photo from wikimedia.org

February 27, 1549. The most despotic ruler, perhaps not only in Russian but also in world history, shows democratic initiative - he convenes a body that has become the prototype of parliament. It united representatives of almost all classes and became an important step towards the centralization of power. This was the first Zemsky Sobor of the Russian Empire.

Subsequently, for 135 years, he participated in resolving important political issues, including the election of kings and determining the line of succession to the throne. Without becoming a real Western-style parliament, it showed the originality of the Russian system of governance. Based on the experience of zemstvo councils, at different periods of the subsequent history of the state, thinkers proposed their own management schemes, and debates about their role in politics are still ongoing. How this governing body came into being, what were the prerequisites for its establishment, and, most importantly, what functions it was called upon to perform will be discussed in this article.

Convening of the first Zemsky Sobor: the date of the beginning of Russian parliamentarism

Why did the roots of Russian parliamentarism originate in 1549?

Before this, the history of the nascent state knew another form of self-government - the veche. This is where the beginnings of the practice of resolving the most important issues at a general meeting of representatives of the people lie. In fact, the veche was a kind of direct democracy. It existed in various forms in many cities, each of which had a specific procedure for its implementation. At first, private cases (controversial, judicial) were considered here, later - generally significant specific issues, including relations with neighbors. However, these “gatherings” were not regulated by law and developed on the basis of folk custom. They did not have a strict procedure: votes were not counted, decisions were made on the basis of expression of will by “calling out”. To achieve the necessary decision, it was enough to hire professional screamers. Mostly their services were used by boyars and major merchants. Often such meetings ended in mass brawls, and the archbishop had to calm the crowd.

The first Zemsky Sobor was convened in 1549. Both the founding and subsequent councils were seriously different from the veche. Their activities were more regulated; they resolved issues of national importance. Despite the fact that this body had many differences from the institutions of the estate-representative monarchy of European countries, it was the councils that are considered the first manifestation of Russian parliamentarism. But under what conditions did they originate? And why exactly did Ivan IV, known in world history as “The Terrible,” as the founder of the oprichnina and the source of terror against all segments of the population, establish an institution that inherently limits the absolute power of the monarch?

The First Zemsky Sobor of 1549: reasons and background

photo from rushist.com

1538 Grand Duchess of Moscow Elena Glinskaya dies. She was the first ruler of a unified Russian state. The princess was remembered for her reforms (in particular, monetary ones, which established a single currency on the territory of Russia), and the conclusion of an important peace with Poland. But it was even more remembered for its internecine confrontations, the lack of stable support among the boyars and the people, as well as cruelty towards rivals in the struggle for state power.

After the death of Elena Glinskaya, the line of succession to the throne was continued by her sons, Ivan and Yuri. At the time of his mother’s death, the first was 8 years old, the second 6. Since none of the direct heirs could take power into their own hands, the boyars established patronage over the young princes. The period between the death of Glinskaya and the accession of the adult Ivan Vasilyevich was filled with a constant struggle for leadership.

In the history of the Moscow principality, there was already a boyar regency. Then in place of the little boys were Grand Duke Dmitry and his cousin Vladimir. Subsequently, they were nicknamed “Don” and “Brave,” but until they came of age, the state was ruled by a government consisting of boyars. The situations are similar, but the experience is different. If in the case of Prince Dmitry the boyars showed themselves to be real managers and, at the same time, were engaged in raising the future Grand Duke, then in relation to Ivan the Terrible the regents showed much less concern. It is not at all surprising that after Ivan matured, he began to consider the boyar class as illegal usurpers of his power.

The rule of representatives of the royal house was accompanied by constant struggle between clans. The main lines of confrontation ran between the Glinskys, Shuiskys, Belskys, and Vorontsovs. The people at the head of the state changed, the signature on official papers changed. Otherwise, each reign was accompanied by the same scenario: a coup, change of government, distribution of ranks and estates to relatives, persecution of rivals.

Read also

During the reign of Ivan the Terrible, the emergence of democratic institutions of governance was just beginning. But in the craft industry there have been no equals to Slavic masters for a long time. Find out how crafts began in Ancient Rus'

The most terrible moment of the young prince’s childhood, which became the cause of many transformations in the era of Grozny, was associated with the rise to power of the Shuisky family. On the night of the coup, they arrested their opponents, including those who were close to the young prince. The detention of Metropolitan Joseph took place in front of the boy himself, in his chambers. The head of the Orthodox Church was hunted as an ordinary fugitive - this hardly left a mark on the character of the future tsar.

After this night, the “Shuya kingdom” was established. It was not long, but, obviously, it was the period of their reign that convinced Ivan of the need to control the boyar class.

December 1543. The young prince is ready to declare his rights. To do this, he uses the only method known to him, shown dozens of times at court - cruelty and reprisals. He gives the order for the arrest of Prince Shuisky. The process did not end as planned - the boyar was not taken to prison, he was killed by the tsar's huntsmen. Although there is no reliable information about what was the plan. Perhaps that was the order. But even after Ivan the Terrible took a serious step towards his establishment as an autocratic ruler, the feuds between the clans did not stop. Only the attitude towards the prince himself changed. If earlier they ignored him, now they began to show attention, show signs of respect and respect.

January 16, 1547. Ivan Vasilyevich is crowned king. There are changes in the tsar's immediate circle associated with his marriage and the promotion of a new boyar family. There is growing dissatisfaction among the people with the lack of governance and the arbitrariness of the nobility. The confrontation between the new feudal class and the boyars is intensifying. Ivan the Terrible gradually understands that in the conditions that were in force before his crowning of the kingdom, he will always be a pawn in the hands of others. In addition, he had to govern a vast territory, but he could not guarantee the implementation of his decisions. Thus, the need for change gradually became obvious.

The first convocation of the Zemsky Sobor in 1549 - reasons and prerequisites:

• establishment and regulation of new orders in government (recognition of the autocratic power of the tsar and the return of the orders that existed during the reign of Vasily III);
• creation of political support for autocratic power (unification of the leading political forces - the feudal class and the townsfolk elite);
• the need for an inter-estate cooperation agreement;
• division of responsibility for policies between representatives of the nobility;
• popular discontent, aggravated by the Moscow fire of 1547;
• the need for reforms (as a consequence - the need to support different segments of the population, as well as representatives of all lands that are part of the state).

This cathedral was called the “Cathedral of Reconciliation.” He summed up the disappointing results of the reign of the boyars after the death of Elena Glinskaya. At the same time, the tsar did not blame the boyars exclusively for all the troubles; he took a significant part of the responsibility upon himself, at the same time making it clear that he generously forgives all outrages and past grievances in exchange for loyalty. However, even then it became clear that the boyar power would be significantly limited in favor of the noble one - the young tsar did not intend to give the reins of power into the hands of one class.

If the prerequisites for the convening of the first Zemsky Sobor in 1549 were aspects of the personal development of the tsar, as well as contradictions that had been accumulating for years in the upper echelon of power, then disputes between historians are still ongoing regarding the main reason. Some people highlight the grandiose Moscow fire, for which people blamed Grozny’s relatives – the Glinsky family, as a key factor. They were persecuted and reprisals were carried out. Some believe that the king was afraid of the atrocities of the people, others see in this the beginning of the idea of ​​cleansing the ruler from the debauchery and mistakes of his youth: it seemed to him that the fire was a punishment for sins. Whether it was a government fuse or whether Grozny was simply afraid of the responsibility that was in his hands - it is now difficult to give a definite answer. It is important that it was in 1549 that the first Zemsky Sobor in the history of Russia was convened, a proto-parliament in a conditionally formative class-representative monarchy.

Limited monarchy in the Russian style

photo from the site slavyanskaya-kultura.ru

When we talk about the beginnings of Russian parliamentarism, limitation of power, class representation and other things typical of Western political practice, it is necessary to understand that all Russian institutions bore the imprint of originality and uniqueness. The same is true with regard to the institution of zemstvo representation.

This body became a step towards the formation of a new management system, which subsequently helped to overcome government crises more than once. Thus, during periods of interregnum and the absence of obvious contenders for the throne, it was this body that nominated the ruler and determined the new dynasty. The first tsar elected by the Zemsky Sobor was Tsarevich Feodor, the son of Ivan IV. Then the “electoral” staff met several more times, naming the kingdom of Boris Godunov and Mikhail Romanov. During the reign of the latter, the cathedrals ceased their history, but became a prototype for the formation of government bodies in the future.

1. Reasons for formation.
   In the West, representative bodies were formed in response to the arbitrariness of autocratic power. As a rule, their establishment was a consequence of political and social struggle. As a result of the confrontation between the classes and the autocrat, a special political council was established, the main function of which was to restrain the power of the monarch and represent different interests. The initiative to establish these bodies came from the people, and the top only had to accept the new conditions of the game.
   In Russia everything turned out differently. The body was established by the center itself, and its goal was far from limiting autocratic power. On the contrary, the estates were to become the basis for its strengthening.
2. Regulation of activities
   If the Western-style parliament had a regulated system of representation and met at certain intervals, then in the Russian version it was convened at the behest of the tsar or as needed (determination of a new royal branch).
3. Functions
   Traditionally, parliament belonged to the legislative branch of government. In Russia, he rarely performed this function. Zemsky councils of Ivan the Terrible approved a plan for reforming the country, and also adopted a new set of laws. However, this body cannot be called legislative in the full sense. Rather, he performed a sham function, agreeing with all the ruler’s proposals.
4. Members of the Zemsky Sobor
   There was no representation as such. Members of the proto-parliament were not determined as a result of public choice, but were called up based on position and rank.

To summarize the above, the Zemsky Sobor was not a legislative, not a representative, but an advisory body of power. His role fell within the framework of providing support for the policies pursued by the tsar. The establishment of this body was a way of legitimizing the only strengthening monarchical power within the framework of a single state. The fate of the first parliament in the Russian style is quite clearly illustrated by the end of its history: the first tsar, elected by the Zemsky Sobor, abandoned it, building his own system of government. The era of the Romanovs began.

In conclusion

The first Zemsky Sobor was convened during the reign of Ivan IV and dates back to the very beginning of the reign of the young monarch. It seemed that he was striving to assert his power, complete the unification of lands, and build a new system of government. However, the further process showed that this gesture was a frame one - the new ruler pursued his own goals, which were far from organizing power in the likeness of Western countries. At the same time, the government body he established became a prototype for subsequent models of public administration.

The first Zemsky Sobors

In February 1549, on the initiative of Ivan IV, a central estate-representative legislative body, the Zemsky Sobor, was convened for the first time. Subsequently (until the middle of the 17th century), the use of zemstvo councils to resolve the most important state issues became a common practice. This body of power cannot be identified with Western European class-representative institutions (parliaments, states general, cortes, diets), since zemstvo councils were convened irregularly, solely at the will of the sovereign, they did not have legislative initiative and, therefore, did not limit the autocratic power of the tsar in any way.

The Council of 1549, called the “Cathedral of Reconciliation,” was attended by the Boyar Duma, church hierarchs and representatives of the nobility. At the very first meeting, the sovereign accused the boyars of “untruths,” abuses and “negligence.” The boyars obeyed and tearfully begged for forgiveness, the tsar forgave them and called on everyone to live in peace and harmony. During the Council, decisions were made on judicial reform, on preparations for war with the Kazan Khanate, and on the “organization” of local self-government.

Law code 1550

In 1550, by decision of the Zemsky Sobor of 1549, a new Code of Law was adopted. It largely repeated the provisions that already existed in the Code of Laws of Ivan III, but took into account the accumulated legal practice and was significantly expanded.

The composition of the judiciary expanded due to butlers, treasurers, clerks and all sorts of clerks. Landowners were removed from the jurisdiction of the boyars and governors. Nobles and merchants could elect special people - kissers, who participated in the governor's court. The rights of governors were also curtailed by the fact that the responsibility for collecting taxes passed to elected people - favorite heads (elders), which prepared the way for the abolition of the feeding system. A procedure for filing complaints against governors and volosts was established. Service people, who were the support of the royal power, were protected from falling into servitude. The judicial privileges of appanage princes were also sharply reduced.

New in the Code of Laws was the concept of anti-state activity - “sedition”, which included serious criminal offenses, conspiracies, and rebellions. The first articles of this code of laws established severe penalties for bribery and willful injustice.

The Code of Law also concerned the position of dependent peasants. Their attachment to the land intensified, since, despite the fact that the right of St. George's Day was preserved, payments for the elderly increased.

Order system

The system of central government bodies that began to take shape under Ivan III received a relatively complete form in the middle of the 16th century. The core of the administrative apparatus became the order system. At the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th centuries. orders were the orders given by the sovereign to his associates - instructions to “manage” this or that matter. But the orders of the mid-16th–17th centuries. These are permanent departments responsible for certain areas of government activity. The first orders of this kind arose in the system of palace management: the State and Stable orders, the order of the Grand Palace, etc. The Ambassadorial order was in charge of foreign policy, the Local order was in charge of the distribution of lands among service people, the collection of the noble militia and the appointment of a governor - Discharge, the capture of criminals - Robbery, etc. In addition to sectoral orders, the jurisdiction of which extended to the entire country, there were also regional ones that governed certain territories: the Novgorod Chet, the Vladimir Court Order, the Kazan, Astrakhan, Zemsky (Moscow administration) orders, etc.

The order administration included order judges, order clerks and clerks. An order judge is a okolnichy or boyar appointed by the tsar at the head of the department. The name of this position indicates that its holder had not only administrative, but also judicial functions. An order clerk was an official who received a monetary and sometimes a local salary, who was responsible for organizing all the activities of the department (each order had several clerks). Clerks are the lowest rank of clerks, ordinary clerks.

Stoglavy Cathedral

In 1551, a church council was held (with the participation of secular representatives of the ruling class), which released a collection of its decrees - the “Conciliar Code”, which consisted of one hundred chapters. Therefore, the cathedral itself began to be called Stoglavy. This Church Council made the following main decisions: 1) on the unification of church rites and duties throughout Russia; 2) on the creation of an all-Russian pantheon of saints; 3) on the adoption of a unified monastic charter; 4) on determining the standards of behavior of the clergy and tightening punishment for their violation; 5) on the regulation (creation of canons) of church art - icon painting and book writing; 6) on the establishment of schools for priests; 7) about methods of combating heresies; 8) on approval of the structure of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Under the influence of his confessor Sylvester, Ivan IV proposed limiting monastic land ownership. However, this idea did not find support among the majority of those participating in the Council. In addition, the clergy was now under the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical court. The Stoglav Cathedral played a major role in strengthening the spiritual authority of the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Stoglav Cathedral became one of the most important church-legal documents.

Since ancient times in Rus' there has been a custom to solve problems that have arisen and settle matters with the entire community, “conciliarly,” despite the fact that the convening of the first Zemsky Sobor took place only in the middle of the sixteenth century, during the period of the country’s rule by Ivan the Terrible. The existence of such institutions is typical for many European countries that have passed through the stage of estate-representative monarchy in their development. The first zemstvo councils arose in England, Catalonia, and Portugal. In Spain, such deliberative institutions were called Cortes, in Poland - Diets, in Germany - Landtags.

So, the Zemsky Sobor is the highest institution of estate-representative power, endowed with legislative functions. It was convened to resolve political and administrative affairs. In other words, this is a convening of representatives of different classes to resolve some matter of national importance. The emergence of such an institution was the result of the end of the unification of Russian lands into a single state and the strengthening of local power of the nobility. In terms of the composition of its members, the Russian Zemsky Sobor was close to Western European class representations, but differed from them in having only an advisory function. European zemstvo councils had the right to legislate. In Rus', the decisions of this institution came into force only after their approval by the Tsar and the Boyar Duma.

The convening of the first Zemsky Sobor in Rus' was timed to coincide with the beginning of the reforms of Ivan IV the Terrible. It included the highest clergy, boyars, appanage princes, wealthy townspeople, and representatives of the nobility from different provinces of the country. The Zemsky Sobor conventionally consisted of two chambers. One of them included boyars, treasurers, butlers, the other - nobles and military leaders. Each convocation of the Zemsky Sobor lasted, as a rule, no more than two days. The tsar spoke at it three times, after which the boyars could express their opinion on the issue at hand, and at the end a meeting of the Boyar Duma was held. All meetings were held strictly according to ranks, decisions were made unanimously.

The convening of the first Zemsky Sobor in February 1549, which proclaimed the transition of the Russian state to an estate-representative monarchy, was of great importance for the political and cultural life of the country. From this time on, the role of the nobility in governing the country increased. During the convocation, a new set of laws is established and a decision is made to create the Petition Hut. From now on, anyone could submit a petition (request) to the Tsar and almost immediately receive an answer to it. Similarly, the petition hut regulated the activities of other government agencies.

The first Zemsky Sobor, convened in Rus', was called the “Cathedral of Reconciliation”; in parallel with it, a meeting of the Church Council was held, which examined the lives of sixteen Orthodox saints and established the church celebration of the holidays named after them.

The convening of the first Zemsky Sobor, and all those that followed it, was carried out by a special charter, which indicated the reason for convening and the number of elected representatives. Often the population itself decided how many people should sit at the Zemsky Sobor. Representatives were selected through elections held in various cities of the country in the form of meetings. Persons who perform service and also regularly pay taxes to the state treasury could take part in these elections. Elected representatives did not receive a salary for their participation in the convening of the Zemsky Sobor. Moreover, they had to independently provide themselves with everything they needed when going to such a meeting.

All convocations of the Zemsky Sobor were held, as a rule, in a solemn atmosphere in the Kremlin. A service was held in their honor in the Assumption Cathedral. In total, over the two centuries of the existence of this institution, a meeting of 57 Zemsky Sobors was held.

Zemsky Sobor in Rus' from the mid-16th to the end of the 17th century - a meeting of representatives of various segments of the population of the Moscow State to resolve political, economic and administrative issues.

The Zemsky Sobor existed under conditions of an estate-representative monarchy. The last Zemsky Sobor is considered to be the meeting that took place in 1683-1684 on the issue of “eternal peace” with Poland.

History of Zemsky Sobors

In 1549, Ivan IV convened the “Cathedral of Reconciliation”; Subsequently, such cathedrals began to be called Zemsky cathedrals (as opposed to church cathedrals - “consecrated”). The word “zemsky” could mean “nationwide” (that is, the matter of “the whole earth”). The practice of convening class meetings, called “Zemstvo Sobors,” spread only in the 17th century.

V. O. Klyuchevsky defined zemstvo councils as “a special type of popular representation, different from Western representative assemblies. In turn, S. F. Platonov believed that the zemstvo council is a “council of the whole earth”, consisting of “three necessary parts”: 1) “the consecrated cathedral of the Russian church with the metropolitan, later with the patriarch at its head”; 2) the boyar duma; 3) “the zemstvo people, representing different groups of the population and different areas of the state.”

Such meetings were convened to discuss the most important issues of the domestic and foreign policy of the Russian state, as well as on urgent matters, for example, issues of war and peace (the continuation of the Livonian War), taxes and fees, mainly for military needs. The zemstvo councils of 1565 were devoted to the fate of the country's political structure, when Ivan the Terrible left for Alexandrov Sloboda; the verdict passed by the zemstvo assembly on June 30, 1611 in the “stateless time” is of particular importance.

The history of zemstvo councils is the history of the internal development of society, the evolution of the state apparatus, the formation of social relations, and changes in the class system. In the 16th century, the process of forming this social institution was just beginning; initially it was not clearly structured, and its competence was not strictly defined. The practice of convening, the procedure for forming, especially the composition of zemstvo councils, were also not regulated for a long time.

As for the composition of zemstvo councils, even during the reign of Mikhail Romanov, when the activity of zemstvo councils was most intense, the composition varied depending on the urgency of the issues being resolved and the very nature of the issues.

Periodization of Zemsky Sobors

The periodization of Zemsky Sobors can be divided into 6 periods:

1. The history of zemstvo councils begins during the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible. The first council took place in 1549. Councils convened by the royal authorities - this period lasts until 1584.

2. Starting from the death of Ivan the Terrible and until the fall of Shuisky (1584-1610). This was the time when the preconditions for civil war and foreign intervention were taking shape, and the crisis of autocracy began. The councils performed the function of electing the kingdom and often became an instrument of forces hostile to Russia.

3. 1610-1613 The Zemsky Sobor, under the militias, turns into the supreme body of power (both legislative and executive), deciding issues of domestic and foreign policy, the conciliar code. It was during this period of time that the Zemsky Sobor played the most important and significant role in the public life of Russia.

4. 1613-1622 The Council operates almost continuously, but as an advisory body under the royal authority. Resolves current administrative and financial issues. The tsarist government seeks to rely on zemstvo councils when carrying out financial activities: collecting five-dollar money, restoring the damaged economy, eliminating the consequences of the intervention and preventing new aggression from Poland. From 1622, the activity of the cathedrals ceased until 1632.

5. 1632-1653 Councils meet relatively rarely, but to resolve important issues of both domestic policy: drawing up the Code, the uprising in Pskov, and foreign policy: Russian-Polish and Russian-Crimean relations, the annexation of Ukraine, the question of Azov. During this period, the speeches of class groups intensifying, presenting demands to the government, not so much through zemstvo councils, but through submitted petitions.

6. 1653-1684. The importance of zemstvo cathedrals is declining (a slight rise was observed in the 80s). The last council in its entirety met in 1653 on the issue of accepting the Zaporozhye Army into the Moscow state.

The first is considered to be the Zemsky Sobor of 1549, which lasted two days and was convened to resolve issues about the new Tsar’s Code of Law and the reforms of the “Elected Rada”. During the council, the tsar and the boyars spoke, and later a meeting of the Boyar Duma took place, which adopted a provision on the non-jurisdiction (except in major criminal cases) of boyar children to the governors. According to I.D. Belyaev, elected representatives from all classes participated in the first Zemsky Sobor. The Tsar asked the saints who were at the cathedral for a blessing to correct the Code of Law “in the old way”; then he announced to the representatives of the communities that throughout the state, in all cities, suburbs, volosts and churchyards, and even in the private estates of boyars and other landowners, elders and kissers, sotskys and courtiers, should be elected by the residents themselves; Charter charters will be written for all regions, with the help of which the regions could govern themselves without sovereign governors and volosts.

There is also an opinion that this was the so-called “cathedral of reconciliation” (possibly between the king and the boyars or reconciliation between representatives of different classes among themselves).

B. A. Romanov that the Zemsky Sobor consisted of two “chambers”: the first consisted of boyars, okolnichy, butlers, treasurers, the second - governors, princes, boyar children, great nobles. Nothing is said about who the second “chamber” consisted of: those who happened to be in Moscow at that time, or those who were specially summoned to Moscow. The data on the participation of the townspeople in zemstvo councils is very doubtful, although the decisions made there were often very beneficial to the top of the town. Often the discussion took place separately among the boyars and okolnichy, the clergy, and service people, that is, each group separately expressed its opinion on this issue.

The earliest council, the activity of which is evidenced by the sentencing letter that has reached us (with signatures and a list of participants in the Duma Council) and news in the chronicle, took place in 1566, where the main question was the continuation or termination of the bloody Livonian War.

The clergy occupied an important place in the composition of the zemstvo councils; in particular, the zemstvo councils of February - March 1549 and the spring of 1551 were simultaneously church councils in full, and only the metropolitan and the highest clergy participated in the remaining Moscow councils. Participation in the councils of the clergy was intended to emphasize the legitimacy of the decisions made by the monarch.

Results. Proposals for convening in later eras

Zemsky cathedrals of the XVI-XVII centuries. did not give rise to stable class representation in the Moscow state; the economy of that period was not yet productive enough for the development of industrial and trading classes (and in most European countries of that period, which were much stronger economically, absolutism prevailed).

In the Russian Empire, the idea of ​​convening a Zemsky Sobor was proposed (in order to “put an end first of all to this misfortune, to the unrest and to the troublemakers”) by the Slavophile P. D. Golokhvastov in his letter dated December 10, 1879 to a member of the State Council (later Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod) K. P. Pobedonostsev; the letter was handed over by Tsarevich Alexander Alexandrovich to Emperor Alexander II, who left a note: “I read it with curiosity and found a lot of justice.”

At the beginning of May 1882, the Minister of Internal Affairs, Count N.P. Ignatiev, presented to Emperor Alexander III a draft (B.B. Glinsky wrote that the draft was drawn up by Golokhvastov with the assistance of I.S. Aksakov) of the Highest Manifesto (marked May 6, 1882), proposing the convening of a Zemsky Sobor simultaneously with the coronation of the emperor in Moscow; the project was rejected by Alexander in May 1882. Pobedonostsev, who then had significant influence on the emperor, wrote to Alexander III in a letter dated March 11, 1883: “The blood runs cold in the veins of a Russian person at the mere thought of what would happen from the implementation of the project of Count Loris-Melikov and his friends. Subsequent fantasy c. Ignatieva was even more absurd, although under the cover of the plausible form of the Zemsky Cathedral. What would have happened, what chaos would have resulted when the representatives of the peoples and foreigners of the empire that embraced the universe, described by him, gathered in Moscow to discuss something unknown.”