Vol 13, No 3 (2023)

At the beginning of the 17th century, a detachment of Yaik Cossacks, led by ataman Nechai, raided the Khiva Khanate, plundering and ruining its capital – the city of Urgench. However, the raid ended tragically for the Cossacks – they were all killed by the troops of the Khan Arab-Mohammed, whose son, a few decades later, described this event in his book on the history of the Khanate. The disappearance of this ancient book with its preserved translations into various European languages, although they do not allow us to restore the contents of the protograph with absolute accuracy, but they show that the legends of the Ural Cossacks about the campaign of their ancestors led by Nechai to the Khiva Khanate reflect real events, that these are not myths and legends created by the imagination of the Cossacks. The works of all the authors mentioned in the article, despite the differences present in them, contain relatively small amounts of information about those events, since they, as a rule, cover a wide chronological framework, within which the raid of the Yaik Cossacks on the Khiva Khanate in 1603 is only a small episode. The article also analyzes the reasons for the differences in the coverage of this event by different authors.

This article discusses some fragmentary known aspects of the history of mining partnerships – the first domestic institution created in addition to state pension guarantees for retired "free rural residents" of state-owned mining plants in the Caucasus, the Urals, Karelia and Eastern Siberia.

When writing the article, materials from two Russian archives and, mainly, pre-revolutionary author's publications in the Mining Journal, the official publication of the Mining Scientific Committee, were used.

The problematic characteristics of loan transactions are analyzed by the content of the identified facts of "neglect" and "damages" investigated during inspections of the activities of the Kusinsky, Zlatoust and Satka partnerships in 1881, 1877–1884 and 1911–1913, respectively. The indicators of financial and material "sustainability" of the system of partnerships as new formations of the post-reform era are given.

After agriculture, the second main branch of farming in the Southern Urals was animal husbandry, especially for semi-nomadic and nomadic peoples. Since the 19th century an entrepreneurial, market economy is being formed, primarily in horse breeding and sheep breeding. However, due to the short duration of the livestock trade, identifying the actors in the livestock market remains a challenge for historians. The article uses new methods of searching and analyzing sources. In addition to the published data on the noble, landowner economy, where there is information about the number of livestock, direct and indirect information about large-scale, market livestock raising in the Bashkir-Meshcheryak army, as well as information from veterinary point doctors who controlled the arrival of cattle from other regions, was involved. The widest possible coverage of sources made it possible to establish that already from the first half of the 19th century. in the southern Urals there was trade horse breeding and sheep breeding. A large number of horses were sold at the Menzelinsky fair; individual herds were even brought to Nizhny Novgorod. Horse breeding for sale existed among the Turkic peoples (Bashkirs and Tatars), it was represented by both large stud farms and small businesses in the countryside. he development of market relations in the 19th – early 20th centuries in the Southern Urals was observed in animal husbandry, which was stimulated by the ancient traditions of the semi-nomadic Bashkirs.

The question of the national autonomy of the Turko-Tatar peoples of Russia has been in the air for quite a long time. At the First All-Russian Muslim Congress, held in Moscow in May 1917, while discussing the question of the state structure of Russia, delegates split into two camps – Unitarians and federalists. The latter soon won the victory, immediately starting to draw up a project of national-territorial autonomy. One of these projects was the “Idel-Ural State”. At present, a considerable array of scientific research has been accumulated on the process of preparing and proclaiming the project of the State of Idel-Ural as a multinational state. However, among these studies there are no works that would cover the legal component of this project.

As a result of a long meeting of the National Assembly of Turko-Tatar Muslims in January 1918, a number of resolutions came into being, which generally established the framework for the subsequent constitutionalization of law and order in the State of Idel-Ural. The combination of these resolutions can be given the conditional name “Constitution” of Idel-Ural. It fixed the path of development of constitutionalism, and guaranteed the fundamental principles of building statehood: national equality, federalism, democracy, political and ideological pluralism. The “Constitution” of Idel-Ural played a particularly important role in the practice of state building of the Tatar people. This work aims to provide a general analysis of the provisions of this legal document, and thereby reveal the hidden areas of the state-legal history of the Tatars.

The publication presents documents from the fund “Ufa Prikaznaya Izba” of the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts, which help to assess the process of formation of social groups of the yasak population of Ufa district in the last third of the 17th century and the influence of the state's fiscal policy on this process. The documents shed light on the role of the state in the stratification of rural residents, as well as the mechanisms for integrating migrants from the Pre-Kama region into the established social structure of the local society.

This review is an analysis of a new collection of articles and essays on the history of the Orenburg Cossack army (OCA), covering mainly the period from 1914 to the 1930s. The work is replete with rich factual material, collected for the most part in the archives. Here the reader discovers information about the missing, wounded, killed Cossacks during the First World War (1914–1918) and the Civil War (1917– 1922). The authors focus their attention on the events that took place on the territory of the modern Chelyabinsk region. When publishing memoirs about N.D. Kashirin provides comments and brief information about the contemporaries of the events.

The ethnogenetic concept of R.G. Kuzeev, according to which the Belebeevo-Bugulma upland from the end of the 1st millennium A.D. is the territory of the formation of the Bashkir people, has established itself in historiography, and for several decades various researchers and publicists rely on it in their research. However, its main provisions are not verified. Sources of the 10th–15th centuries do not connect medieval Bashkirs (“bashgart”, “baskart”, “paskatir”) with the territory of the Belebeevo-Bugulma upland, and the sources of the 16th century localize the Bashkirs (“Bashkird”, “Bashkirs”) in the Perm Kama region. The composition and localization of the ethno-tribal divisions of the medieval Bashkirs were established by R.G. Kuzeev on the basis of data from sources of the 18th–19th centuries. But this extrapolation was carried out without taking into account the significant ethno-social changes that occurred in the 17th–18th centuries. Therefore, it is obvious that the concept of R.G. Kuzeev does not stand up to scientific criticism, and the ideas about the ethnogenesis of the medieval Bashkirs that have developed on its basis need to be substantially corrected.