли они актуальны для самого царя? Фальшивое «Завещание Петра Великого» приписывает ему планы изгнания турок из Европы и завоевания Константинополя. Подобные ожидания действительно оживились во время русско-турецких войн конца XVII-начала XVIII в., причем не только среди православного населения Османской империи и восточных церковных иерархов, но и в католических и протестантских странах Европы. В начале XVIII в. османские власти не сомневались в намерении Петра I занять трон византийских императоров, в чем Порту с немалым успехом убеждали эмиссары Карла XII. В 1711 г. слухи о претензиях царя на «ориентальное цесарство» ходили даже в некоторых европейских столицах. Анализ источников и историографии позволяет разделить исторические мифы и реальность и определить разницу между целями Петра I и наветами его противников.
The article examines official contacts between the Russian Tsardom and the Ottoman Empire in the Sea of Azov Region during the preparation of the embassy of Y.I. Ukraintsev to Constantinople in 1699. The parties were represented by officials who did not have diplomatic status: Admiral F.A. Golovin, who arrived in Azov and the Beylerbey of Kefe Tatar Murtaza Pasha, who was in Kerch. The Azov Voyevoda (Governor) participated in organizing communication between them, within the framework of the so-called border diplomacy. The Armistice of Karlowitz established in 1699 and the mutual hope for concluding a long-term peace served as a favorable background for the development of bilateral relations at the local level. It is shown that, largely thanks to successfully conducted negotiations, including through envoys and correspondence, the admiral and the beylerbey managed to organize a temporary stay in the Kerch Strait for a squadron of the Azov Fleet and the dispatch of a Tsar's Envoy to Constantinople on a Russian warship. The source base for the study consisted mainly of archival documents, some of which were introduced into scientific circulation for the first time.
В статье исследуются официальные контакты между Российским царством и Османской империей в Приазовье во время подготовки посольства Е.И. Украинцева в Константинополь в 1699 г. Стороны представляли чиновники, не имевшие дипломатического статуса: прибывший в Азов адмирал Ф.А. Головин и находившийся в Керчи кафинский бейлербей Татар Муртаза-паша. В организации коммуникации между ними, в рамках так называемой пограничной дипломатии, участвовал азовский воевода. Благоприятным фоном для развития двусторонних связей на местном уровне послужило установившееся в 1699 г. Карловицкое перемирие и обоюдная надежда сторон на заключение долгосрочного мира. Показано, что во многом благодаря успешно проведенным переговорам, в том числе через посланцев и посредством переписки, адмиралу и бейлербею удалось организовать временное пребывание в Керченском проливе эскадры Азовского флота и отправку царского посланника в Константинополь на российском военном корабле. Источниковую базу исследования составили, главным образом, архивные документы, часть которых впервые вводится в научный оборот.
Abstract. Introduction. Sphragistic sources play an important role in the historical study of the Kalmyk Khanate. Seals of the Kalmyk nobility gain particular importance for further insights into the shaping of the institution of khanship, genesis of Kalmyk nationhood, and religious-political ties between the Khanate and Tibet. Goals. The article introduces into scientific circulation a previously unknown seal of the Kalmyk Taishi (future Khan) Ayuka put by him in early 1684 on a shert' manuscript. Materials and methods. The original document has been discovered at the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. It rarely attracted the attention of historians who preferred to use its outdated publication of 1830. The study employs a set of research methods inherent to historical science, philology, and linguistics. Results. The paper investigates the circumstances that witnessed Ayuka’s use of the seal when the Kalmyk nobility were taking an oath of allegiance to the Russian Tsar, analyzes its appearances and Sanskrit-language legend. As compared to similar ceremonies in 1673 and 1677, the fact that Ayuka certified his oath with a seal in 1684 was a novelty in the oath taking procedure. Conclusions. The work suggests this seal be the earliest one of Ayuka’s personal seals known to date. The presence of the Indian title ‘rāja’ in the seal’s legend makes it possible to presume that even then Ayuka tended to position himself as supreme ruler of all Kalmyks in the status of Khan, although he received this title from the Dalai Lama over the subsequent years.
A Eurocentric view of the history of Russia affects the aberration of our retrospective ideas about the political and mental geography of the Petrine era. Contrary to the prevailing opinion in historiography, the first foreign trip of Peter I did not take place during the Great Embassy, during the Azov Campaigns of 1695-1696. Thus, the first foreign state visited by the Tsar was the Ottoman Empire. The effect of these two trips in terms of its scale, perhaps, even overshadowed their military-political results.
The role of the Russian Galley Squadron in the siege of Azov in 1696 was rather passive, and it was able to play it only thanks to the successful attack of the Don Cossacks on the Ottoman Flotilla at the mouth of the Don River. Peter I, who was inactive then, was so upset that in one of his letters he even lied about his participation in the action. This version of events became the basis of a historiographical myth, which for a long time was replicate by a whole galaxy of authors. An analysis of the sources shows that the Tsar deliberately cultivated this myth
The article reconstructs the history of the campaign of the Ryazan Razryad Regiment (Discharge Corps) in the North-Eastern Azov Sea area – the most poorly studied operation of the Russian-Turkish War of 1686–1699 based on the archival material. The specific dates of the campaign, the number and composition of the troops participating in it, their exact route is determined. The goals of the military expedition were to protect the region and build a port and a fortress on the northern coast of the Azov Sea. It is shown that the Mius Campaign of 1698 had an exclusively demonstration and colonization value.
The events that took place in the North-Eastern Azov Sea area in 1696–1711 are characterized by an unique attempt to implement a large-scale colonization project designed to further advance Russia into the Black Sea. The conclusion of the Treaty of Constantinople and the outbreak of the Great Northern War in 1700 only delayed these plans. New administrative-territorial unit with a population of many thousands, a naval base and a number of fortresses were founded. The «Azov project» of the tsar collapsed due to the defeat of the Prut Campaign in 1711.
The paper presents and analyses the undated drawing of Zaporozhian Sich and Russian fortress Kamenny Zaton (Stone Bay), completely unstudied before. The drawing was made at the beginning of 18th Century and has preserved in collection of Malorossiysky prikaz (Little Russia Office) in the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. Using methods of source criticism and historical geography authors attribute the drawing and conclude that it can be connected with the special mission to Sich, headed by Stol’nik (Steward) Fedor Protas’ev and the General Esaul of Zaporozhian Host (Cossack Hetmanate) Ivan Skoropadsky in 1703. The main goal of the mission, that is studied on the base of new archive sources, was to oblige Zaporozhian Cossack to take an oath to the Peter I in return for tsar’s salary. Authors also analyzes in details the drawing itself, describing at the same time the process of building of the Kamenny Zaton and correcting the timeline of it, including the foundation date of the fortress. It appeared that Kamenny Zaton had earthen fortifications only, as the Russian government didn’t manage to build stone ones. The picture of the Kamenny Zaton on the drawing was made in the orthogonal projection as quadrilateral bastion fortress, whereas in reality it had five bastions. The Zaporozhian Sich is pictured as symbolical agglomeration of buildings with gable roofs and four towers. Considering technical and stylistic characteristics of the document it can be identified as the Russian geographical drawing, the unique artefact that reflects and visualizes the history of Russian colonization of the lower Dnieper River territories in the beginning of 18th Century.
A new source on the history of the Bulavin Uprising of 1707-1709 is published: a report of the Azov Governor I.A. Tolstoy to the Ambassadorial Chancery of December 8, 1708, which is stored in the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. It was sent in response to a request for an order about the Gulyashiy Chelovek (Freeman Wanderer) Grigory Zaitsev, nicknamed Banshick (Bath Attendant), accused of aiding Kondraty Bulavin. Analysis. Despite the brevity of the presentation, the document is very informative. It contains information about the events that took place in Cherkassk and Azov in June 1708. New details are reported about the organization of the rebelled campaign against Azov, about Ataman K.A. Bulavin's hopes for support from the Azov residents and soldiers, about the conspiracy against him in Cherkassk, etc. No less important is the data on how the preliminary investigation of state crimes (participation in a rebellion) was conducted at the Ambassadorial Chancery in the second half of 1708. On the example of the G.K. Zaitsev's case we see that the investigation, which started because of a denunciation, was carried out in accordance with the norms of procedural law adopted at that time and was accompanied by the collection of evidence. At the same time, the paper is a source of biographical information about the person under investigation, who unwittingly became an agent of the Cherkassk's conspirators and an informant of the Azov governor. Methods. The publication is prepared in accordance with the applicable rules of archaeography. Results. The published document allows us to verify some other sources introduced into scientific circulation earlier, and extends the knowledge available in science about the culmination of the Bulavin Uprising.
The article is devoted to the poorly studied history of fortification construction in the Ottoman fortress Azov, located at the Don River delta. Based on a wide range of Russian and Ottoman sources, the stages of the creation of the complex of fortifications of Azov, the evolution of its planning structure and the changes that took place in local toponymy in connection with these processes are traced. An attempt was made to determine the location and parameters of the city's fortifications in the 16th–17th Centuries. It is shown that the system of stone fortifications of Azov began to form in 1475, and it was based on two stone castles built by the Venetians and Genoese as early as the 14th Century. By the early 1540s, Azov had a four-part structure. By the time of the capture by the Don Cossacks in 1637, Azov already had a three-part structure. The consequence of the Ottoman siege of Azov in 1641 was the almost total destruction of the fortifications. Sources do not confirm the point of view widespread in historiography, according to which, when the Ottomans restored fortress in 1642, its layout remained unchanged. Purposeful improvement of the fortifications of Azov continued in the second half of the 17th Century. The Sublime Porte paid great attention to the defense capability of the northernmost outpost of the empire. However, the strengthening in the region of the positions of the first Don Cossacks, and then of the Russian State, made these defensive measures useless.
https://vostokoriens.jes.su/s086919080011544-5-1/ Текст на сайте журнала отличается от опубликованного!
Monograph contains the original results of analytical research of the little-studied Sea of Azov and Black Sea direction of Peter the Great’s policy, with which his first innovations and military successes are associated. In 1696–1711, a unique attempt was made in the Northeastern Sea of Azov Region to implement a large-scale colonization project aimed to ensure Russia’s advance into the Black Sea. The conclusion of the Treaty of Constantinople with the Ottoman Empire and the outbreak of the Northern War in 1700 only delayed the implementation of these plans. Within fifteen years, a new administrative-territorial unit with a population of many thousands arose on the shores of the Sea of Azov, the first naval base in the history of Russia was founded and a number of fortresses were built. At the same time, the valuable experience of borderline interaction with the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean Khanate was gained, but an attempt to normalize the conflict-prone situation in the region failed. Due to the tsar’s military defeat in the Prut campaign in 1711, the “Azov project” lost its momentum and for three centuries was overshadowed by Russia’s reverberating victories in the Baltic, which predetermined its historiographical fate. The book is based on a wide range of written and pictorial sources, both published and held in nineteen Russian and foreign archives, museums and manuscript collections of libraries. Many of them are being brought into scholarly circulation for the first time. The publication is intended for historians, local historians, students of humanities and all those interested in the history of Southern Russia and its foreign policy of the Petrine era.
Монография посвящена малоизученному азово-черноморскому направлению политики Петра I, с которым связаны его первые новации и военные успехи. В 1696–1711 гг. в Северо-Восточном Приазовье была предпринята уникальная попытка реализовать масштабный колонизационный проект, призванный обеспечить продвижение России в Черное море. Заключение Константинопольского мира с Османской империей и начало Северной войны в 1700 г. лишь отсрочили воплощение этих планов. За пятнадцать лет на берегах Азовского моря была создана новая административно-территориальная единица с многотысячным населением, основана первая в истории России военно-морская база и построен ряд крепостей. В это же время был получен ценный опыт пограничного взаимодействия с Османской империей и Крымским ханством, но попытка нормализовать конфликтогенную ситуацию в регионе не удалась. Из-за военного поражения царя в Прутском походе 1711 г. «Азовский проект» потерпел крах и на три столетия оказался в тени громких побед России на Балтике, что предопределило и его историографическую судьбу. Книга написана на основе широкого круга письменных и изобразительных источников – как опубликованных, так и хранящихся в девятнадцати российских и зарубежных архивах, музеях и рукописных собраниях библиотек. Многие из них впервые вводятся в научный оборот.
Издание адресовано историкам, краеведам, студентам-гуманитариям и всем интересующимся историей Юга России и ее внешней политики Петровской эпохи.
The original journals of the Crimean campaigns are kept in the Russian State Archives of Ancient Acts. The documents provide the most complete and reliable day by day description of military operations and valuable information on the historical geography and toponymy of Crimea, the Dnieper area and the Azov Sea area. The unique ethnographic data contained in the documents allows to expand the scientific understanding of the daily life and military affairs of the Crimean Tatars and the Nogais of Azov sea area. The journals reflect the role of a pleiad of brilliant of Russian commanders and officers in combat operations. The commanders of Russian troops in the Crimean campaigns were such military leaders as Lieutenant-General Mikhail Leontyev (1735), General-Field marshals Count Burkhard Christoph von Münnich (1736) and Peter Lacy (1737, 1738).
Documents are supplemented by unique cartographic and other graphic materials, most of which are published for the first time. The comments and indexes in the Appendix help to work with the sources published in the collection.
The publication might be of interest for historians and everyone interested in the history of Crimea, the Russian army and international relations of the second quarter of the XVIII century.
Сборник содержит множество неизвестных ранее материалов по истории фортификации, способам реставрации, особенностям приспособления и использования памятников.
Публикуемые материалы сопровождаются большим количеством иллюстраций.
Издание адресовано историкам, краеведам, студентам и всем кто интересуется историей развития военно-инженерного дела.
The article is devoted to a analysis of the works of O.Yu. Kuts on the history of the Don Cossacks of the 17th Century. The historian’s monographs and publications, which are distinguished by their extensiveness, explore issues of the formation of the Cossack community, the features of its social organization and relations with the Russian State. Much attention is paid to the military-administrative structure of the Don Host and regional trade. Research by O.Yu. Kuts shows that the ranks of the Don Cossacks were replenished by the free population of the southern Counties of Russia, who belonged to different social groups (from serfs to boyar children), with the participation of the Turkic element. Contrary to popular opinion in historiography, the flight of serfs to the Don was episodic. According to the observations of the historian, the military and industrial activity of the Cossacks in the Azov Region and on the Black Sea served as an important deterrent to the raiding activity of the Crimean Khanate. The researcher came to the conclusion that the possession of Azov in 1637–1641 played a fatal role in the history of the Don Host, contributed to its weakening and rapprochement with the Russian State.
Historiographic coverage of the southern direction of the policy of Peter I still has many gaps. The epoch-making triumph of the Tsar in the Baltic obscured from researchers his no less grandiose but unsuccessful attempt to solve the Black Sea issue. It is still unclear what place Constantinople occupied in Peter’s plans. The utopian idea of Constantinople liberation from the Agarians fascinated many minds of the Christian world since 1453, and special hopes were invariably pinned on Russia. But were they relevant to the king himself? The forged “Testament of Peter the Great” describes the plans for the expulsion of the Turks from Europe and the conquest of Constantinople. Such expectations really revived during the Russian-Turkish wars of the late 17th and early 18th centuries, not only among the Orthodox population of the Ottoman Empire and the Eastern Orthodoxy church hierarchs, but also in the Catholic and Protestant countries of Europe. At the beginning of the 18th century the Ottoman authorities did not doubt the intention of Peter I to take the throne of the Byzantine emperors, which the emissaries of Charles XII convinced Porta with considerable success. In 1711, rumors about the Tsar’s claims to throne of Eastern Emperor circulated even in some European capitals. An analysis of sources and historiography makes it possible to separate historical myths and reality and determine the difference between the goals of Peter I and the libels of his opponents.
Историографическое освещение южного направления политики Петра I по-прежнему зияет множеством лакун. Эпохальный триумф царя на Балтике заслонил от исследователей его не менее грандиозную, но неудачную попытку решить Черноморский вопрос. До сих пор неясно, какое место в планах Петра занимал Константинополь. Утопическая идея его освобождения из плена «агарян» будоражила многие умы христианского мира с 1453 г., и особые надежды при этом неизменно возлагались на Россию. Но были ли они актуальны для самого царя? Фальшивое «Завещание Петра Великого» приписывает ему планы изгнания турок из Европы и завоевания Константинополя. Подобные ожидания действительно оживились во время русско-турецких войн конца XVII-начала XVIII в., причем не только среди православного населения Османской империи и восточных церковных иерархов, но и в католических и протестантских странах Европы. В начале XVIII в. османские власти не сомневались в намерении Петра I занять трон византийских императоров, в чем Порту с немалым успехом убеждали эмиссары Карла XII. В 1711 г. слухи о претензиях царя на «ориентальное цесарство» ходили даже в некоторых европейских столицах. Анализ источников и историографии позволяет разделить исторические мифы и реальность и определить разницу между целями Петра I и наветами его противников.
The article examines official contacts between the Russian Tsardom and the Ottoman Empire in the Sea of Azov Region during the preparation of the embassy of Y.I. Ukraintsev to Constantinople in 1699. The parties were represented by officials who did not have diplomatic status: Admiral F.A. Golovin, who arrived in Azov and the Beylerbey of Kefe Tatar Murtaza Pasha, who was in Kerch. The Azov Voyevoda (Governor) participated in organizing communication between them, within the framework of the so-called border diplomacy. The Armistice of Karlowitz established in 1699 and the mutual hope for concluding a long-term peace served as a favorable background for the development of bilateral relations at the local level. It is shown that, largely thanks to successfully conducted negotiations, including through envoys and correspondence, the admiral and the beylerbey managed to organize a temporary stay in the Kerch Strait for a squadron of the Azov Fleet and the dispatch of a Tsar's Envoy to Constantinople on a Russian warship. The source base for the study consisted mainly of archival documents, some of which were introduced into scientific circulation for the first time.
В статье исследуются официальные контакты между Российским царством и Османской империей в Приазовье во время подготовки посольства Е.И. Украинцева в Константинополь в 1699 г. Стороны представляли чиновники, не имевшие дипломатического статуса: прибывший в Азов адмирал Ф.А. Головин и находившийся в Керчи кафинский бейлербей Татар Муртаза-паша. В организации коммуникации между ними, в рамках так называемой пограничной дипломатии, участвовал азовский воевода. Благоприятным фоном для развития двусторонних связей на местном уровне послужило установившееся в 1699 г. Карловицкое перемирие и обоюдная надежда сторон на заключение долгосрочного мира. Показано, что во многом благодаря успешно проведенным переговорам, в том числе через посланцев и посредством переписки, адмиралу и бейлербею удалось организовать временное пребывание в Керченском проливе эскадры Азовского флота и отправку царского посланника в Константинополь на российском военном корабле. Источниковую базу исследования составили, главным образом, архивные документы, часть которых впервые вводится в научный оборот.
Abstract. Introduction. Sphragistic sources play an important role in the historical study of the Kalmyk Khanate. Seals of the Kalmyk nobility gain particular importance for further insights into the shaping of the institution of khanship, genesis of Kalmyk nationhood, and religious-political ties between the Khanate and Tibet. Goals. The article introduces into scientific circulation a previously unknown seal of the Kalmyk Taishi (future Khan) Ayuka put by him in early 1684 on a shert' manuscript. Materials and methods. The original document has been discovered at the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. It rarely attracted the attention of historians who preferred to use its outdated publication of 1830. The study employs a set of research methods inherent to historical science, philology, and linguistics. Results. The paper investigates the circumstances that witnessed Ayuka’s use of the seal when the Kalmyk nobility were taking an oath of allegiance to the Russian Tsar, analyzes its appearances and Sanskrit-language legend. As compared to similar ceremonies in 1673 and 1677, the fact that Ayuka certified his oath with a seal in 1684 was a novelty in the oath taking procedure. Conclusions. The work suggests this seal be the earliest one of Ayuka’s personal seals known to date. The presence of the Indian title ‘rāja’ in the seal’s legend makes it possible to presume that even then Ayuka tended to position himself as supreme ruler of all Kalmyks in the status of Khan, although he received this title from the Dalai Lama over the subsequent years.
A Eurocentric view of the history of Russia affects the aberration of our retrospective ideas about the political and mental geography of the Petrine era. Contrary to the prevailing opinion in historiography, the first foreign trip of Peter I did not take place during the Great Embassy, during the Azov Campaigns of 1695-1696. Thus, the first foreign state visited by the Tsar was the Ottoman Empire. The effect of these two trips in terms of its scale, perhaps, even overshadowed their military-political results.
The role of the Russian Galley Squadron in the siege of Azov in 1696 was rather passive, and it was able to play it only thanks to the successful attack of the Don Cossacks on the Ottoman Flotilla at the mouth of the Don River. Peter I, who was inactive then, was so upset that in one of his letters he even lied about his participation in the action. This version of events became the basis of a historiographical myth, which for a long time was replicate by a whole galaxy of authors. An analysis of the sources shows that the Tsar deliberately cultivated this myth
The article reconstructs the history of the campaign of the Ryazan Razryad Regiment (Discharge Corps) in the North-Eastern Azov Sea area – the most poorly studied operation of the Russian-Turkish War of 1686–1699 based on the archival material. The specific dates of the campaign, the number and composition of the troops participating in it, their exact route is determined. The goals of the military expedition were to protect the region and build a port and a fortress on the northern coast of the Azov Sea. It is shown that the Mius Campaign of 1698 had an exclusively demonstration and colonization value.
The events that took place in the North-Eastern Azov Sea area in 1696–1711 are characterized by an unique attempt to implement a large-scale colonization project designed to further advance Russia into the Black Sea. The conclusion of the Treaty of Constantinople and the outbreak of the Great Northern War in 1700 only delayed these plans. New administrative-territorial unit with a population of many thousands, a naval base and a number of fortresses were founded. The «Azov project» of the tsar collapsed due to the defeat of the Prut Campaign in 1711.
The paper presents and analyses the undated drawing of Zaporozhian Sich and Russian fortress Kamenny Zaton (Stone Bay), completely unstudied before. The drawing was made at the beginning of 18th Century and has preserved in collection of Malorossiysky prikaz (Little Russia Office) in the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. Using methods of source criticism and historical geography authors attribute the drawing and conclude that it can be connected with the special mission to Sich, headed by Stol’nik (Steward) Fedor Protas’ev and the General Esaul of Zaporozhian Host (Cossack Hetmanate) Ivan Skoropadsky in 1703. The main goal of the mission, that is studied on the base of new archive sources, was to oblige Zaporozhian Cossack to take an oath to the Peter I in return for tsar’s salary. Authors also analyzes in details the drawing itself, describing at the same time the process of building of the Kamenny Zaton and correcting the timeline of it, including the foundation date of the fortress. It appeared that Kamenny Zaton had earthen fortifications only, as the Russian government didn’t manage to build stone ones. The picture of the Kamenny Zaton on the drawing was made in the orthogonal projection as quadrilateral bastion fortress, whereas in reality it had five bastions. The Zaporozhian Sich is pictured as symbolical agglomeration of buildings with gable roofs and four towers. Considering technical and stylistic characteristics of the document it can be identified as the Russian geographical drawing, the unique artefact that reflects and visualizes the history of Russian colonization of the lower Dnieper River territories in the beginning of 18th Century.
A new source on the history of the Bulavin Uprising of 1707-1709 is published: a report of the Azov Governor I.A. Tolstoy to the Ambassadorial Chancery of December 8, 1708, which is stored in the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. It was sent in response to a request for an order about the Gulyashiy Chelovek (Freeman Wanderer) Grigory Zaitsev, nicknamed Banshick (Bath Attendant), accused of aiding Kondraty Bulavin. Analysis. Despite the brevity of the presentation, the document is very informative. It contains information about the events that took place in Cherkassk and Azov in June 1708. New details are reported about the organization of the rebelled campaign against Azov, about Ataman K.A. Bulavin's hopes for support from the Azov residents and soldiers, about the conspiracy against him in Cherkassk, etc. No less important is the data on how the preliminary investigation of state crimes (participation in a rebellion) was conducted at the Ambassadorial Chancery in the second half of 1708. On the example of the G.K. Zaitsev's case we see that the investigation, which started because of a denunciation, was carried out in accordance with the norms of procedural law adopted at that time and was accompanied by the collection of evidence. At the same time, the paper is a source of biographical information about the person under investigation, who unwittingly became an agent of the Cherkassk's conspirators and an informant of the Azov governor. Methods. The publication is prepared in accordance with the applicable rules of archaeography. Results. The published document allows us to verify some other sources introduced into scientific circulation earlier, and extends the knowledge available in science about the culmination of the Bulavin Uprising.
The article is devoted to the poorly studied history of fortification construction in the Ottoman fortress Azov, located at the Don River delta. Based on a wide range of Russian and Ottoman sources, the stages of the creation of the complex of fortifications of Azov, the evolution of its planning structure and the changes that took place in local toponymy in connection with these processes are traced. An attempt was made to determine the location and parameters of the city's fortifications in the 16th–17th Centuries. It is shown that the system of stone fortifications of Azov began to form in 1475, and it was based on two stone castles built by the Venetians and Genoese as early as the 14th Century. By the early 1540s, Azov had a four-part structure. By the time of the capture by the Don Cossacks in 1637, Azov already had a three-part structure. The consequence of the Ottoman siege of Azov in 1641 was the almost total destruction of the fortifications. Sources do not confirm the point of view widespread in historiography, according to which, when the Ottomans restored fortress in 1642, its layout remained unchanged. Purposeful improvement of the fortifications of Azov continued in the second half of the 17th Century. The Sublime Porte paid great attention to the defense capability of the northernmost outpost of the empire. However, the strengthening in the region of the positions of the first Don Cossacks, and then of the Russian State, made these defensive measures useless.
https://vostokoriens.jes.su/s086919080011544-5-1/ Текст на сайте журнала отличается от опубликованного!
The article analyzes the causes and goals of Peter I’s Azov campaigns. The author concludes that the generally accepted interpretation of this issue in historiography is hypothetical in nature and based on an a priori equivalence of the campaigns’ goals and results. The purpose of the campaigns was to deliver a tangible blow to the Ottoman Empire: getting access to the sea was the result of the capture of Azov. It is shown that J. Rousset de Missy, a Dutch publicist of the first half of the eighteenth century, stands at the origins of the historiographic tradition that connects the idea of owning Azov with the ambition to develop maritime trade in Russia. The universal constructions of the philosopher K. Marx played an important role in consolidating this scheme in Soviet historical science. The idea of organizing the Azov campaigns, based on the previous experience of military-political relations between Russia and the Ottoman Empire in the seventeenth century, probably belongs to the tsar himself. The opinion that the author of this idea was the Ukrainian Hetman I.S. Mazepa has been declared insolvent. The author presents new information and arguments confirming that the planning of the Azov campaign began no earlier than the end of 1694.
В статье анализируются причины и цели Азовских походов Петра I. Автор приходит к выводу, что общепринятая в историографии трактовка этого вопроса носит гипотетический характер и основана на априорном тождестве целей Азовских походов и их результатов. Целью походов было нанесение ощутимого удара по Османской империи, а получение выхода в море стало следствием взятия Азова. Показано, что у истоков историографической традиции, связывающей идею обладания Азовом со стремлением развивать в России морскую торговлю, стоит голландский публицист первой половины XVIII в. Ж. Руссе де Мисси. Для закрепления этой схемы в советской исторической науке важную роль сыграли универсальные построения философа К. Маркса. Идея организации Азовских походов, основанная на предшествующем опыте военно-политических отношений России с Османской империей в XVII в., вероятно, принадлежит самому царю. Мнение о том, что автором этой идеи был украинский гетман И.С. Мазепа, признано несостоятельным. Приведены новые сведения и аргументы, подтверждающие вывод о начале планирования похода к Азову не ранее конца 1694 г.
Based on new material, the article highlights the course of the first Russo-Turkish war at
its peripheral theater in 1672–1677. It is shown that the Don Cossacks and located in the
lower Don River Russian troops at the first stage of the war created a tangible threat to
Azov and diverted significant Ottoman military forces from other fronts.
Based on a wide range of sources, the article reconstructs the most vivid period of life of Danila Efremovich Efremov (1690–1760) – one of the most famous Atamans of the Don Host. The article traces the stages of his unusual career preceding his appointment as an Ataman. The use of a number of new and little-known archival documents made it possible to establish and clarify many facts of the hero’s biography. For the first time in historiography, the conflict of the Officer (Starshina) D.E. Efremov with the authorities of the Don Host in 1731–1732 is highlighted, after the investigation of which the Military Collegium demoted him to an ordinary Cossack. Combat merit and connections among the Russian generals ensured the nonconformist’s return to the ranks of the officer elite. The subsequent elevation of D.E. Efremov happened due to his personal contribution to the successful implementation of Russia's foreign policy. Through the efforts of the Officer, the feud in the Kalmyk Khanate was stopped and its integration with the Russian Empire intensified. The article analyzes the relationships of D.E. Efremov with other Officers of the Don Host and the Kalmyk Khan Donduk Ombo, as well as contacts with representatives of Russian generals. In addition, inaccurate biographical information about the ataman found in historiography is refuted. The facts studied allow us to conclude that the crucial part for D.E. Efremov’s win over the competitors in the struggle for the post of the Ataman of the Don Host did not have so much to do with his military experience and diplomatic talent as it had with his high credit of trust with the supreme authority.
The image of Peter the Great occupies a special place in the historical memory of the people of the Rostov region, the territory of which the tsar repeatedly visited in the past. Since the end of the XIX century, the myth about the stay of Peter the Great in the place of the future Rostov-on-Don and his involvement in the appearance of the city became widespread in local history. In 1909–1914 Rostov social activists tried to immortalize it, but could not raise funds to create the monument. The idea was implemented by the city authorities in 2018.
Turkish War of 1686-1700 (Moscow: Russkoe slovo, 2022).
The monograph under review is a serious contribution to the study of the foreign policy and military history of Russia in the first decades of the 18th сentury. V. A. Artamonov used a large array of historical sources (primarily archival ones) and offered a number of innovative assessments and conclusions.