Rossijskaâ istoriâ

The article is devoted to the analysis of the thesis on the belonging of Russian zemsky sobors to the number of organs of estate-representative power. It is not possible for the author to draw parallels between the zemsky sobors and the european parliaments. The very existence of the zemsky sobors as a political institution and authority in Russia of the XVI--XVII centuries remains questionable.

The article examines attempts to transform the institute of the tsar's personal power (the Commission for the Acceptance of Petitions) and the foundations of civil service during the reign of Alexander III. It is stressed that these measures were connected with ideological searches among conservatives, who considered the personal power of the monarch as the main guarantee of ensuring social stability. Faced with the fact that the prerogatives of the tsar were largely limited by the influence of the bureaucracy and the departmental system of management, conservatives proposed measures aimed to change the current situation. The most part of the planned transformations were not implemented. This indicated both of the strength of the bureaucracy's resistance to measures aimed at limiting its influence, and of the fact that most conservative projects did not correspond to the socio-political realities of the end of nineteenth century.

The article is cover the reconstruction of the biography of the lady-in-waiting of the imperial court, Baroness Maria Petrovna Fredericks (1832-1903), as well as a review of her memoir legacy, which has so far been published only partially. The court activities of Baroness M.P. Fredericks are characterized, her decisive role in the creation of the Society for the Care of Wounded and Sick Soldiers (renamed the Russian Red Cross Society in 1879) together with M.S. Sabinina. This article clarifies the dates when Baroness Fredericks and Sabinina left the Court, and describes their activities in the field of charity and charity. The memoirs of Baroness Fredericks were written from December 14, 1883 to March 1897 and cover the period from the second half of the 1830s to 1894. An analysis of Baroness Fredericks' correspondence with Princess A.V. Golitsyna and the editor of the Historical Bulletin magazine, S.N. Shubinsky, allowed us to see the changes in the author's intention during the publication of part of the memoirs and to understand the reasons for which this publication has not been completed. The unpublished part of the memoirs is an important source for studying the daily life of the Court not only of the Nicholas era, but also of the era of Great Reforms, opens the "Crimean pages" of the biography of Baroness Fredericks, and also provides new material on the history of charity and communities of sisters of mercy in the Russian Empire.

The article provides an overview of the discussion in the scientific economic literature on the degree of customs protection of domestic industry, which unfolded after the approval of the protectionist tariff of 1891. It is noted that among its participants, committed free traders were a minority, since freedom of trade has always been considered in Russia only as a distant and elusive goal. Most liberal economists considered the concept of the German economist F. The bill, which provided for temporary selective support for certain promising industries that were much more suitable for Russia, pointed to the bureaucrats' perversion of "true" protectionism and demanded a relaxation of customs duties. The proponents of the prohibitive tariff also agreed with List's ideas in theory, but in practice they advocated a general (indiscriminate) and virtually indefinite increase in duties. To a greater extent than their opponents, they took into account the conditions and needs of Russia, its lagging behind the advanced countries of the West, and also took into account the fact that a strict prohibitive system in foreign trade has long been a national economic tradition, deviations from which occurred quite rarely. In addition, at that time, a significant strengthening of customs protection was a global trend, in line with which the United States and the leading countries of continental Europe built their foreign trade policy, so Russia could not stay away from this process.

The article is devoted to the national question in the publicism of the Russian Political Committee (RPC), which united Russian republican emigrants in Poland. The article analyzes articles from the newspaper «Svoboda», where the authors spoke about the relationship with the anti-Bolshevik movements of non-Russian peoples. Separately, the discourse of Russian-Polish rapprochement, promoted by the RPC and its leader B.V. Savinkov, is covered. Recognizing the mistakes of the White movement, the RPC saw a federation as the preferred form of organizing the Russian space. The Polish public reacted to the activities of the RPC in different ways: among Polish intellectuals there were both Russophiles, waiting for the imminent «liberation of Russia», and Russophobes, suspecting Savinkov's group of "imperialism". The conclusion of a preliminary truce between the RSFSR and Poland served as a temporary cooperation of Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian forces, faced with the threat of losing Polish support.

In historical science and journalism, Lavrentiy Beria was evaluated as the head of the NKVD-the Ministry of Internal Affairs. However, participation in the repressions and deportations of 1941, 1943-1944, the leadership of intelligence and counterintelligence overshadowed the routine management of the industrial sector. "Beria the businessman" is in the shadow of the head of the internal affairs and state security agencies. It is this aspect of Beria's activities that has not been sufficiently studied. The article focuses on his experience as Stalin's deputy in the Council of People's Commissars -- the Council of Ministers of the USSR and their operational bureaus, where he had to solve current economic management issues. The documents of the Beriev secretariat in the government, the resolutions of the GKO, which his assistants took part in developing, and the testimonies of his contemporaries make it possible to characterize Beria as one of the few representatives of the Stalinist ruling group who managed to strengthen and maintain his positions of power, expand the zone of administrative control over key areas of domestic policy. It is also important to reveal Beria's management style, his relationships with subordinates, and his ability to create and manage clients.

The article reconstructs the circumstances of the sharp increase in agricultural tax in 1948 and an even sharper reduction of this tax in 1953. The roles of I.V. Stalin and N.S. Khrushchev in this process are highlighted, and alternative options proposed by the USSR Ministry of Finance are studied. The consequences of the increase in taxation of personal subsidiary plots on the volume of production of certain types of agricultural products, the quality of peasant nutrition and prices in collective farm markets are shown. It is revealed that the entire set of measures to change the taxation procedure and reduce the tax amount adopted in 1953 was developed by the USSR Ministry of Finance back in 1948, but "waited for its time", like many other initiatives that later became associated with the Khrushchev thaw.

The article is devoted to the characterization of V.P.Danilov's work in the context of the development of Russian historiography in the second half of the twentieth century. and its coverage of the agrarian history of the Soviet era.

The review concerns itself the publication of the Arkhangelsk (Dvinsk) Customs Book of 1719 and analyzes the history and principles of the publication of customs books.

The review analyzes the latest research revealing the role of palace commandants in the ruling elite of the Russian Empire during the reign of Nicholas II.

The review analyzes the provisions and conclusions of E. Kochetkova's monograph devoted to the study of the experience of state socialism in relation to nature in the late Soviet period. Attention is drawn to the author's recognition of the special role of specialists in the forestry industry in making decisions on the modernization of the country. The importance of the author's judgment on the coexistence in the policy of the Soviet government of the desire for extensive exploitation of natural resources and the desire for technological modernity is emphasized. This is demonstrated by the examples of the development of the eastern regions of the country, experiments with alternative resources. A general conclusion is drawn about the importance of the monograph from the point of view of rethinking the relationship between the state, industry, society and nature.

The review examines a study summarizing the attribution of 800 works of Russian portrait painting of the 18th -- early 20th centuries and demonstrating the possibilities of the historical and subject method in its implementation.