Since ancient times, the Russian state has been characterized by an abundance of cities. In Kievan Rus and during the period of feudal fragmentation, there were about 160,000 of them . In the Muscovite state in the XVI-XVII centuries, a large number of cities were built again (in the XVI century - about 702 and about the same number in the XVII century). Thus, almost half of all Russian cities were built in the XVI-XVII centuries.

The Russian city consisted of a fortress, a posad, and a settlement. He owned large arable and pasture land plots surrounding him, as well as" museums", that is, fishing grounds, hunting grounds, and beekeeping. The fortress housed administrative buildings: the voivodeship court, the sovereign's treasury, a green cellar, a sliding hut, storerooms, barns and granaries; it housed the privileged population and part of the army guarding the city. Posad, as a rule, was inhabited by artisan people, and it was located gostiny dvors. In the city there were both settlements in which service people and artisans lived, and settlements that usually belonged to individuals or monasteries.

Cities were built according to urban planning standards that came to Russia in the IX century. from Byzantium. There are three documents that show that in Kievan Rus cities were built according to certain rules. This is the "Law of Gradsky", which is part of the earliest legal documents of Kievan Rus - the "Measure of the Righteous" of the IX century.and the "Helmsman's Books"of the 4th XII-XIII centuries. In the Moscow state, the Gradsky Law was again translated from Greek into Slavic and was widely used. Two other legal provisions - "The rank and succession of the foundation of the city" and "The rank and blessing of a newly built stone or wooden city" were found by the author of this article in the breviary of Peter the Grave, published by him in Kiev in 1646.5
Of particular interest is the "Rank and ascension of the foundation of the city", since this document allows us to state that when the new city was laid out, it was completely drawn on the ground according to the drawing. In the XVI -

1 K. A. Nevolin. Complete Works, Vol. VI. SPB 1859, pp. 35-95; N. D. Chechulin. Cities of the Moscow State in the XVI century St. Petersburg, 1889, p. 15.

2 A. A. Zimin. The composition of Russian cities in the XVI century. "Historical notes", vol. 52, 1955, p. 344 (the author gives a list of newly built cities).

3 G. F. Miller. History of Siberia. Tt. I-II. M.-L. 1937-1941, V. P. Zagorovsky. Belgorod line. Voronezh, 1969.

4 G. V. Alferova. Helmsman's Book as the most valuable source of ancient Russian urban planning legislation. Its influence on the artistic appearance and layout of Russian cities. "Byzantine vremennik", vol. 35, Moscow, 1973.

5 "Rank" - the established, accepted procedure for doing something ("Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian language", Vol. IV. M, 1961, p. 925).

page 50

XVII centuries. Russian cities were built according to drawings. The latter were made on paper, which was sometimes pasted on canvas, less often drawn on birch bark. A number of drawings of the 17th century were preserved in the Local, Discharge, Siberian, Secret Affairs and other orders 6 . In this regard, the works of Academician B. A. Rybakov on the study of measures of length that existed in ancient Russia are of great importance. An important discovery is a measured fathom of the XIII century 7 found by him in Novgorod . A similar "measure of Novogorod architecture" was used when laying out the city. There were various measures of length - "sovereign" and "oblique" fathoms, which are well traced according to the documents of the construction of Staraya Russa in 1629-1631 .8 A. A. Piletsky is currently working on the issues of proportionation and methods of using fathoms in Russian urban planning and construction in general .9 His works confirm the validity of the above provisions.

In the Russian state, cities had curved streets, alleys, and dead ends, and complex square configurations. The city easily fell on the terrain, smoothly entered the nature. Its dominants - fortresses, towers, temples, bell towers-were placed freely and reigned over low residential and public buildings. The group of cities that were built in Russia up to the XVIII century should be called "picturesque" in contrast to the cities created according to a strictly geometric system, "regulatory cities", characteristic of urban planning of the XVIII and XIX centuries. (Later in the article, these two terms will be used, which are being introduced into scientific use for the first time.)

The picturesque city was studied in various aspects by city planners - theorists and practitioners, lawyers, and artists, but most of all historians and architects did in this area. At first, the main charges were paid to the history of the city, the number of its population, the nature of its occupations and class composition, the development of crafts, etc. Historians could use archaeological data and written sources. The archives organized since the time of Peter I were further expanded, systematized, and their materials were partially published. At the end of the 19th century, D. Ya. Samokvasov analyzed all studies on the history of ancient Russian cities over two centuries, identifying historical schools and trends .

In the 18th century, G. F. Miller collected and partially published materials on the picturesque cities of Siberia . In the 19th century, D. I. Bagaley published documents on Ukrainian picturesque cities, and academic commissions published documents on Tambov and Voronezh .12 In the same century , the collection of laws of the Russian Empire 13 , scribal and census books 14, containing rich information on picturesque cities, were published.

6 TSGADA, ff. 1209, 210, 214, 192, 27 etc.

7 B. A. Rybakov. Yardstick of the Novgorod architect of the XIII century. "Yearbook of the USSR Academy of Sciences for 1974", Moscow, 1975.

8 TSGADA, f. 141, d. 32, ll. 59-60, 129, 134.

9 A. A. Piletsky. Muduler in old Russian measures. "Architecture of the USSR", 1976, N 8.

10 D. Ya. Samokvasov. Ancient cities of Russia. Istoriko-yuridicheskoe issledovanie [Historical and Legal Research], St. Petersburg, 1873. Istoriya russkogo prava [History of Russian Law]. 1878.

11 G. F. Miller. Siberian history. Description of the Siberian Kingdom. Book I. St. Petersburg, 1750; his own. Description of the Siberian Kingdom, St. Petersburg, 1787. History of Siberia (see Appendices to vols. I-II); TSGADA. Miller's Portfolios, p. 199; Archive of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (Leningrad), p. 21.

12 D. I. Bagalei. Materials for the history of colonization and everyday life of the steppe outskirts of the Moscow State, Kharkiv and partly Kursk and Voronezh provinces in the XVI-XVII centuries. Vols. I, II. Kharkiv. 1885-1890; "Essays on the history of colonization of the Tambov region". Tambov. 1910 - 1911.

13 " The Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire "(PSZ). Collection I. St. Petersburg, 1830-1839.

14 "Scribal books of the Moscow state". Tt. I, II. SPB. 1872, 1877.

page 51

Historians of the 19th century [15] studied the picturesque city from the point of view of its state foundations, legal rights of citizens, population structure, etc. K. A. Nevolin and N. D. Chechulin compiled the first lists of Russian picturesque cities. Historians of land surveying in Russia have made a significant contribution to the study of state construction 16 . This topic was discussed by A. I. Yakovlev in his work on the construction of the Tula zasechnaya line 17 .

During the Soviet period, P. P. Smirnov revealed the process of outgrowing the picturesque cities of the Kievan period into picturesque towns-posadas of the Moscow period18. He also showed that the powerful movement of colonization to the south and east, characteristic of the Russian state in the XVI-XVII centuries, was accompanied by continuous urban development 19 . The question that the creation of the order system was closely connected with the construction of picturesque cities (raised in the XIX century by K. A. Nevolin) was studied in Soviet times by N. V. Ustyugov and A. A. Zimin .20 The works of M. N. Tikhomirov, S. A. Klepikov, and L. V. Cherepnin are a great contribution to the study of picturesque cities. 21 N. N. Voronin22 showed that the Russian state has the conditions necessary for the creation and flourishing of these cities . The works of V. I. Koshelev, who worked in Voronezh and the Voronezh Region, and V. P. Zagorovsky [23] contain valuable information about the methods of state construction in the XVI-XVII centuries.

In recent years, along with other issues related to the study of the city, attempts have been made to explain the process of the emergence of picturesque cities. The complexity of revealing the methods by which picturesque cities were built lies in the versatility and versatility of the urban organism itself. Cities had a variety of functions: administrative, military, commercial, port, craft, etc. But all of them (as will be shown below) were built according to a single system.

Due to insufficient knowledge of the problem in the literature, there is an idea that first the Kremlin was built, and then gradually over a long time it "overgrown" with posad and sloboda-

15 M. A. Solovyov. Cities. "Encyclopedic lexicon", Vol. XV, Moscow, 1838, p. 15; D. Ya. Samokvasov. Ancient Cities of Russia, p. 6; K. A. Nevolin. Edict. op.; N. D. Chechulin. Op. ed., pp. 15-21.

16 P. I. Ivanov. Experiments of historical research on land surveying in Russia M. 1846; I. E. German. Legislation on the Russian land survey from the Cathedral Code to the General Land Survey. St. Petersburg, 1889; it is the same. Istoriya russkogo mezhevaniya [History of Russian Land Surveying], Moscow, 1910.

17 A. I. Yakovlev. Serif line in the Moscow State in the XVII century. Moscow, 1910.

18 P. P. Smirnov. Posadsky people and their class struggle until the middle of the XVII century. Vol. I, II. Moscow, 1948.

19 p. II. Smirnov. Cities of the Moscow State in the first half of the 17th century Vol. I. Kiev. 1917, pp. 15-17.

20 A. A. Zimin. On the addition of the order system. "Reports and Messages" of the Institute of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Issue 3, Moscow, 1954, p. 164; N. V. Ustyugov. Central management. Orders " Essays on the history of the USSR. XVII century.", Moscow, 1955, p. 336.

21 M. N. Tikhomirov Drevnerusskiye goroda [Old Russian Cities], Moscow, 1946; his. Srednevekovaya Moskva [Medieval Moscow], Moscow, 1948. Drevnyaya Moskva, Moscow, 1956; S. A. Klepikov. Bibliography of printed plans of the city of Moscow of the XVI-XIX centuries, Moscow, 1956, pp. 1-5; L. V. Cherepnin. On the role of cities in the formation of the Russian Centralized State. "Cities of feudal Russia", Moscow, 1966.

22 N. N. Voronin. Drevnerusskiye goroda [Ancient Russian Cities], Moscow: Leningrad, 1945.

23 V. And Koshelev. The town of Orlov and its military zone in the 17th century. Izvestia of the Voronezh Pedagogical Institute, 1950, vol. 12, no. I; his own. Drawing of Belgorod Menshov in 1693. Same place; same place. Map of the location of sides and fortifications in the Voronezh Region in the XVII century. "From the history of the Voronezh Region". Voronezh. 1954; same name. Within the Belgorod city limits. Kozlovsky val. Izvestia of the Voronezh Pedagogical Institute, 1958, vol. 26; V. P. Zagorovsky. Edict op.

page 52

mi 24 . This process seemed extremely simple and clear: the city was formed and grew spontaneously. Documents and materials that reveal the true history of the city (many of which are published) did not attract the attention of scientists or were misinterpreted. The theory of spontaneous addition of Russian cities still exists today. Although the authors of a number of works have come close to elucidating the history of the creation of picturesque cities, three important aspects have remained almost undeveloped: the methods by which these cities were built; the legislative foundations of urban planning; and the nature of aesthetic laws of a picturesque city. The first two questions are related to historical disciplines, while the third is the topic of architecture and urban planning.

Urban planning science in the study of Russian picturesque cities has passed through three stages. In the early stages (as well as in historical science), it was argued that picturesque cities were formed spontaneously and there was no urban planning idea in Russia .25 Then an attempt was made to prove that urban planning art existed, but according to the plan, not picturesque cities were built, but regulatory cities, which allegedly began to be founded already in the XVI century .26 In the 1970s, a new concept emerged, claiming that picturesque cities were created by design. This idea was first expressed in the 1950s by a major Soviet urban planner, L. M. Tversky .27
As is known, at the end of the 18th century, on the basis of the decree of Catherine II, picturesque cities began to be redeveloped according to the regulatory system specially created for this purpose by the "Commission of Stone Construction of St. Petersburg, Moscow and Other Cities" .28 As a result, the artistic appearance of picturesque cities was significantly damaged. In the future, the theory of the alleged spontaneous addition of Russian cities became a real tragedy for them. It led to the fact that during the mass reconstruction that began in our time, designers did not take into account the artistic laws of cities, with the picturesque, individual spatial system for each of them, which they broke. Many unique cities were distorted by dull, monotonous buildings, which destroyed their artistic appearance.

In this article, the author sets out to consider the methods of constructing picturesque cities in the Russian state and to reveal the active creativity of a person in this field of culture, as well as to show that the construction of new cities was a state and planned matter.

To reveal the methods by which cities were built in the Russian state, in addition to published works, the article uses archival materials, many of which are used for the first time. These are the funds of the former Moscow Archive of the Ministry of Justice 29, the Local-Patrimonial Archive (covering the time from 1540 to 1720); boyar and city books; Order files of old years; articles on Discharge

24 "Essays on the history of the USSR". The period of feudalism. The end of the XV-beginning of the XVII centuries. Moscow, 1955, p. 82.

25 V. A. Shkvarikov. Russkaya arkhitektura [Russian Architecture], Moscow, 1939; his Plan of cities in Russia in the XVIII and early XIX centuries, Moscow, 1939. Essays on the history of planning and building of Russian cities, Moscow, 1954.

26 V. V. Kirillov. Projects of model houses developed by Semyon Remezov for Tobolsk. "Architectural heritage", 1960, N 12, p. 162.

27 L. M. Tverskoy. Russian urban planning until the end of the 17th century. Planning and construction of Russian cities. Moscow-L. 1953.

28 TsGIA OF the USSR, f. 1310.

29 " Description of documents and papers stored in the Moscow Archive of the Ministry of Justice. Documents of the Discharge order". Book 9-20, Moscow, 1894-1921.

page 53

order 30; cases of Sibirsky order 31 , Ufa prikaznaya izba, etc. For a number of cities, we managed to find documents that reveal the process of their construction from the beginning of laying to settlement. Thus, there are data on newly built cities in the XVI-XVII centuries: Sviyazhsk, Yelets, Voronezh, Orel-gorodok, Tsareve-Borisov, Kozlov, Tambov, Narym, Tobolsk. Completely preserved materials on the cities of Staraya Russa and Dorogobuzh, where fortresses were built, and the cities themselves were rebuilt. For many cities, there are fragmentary documents that allow us to assume that these cities were laid, surveyed, built and settled using the same methods. This group of cities includes the western border town of Sebezh (Ivan - gorod); the eastern city of the Urals, Ufa; the Ural city of Verkhoturye; the Siberian cities of Tyumen, Tura, Pelym, Berezov, Surgut, Yakutsk( Yakutsk), Tomsk, Mangazeya, Yeniseysk, Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, Ilimsk, Nerchinsk, Selenginsk, Udinsk, Omsk; southern cities built in the XVI century near the Tula zasechnaya line, and in the XVII century-near the Belgorod zasechnaya line: Orel, Volkhov, Novosil, Efremov, Dankov, Livny, Stary Oskol, Novy Oskol (Tsarev-Alekseev), Usman, Uryv, Korotoyak, Yablonev, etc.

Large commercial cities that emerged in the pre-Mongol period (Moscow, Novgorod, Pskov, Kiev, Smolensk, Kursk, Rylsk, etc.), which had multi-row fortifications, stone and wooden kremlins, densely populated, fenced-in suburbs, were reconstructed during the Russian state, but their picturesque urban structure was completely preserved. Sometimes the new Kremlin was built in long-lived areas of the city, which were modified; in these cases, the reconstruction was carried out according to the living body of the city. In general, picturesque cities were reconstructed according to the same picturesque principles that they were built according to, so that dissonance in the artistic image of the city and its planning structure did not arise. It often happened that the old cities were abandoned (abandoned) and new ones were laid in another place. This is clearly seen in Tula, Yelets, Ustyuzhna, and Ustyug Veliky.

The conclusions that we came to when analyzing city plans and other documents were similar to those made by L. M. Tverskoy, who studied picturesque cities and their graphic materials in nature. Thus, the concept presented in this article is a further development of those propositions that L. M. Tverskoy once put forward, but could not prove, without having written sources.

Let us now consider how individual cities were built in the Russian state.

Sviyazhsk. The Nikonovskaya chronicle reports the construction of Sviyazhsk under 1551 32 . It was built under the direct supervision of Ivan IV, who, after the first unsuccessful campaigns against Kazan, creates an outpost 20 km away. This outpost, based on the new lands, was also to become the administrative center of the city . The location of the city is chosen by the king together with the voivodes:

30 "Description of documents and papers stored in the Moscow Archive of the Ministry of Justice", Vol. VI. Moscow, 1889.

31 N. N. Oglobin. Review of columns and books of the Siberian Order 1592-1768 Books 1-4. 1895-1901.

32 The fact that Sviyazhsk is built according to the planned plan, researchers noted (see in Podklyuchnikov. Planning and construction of ancient Sviyazhsk. "Architecture of the USSR", 1943, N 3, p. 34; V. P. Ostroumov, V. V. Chumakov. Sviyazhsk. Planning and development. Kazan. 1972). They were wrong only in that they considered Sviyazhsk to be the only city built on this principle.

33 PSRL. T. XIII. M. 1965, p. 162.

page 54

"The faithful tsar came to the place and .....I loved the place where the city and the holy churches would stand, the Round Mountain." Kruglaya Gora, above the Sviyaga River and Shchuchy Lake, is considered by Ivan IV to be "a place of harmony and a good fit for the city." 34
Thanks to a good organization of work, a sufficient number of specialists-architects, fortifiers, engineers (called deacons by their position) and the army, the city cut down in the upper reaches of the Volga was then dismantled and transported to Kruglaya Gora .35 Among the builders, the clerk I. G. Vyrodkov especially stood out. All construction was carried out at the expense of Ivan IV. "Let your royal supplies be sent great" to feed the vast army, "and that supply is ready for his parishes" 36 . The foundation of the city on Kruglaya Gora and the Sviyaga River began after the troops arrived, the tsar and the voivodes arrived. The chronicler notes: "In the month of Maya 24, in the week of All Saints, the king, Shigalei, and the voivodes came to Sviyaga, and the voivodes of the Grand Duke poured out of the courts, and began to build a forest where the city was, and, having cleansed the mountain, they sang prayers and holy water, and with crosses on the wall went around and surrounded the city and the church in the city laid in the name of the Nativity of the Most Pure and Wonderworker Sergius... The city, which was brought from above, became half the height of the mountain, and the other half the voivodes and the children of the boyars immediately closed up with their people." The chronicler comments that this happened because a very large area was set aside for the city:"The place was great, and the city was completed in four weeks." 37
The scribe's book of Sviyazhsk, compiled in 1565 (probably the second one, since the scribe's books were compiled immediately after the construction of the city was completed) was published 38 . From its pages, a large "sovereign city" appears with powerful fortifications near the center and posad, with two monasteries - men's and women's, which were built several years later, a network of streets, alleys, dead ends and with reserve courtyard places. It is a large craft and commercial city with a complex social and ethnic composition of the population. It is planned and organized with the prospect of further development: empty spaces deliberately left during land surveying in all parts of the city will continue to be populated as it grows. The scribe's book shows that all parts of the city - the Kremlin, posad, sloboda - were laid out, demarcated, planned and populated simultaneously. The plans of the city, which had a picturesque layout creeping along the terrain, have come down to us. Its spatial appearance is captured by engravings of the beginning of the XVIII century. The 18th-century historian P. I. Rychkov writes that from May 14 to June 10, "a very grand and grand city, and in it the cathedral church of the Nativity of the Mother of God, six parish churches, and one monastery were built inside the city. The voivodes of Moscow and merchants, as well as ordinary people, have built themselves handsome houses. " 39
Yelets. This city was founded in the Kievan period and defeated by the Mongol-Tatars and Circassians in 1590. New Yelets began to be built in 1591 by decree of Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich in a new place

34 Ibid., pp. 160, 162.

35 Heinrich Staden. About Ivan the Terrible's Moscow. Notes of a German oprichnik, Moscow, 1925, p. 113.

36 PSRL. Vol. XIII, p. 162.

37 Ibid., p. 164.

38 "List from the scribe's Land Survey book of the city of Sviyazhsk and the district of letters and land surveying by Nikita Vasilyevich Yeyurisov and Dmitry Andreevich Kikin 1565-1567". Kazan. 1909. For the original, see: TSGADA, f. 1209, d.432.

39 P. I. Rychkov. Experience of the Kazan history of ancient and Middle Times. St. Petersburg, 1767, p. 129.

page 55

as a craft town 40 . The builders ' correspondence with Fyodor Ivanovich, which was conducted during the construction of the city, has come down to us 41 . Two voivodes, A.D. Zvenigorodsky and I. N. Myasnoy, as well as city affairs master I. Katerinin, were sent to Yelets by a discharge order. The city was laid out according to the estimate at a pre-selected location. This is evidenced by Katerina's petition submitted to the Discharge Order. The deacon's litter on it says: "Ilya Katerina beats her forehead to the sovereign Tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Ivanovich of all Russia. He was sent with the voivode with Prince Ondrej Zvenigorodsky in the year 100 (1591-1592-G. A.) to Yelets for city and prison estimates, and he swept the city and the prison and took a place under the city and under the prison " 42 . Katerina herself emphasizes: "You sent me your serf to Ivan Mikitich the Meat town of delati and the prison. And I, sire, with your voivode, the sovereign Ondrej Dmitrievich Zvenigorodsky and Ivan Mikitich Meat prison made." On the final page of the petition, rewritten by the clerk and submitted to the sovereign, there is a litter: "Give him four rubles, what the city and the prison did, and give Volodimersky master, what the city did, give three rubles "(ll. 181, 182).

What should be understood by the statement :" And he swept away the city and the prison, and took the place of the city and the prison"? The description of the city in the process of its construction allows you to answer this question. When leaving for the site, the boundaries of the city were determined, that is, the part of Novy Yelets that was to be fenced with "toras" - wooden log cabins filled with earth (l. 24), between which there were towers (l.163). The Livnensky (l. 6) and Dankovsky gates 43 are mentioned . A ditch was to be dug around the city (l. 24). Behind the moat began the territory of the prison, that is, the posad (also defined at the exit to the place), fenced with wooden walls with towers. A second ditch was made behind the walls of the prison, and the ditches were erected (l. 116). Judging by the record, the prison occupied almost the entire territory on which the city was located in the XIX century, its walls , as it is marked on the plan of 1769, 44, passed to the left bank of the river. Yelets. The document says: "And from the city wall down the Pine Tree to the prison tower, which is on Argamachy Mountain, the prison is not set up" (l. 116). It was later completed. The prison and the city were located concentrically. It was impossible to leave the city without passing through the prison. This is evidenced by the petition of A.D. Zvenigorodsky in 1593, whom I. N. Myasnoy, in conflict with him, locked up in the city: "Ivan, the sovereign, lives in a prison, and I, the sovereign, your serf, sit in the city as if under siege" (l.248).

From the documents it follows that the settlements were built and populated simultaneously, moreover, small siege towns, "ostrozhki", were put in them. They are visible on the topographical plan drawn up after the fire in 1769. In the decree of the tsar I. N. Myasnoy

40 Here, according to the tsar's decree, 100 people, including blacksmiths, were transferred to permanent residence from Tula during the laying and settlement of Yelets. By the middle of the 17th century, Yelets had become a center of metalworking, with 43 forges and 14 forges operating in 1653 (see V. M. Vazhinsky. Development of market relations in the southern Russian uyezds in the 2nd half of the XVII century. "Scientific Notes" of the Kemerovo Pedagogical Institute, 1963, N 5, p. 105).

41 TSGADA, f. 141, op. 1. d. 1, St. 4. Prikaznye delo starykh let, "O Yelets Cossacks and streltsy decrees, reports, petitions, salary paintings". Further, the NN sheets of this case are indicated in the text. Partially published by: G. N. Anpilogov. Novye dokumenty o Rossii kontsa XVI - nachala XVII v. Novye dokumenty o Rossii kontsa XVI-nachala XVII v. M.-L. 1967, pp. 322-374. Dyachye pomety helped us to read [N. A. Shvetsova].

42 G. N. Anpilogov dates this document to 1592 (G. N. Anpilogov. Op. ed., p. 367). We believe that it was written a year later, after the construction was completed.

43 TSGADA, f. 1209, d. 137, l. 30.

44 Ibid., f. 1293, op. 168, d. 8.

page 56

1593. he is ordered to come to Moscow for the delivery of works, and instead leave the Cossack head of A. Khotyaintsov in Yelets: "And in the city they would order you to live (Alexander Khotyaintsov) and protect it so that it would be thrifty from the fire in the city and the prison. And the Cossack centurions in the settlements and the Streltsy centurions in the settlements protected them tightly " (l. 103). A settlement is organized across the river behind the "Pine Tree under the Loot Swamp" (l. 146). And the sovereign's decree is given: "And we would kill them, tell them to put a prison near their settlement" (l. 144).

The question of the original appearance of the city, its size and topography is further clarified by the Yelets scribal and census books of the XVII century. There are three of them preserved: "The census book signed by the clerk Fyodor; Golovin, Prince Fyodor Petrovich Baryatinsky to the subdeacon Dmitry Petrovich Bolotov in 154 (1648)... on the Yelets city and outside the city of Posatsky and tyagly people "45;" List from the census book of Posatsky people in the city and in suburban settlements and estates and fiefdoms villages, villages and courtyards in the camps: Yeletsky, Vorgalsky, Zasosensky, Bruslanovsky census and inspection of Vasily Ivanovich Sukhotin and deputy Alexey Ostrikov in the year 7186 "(1678)46 ; "The book of scribal letters and land surveying by Tikhon Kamynin in 7199, 200 and 201, part 1 and 2" 47 (1691 -1693). These documents give an idea of how the survey of suburban areas went. Especially valuable is the scribe's book of 1691 -1693 with reference to the scribe's book of 1628, which has not come down to us, according to which all the settlements marked on the plan of Yelets in 1825 are named by the same names. For each settlement, a population census is given, lands separated by different landmarks are indicated, and temples are indicated. Ecclesiastical lands are separated especially from worldly allotments. The scribe's book of 1628 was compiled at the request of petitioners, citizens of Yelets of all classes. The reason for filing the petition was the actions of Roman (Filaret's own brother, Tsar Mikhail's uncle), who committed violence against Yelchans and was distinguished by money-grubbing .48
In all four documents (petitions of builders of Yelets and three scribal and census books of the XVII century), the "Rank of church allotments"is fully revealed. Yelets is far from the only city whose scribe's book begins with the rank of a church allotment. This was also the case in Vyazma, which still retains its picturesque structure49 . Simultaneously with the fortress walls, two temples were laid: Ascension Cathedral in the fortress and Assumption Church in Posad. In the decree of the sovereign's charter, N. Myasny is also given an order to issue grain salaries to the Ascension and Assumption priests, deacon, sexton, and proskurnitsa (l. 148). Long before the construction of the city's fortifications was completed, temples were built and operated. At the same time, the Trinity Monastery was founded. The abbot and the brethren were also given the sovereign's grain salary (ll. 148, 149). In addition to bread, the clergy also received a monetary salary (ll-104, 105). According to the sovereign decree, long before the construction of the city was completed, bells were brought from Tula to Yelets, books were brought, and iconostases were erected in churches (ll. 183, 226). Of the thirteen churches - four in the city, five in the prison on the Posad, one in the settlement beyond the Pine Tree and three beyond the Yelets River - only the Kazan Church (which in the XIX century was renamed Sretenskaya) received a special status.

45 TSGADA, f. 1209, d. 135.

46 Ibid., 8830.

47 Ibid., d. 137.

48 And Voskresensky. City of Yelets, Yelets. 1911, pp. 55-59 (the petition is kept in the Central State Duma).

49 TSGADA, f. 137, d. 1, ll. 1-37. This scribe's book was compiled from the book of 1595 (7103). Vasily Volynsky, as indicated by the text of the book of 1627.

page 57

land surveying by Tikhon Kamynin in 1691 -1693 50 . The rest of the land was allocated according to the first scribe's book, which was corrected in 1628. On the sovereign's money, two churches were built - the cathedral in the city and the Assumption Church in Posad. All other churches were built by the parishioners themselves.

Novy Yelets, founded in 1591 -1593, developed very quickly. The lands separated from him by the scribe's book of 1628 were no longer enough in 1653. The posadsky people wrote a petition to the tsar about the allocation of new additional lands to them; this request was granted. The government provided for the development of the city and its growth. When the builder of Yelets, I. N. Myasnoy, filed a petition with a request to reduce the size of the city, he received a categorical refusal: "It is not necessary for Ivan to reduce the city and the prison, from which the place is prigozh, so that during the siege time in the city and in the prison sit was fearless" (l. 246).

I. N. Myasnoy decided to speed up the construction of the fortress by forcibly delaying the arrival of Epifan Cossacks to their relatives for bread (Epifan at that time, just like Yelets, was being created again). Yelets Cossacks F. Terekhov and his comrades wrote a petition to the tsar. In response, a decree was issued to I. N. Myasnoy: "The Cossacks came (from Epifan. - G. A.) to visit their nephews and buy bread, and you give them bail and tell them to make the city... and you don't do that much: we build new cities, but you empty them" (l.77).

Yelets was built by carpenters sent by the sovereign's decree from different cities, and the local population" with a staff", hired for money received by the voivode from the Discharge Order. "Staff" was hired on the "surplus" coming from the order, but they also took "willing people". For the period of construction, a guard guard was created in the city, organized on the sovereign's money. Builders and security guards were paid bread and money from the state treasury. A granary was built in the center of the city, where bread was brought from the central regions of the country. I. N. Myasnoy was in charge of granaries and money for construction work. "In total, 2059 pairs of rye and oats were sent to Yelets to the tax collectors, boyar children, Streltsy and Cossacks alike... and you ordered that bread to be poured into the barns "(Ll. 147, 148, 149, 150).

On February 19, 1593, when the city was mostly finished, a sovereign decree was issued on the monetary award of all participants in the construction. I. N. Myasnoy writes:: "Let us send you 160 men to the Meat-bearing Yeletsky Zhiletsky and boyar children for fifty rubles each, and to the Cossacks and the streltsy, and the gunner, and the zatinschiks, and the carpenter, and the blacksmith for a total of 844 men for 10 altyns each" (ll. 105, 106).

To populate Yelets, a privileged upper class is recruited from all cities "according to layout" (with an entry in special books). It is provided with land and money, that is, " local typesetting and the sovereign's salary." The voivodes of Yelets Zvenigorodsky and Myasny were given a sovereign decree:" on life " to make up 200 people of boyar children from other cities. However, the points from which residents were chosen for the new city were not exposed, since it was necessary to take young people from large families: "The children of the boyars are not healthy because of their fathers: from their fathers - children, from the brethren-brothers, from uncles - nephews" (l. 63). The Yelets voivodes managed to "write on the Yelets for the life" of only 164 boyar children from different cities. To the sovereign they send a "reply" about the course of "typesetting": "And we, the sovereign, have chosen salaries from the cities of the children of the boyars, so that they can be verified according to your sovereign's letter: the 1st article is 200 rubles, and the monetary salary is 6 rubles, the 2nd article

50 Ibid., f. 1209, d. 137, ll. 26, 27, 28 vol., 29.

page 58

150 chet, and a monetary salary of 5 rubles, the 3rd article of 100 chet, and a monetary salary of 4 rubles" (l. 63). At the same time, the city is being populated by the lower class: Cossacks, archers (among whom are artisans), and peasants. They are recruited from other cities, villages, and villages on the same principle: "from fathers - children, from brothers-brothers, from uncles-nephews "(as evidenced by the "memory" to the boyar I. V. Godunov, sent on September 5, 1592 (l. 55).

To attract the population to the city, the state issued residential money. Don ataman Mikhail Antonov, the son of Koshlyk, and Rusinka Drobishev, the son of Klushin, declared in their petition: in order to "clean up the Cossacks" (that is, to settle them in Yelets), it is necessary to "give your sovereign instrument of registration" and pay "the sovereign's salary in money and grain... saltpeter money and bread. And without selitov's money, sire, we are your serfs, clean up the Cossacks, and without bread it is impossible" (l. 146). From this petition it is clear that simultaneously with the" typesetting "and registration of Cossacks in new cities, the state had to pay them "lifting sums" in the form of money and grain salaries.

The placement of residents in the city, and therefore the surveying of the city territory, was carried out by voivodes. On August 31, 1592, the leaders of the construction of Yelets were given a sovereign decree on how to settle the children of the boyars: "They wrote to us and the books of the children of the boyars were sent to us by the verstani, and we know that. And how will this letter of ours come to you, and you would tell the children of the boyar Yelets tenants to measure out their land according to their layout according to their salaries on the Pine River (that is, in the city. - G. A.) and beyond the Pine River" (that is, outside the city. - G. A.) (l.61).

Documents about the construction of Yelets have not reached us completely. So, they do not mention the drawing and painting, according to which, as a rule, a city was built in the Russian state. But the fact that the drawings of Yelets existed is evidenced by the inventory compiled in 1666 by the clerk of the Discharge Order D. I. Bashmakov, which was stored in the Discharge Order 51 .

One of the features of the creation of cities was that the residents themselves built their own houses on the plots allocated to them. In addition, they had to arrange their lives in such a way that in the future they would not need state support, money and bread salaries. Thus, all residents of Yelets who came from other cities were instructed to build a house and engage in arable land and vegetable gardens. How much attention was paid to this issue can be seen from the state charter sent to Yelets, about the settlement of the children of the boyars. It said: "And tell them to plow their arable land and settle down. And now they are not sent for parcels to visiting villages and storozheya. But don't tell them to do the city business while they sweep away their yards and don't build them" (l.61). Other documents also indicate that every tenant in the newly built city had to put up a hut for himself. Thus, Y. Malyavin wrote in his petition: "And as de pochali arranges the new city of Yelets, and he de Yushko, wrote on Yelets for life in the children of the boyars and the city and the prison did and the yard itself on Yelets put" (l. 129).

Tsarev-Borisov. This city was founded in 1600 on the southernmost edge of Russia, on the Oskol River, at the confluence of the Bakhtin River.-

51 Bashmakov made the following entry about the two Yelets drawings: "The drawing of Yelets is not large, it is on the warehouse, but which year, and who sent it, is not written on it. Yeletskaya's drawing, on the other hand, is pasted on with paper, is ragged, and is stripped from all sides, and the one who was sent to us by someone is not signed on it" ("Description of documents and papers stored in the Moscow Archive of the Ministry of Justice", Vol. VI, p.18).

page 59

lodezya. The decree given to the voivodes reveals the relationship between the construction participants. The city is built by the decree of the tsar, as his "sovereign's business", by voivodes, on the basis of drawings and paintings made in the Discharge order: "Summer 7108 July 5 day Sovereign... Boris Fyodorovich of all Russia ordered the okolnichy and voivodes Bogdan Yakovlevich Velsky and Semyon Romanovich Olferov to go to the field on the Donets River at the mouth of Oskolskoye to the river Bakhtin Kolodez for their sovereign affairs and Zemsky district, and the sovereign ordered them and led Prince Boris Fyodorovich of All Russia to build a city, and the drawing and painting for that place were given to them, and which heads Fyodor Chyulkov and Istoma Mikhnev of that place looked at and drew, and those heads Fyodor and Istoma were sent with them " 52 .

The decree further states that the voivodes, when they arrive at the site, must once again measure and view all the streams and ravines according to the drawing and painting of Chulkov and Mikhnev, and determine which will be buried and which will be preserved. They must link the rough terrain with fortifications, walls and towers, and roadways. The document reads: "And as on the Donets and on the mouth of Oskolsky to Bakhtin kolodez will come and okolnichem and voivodes God. Yak. yes This. Olferov and the place... that..... we looked at the heads of Fyodor Chyulkov and Istoma Mikhnev according to the drawing and painting of measuring and streams and mounds we will consider and measure how far away which stream or hillock will be from the city and how to trade with them whether to dig up which hillock or stream mochno in the city to take, what custom they are in the city to take from the tower how many fathoms are the city walls or moat to that stream or to the hill and about that stream or hill to do and the enemies (ravines. - G. L.) they will consider and measure in that place and which enemies instead did not converge and they will measure how many fathoms between those enemies prozhevo places and whether ivo needs to dig or not if necessary, and what enemies will come in handy near the city in the moat place " 53 . Choosing a place for the city, the voivodes had to not only assess its advantages and disadvantages, taking into account the needs of its defense, but also improve the terrain in military terms. The document shows how much importance was attached to the drawing made by employees of the Discharge Order,and the painting. At the same time, an estimate was drawn up: "And for the city, for towers and for every city business, to sweep away the forest with them, as the city is made according to that drawing and according to the painting"54 .

The ritual of laying the foundation of the city, which was mentioned above (when describing the laying of Sviyazhsk in 1551), was fully preserved in 1600: "Yes, immediately sing a moleben and light up the water, let the city rubiti according to the drawing and painting, what drawings and painting were given to them, and let the carpenter rubiti the city and do it hastily, and make them a city a model as prigozhe that the sovereign tsar and great Prince Boris Fedorovich of all Russia put on okolnichem and voivode on Bogdan Yakovlevich " 55 .

The same decree gives Voivode B. Y. Velsky the right to choose for solving the spatial image of the city such a model as he considers most suitable. Judging by this record, samples were made not only for individual buildings 56, but also for the entire city, the latter was considered as a single artistic whole. We can assume that the samples for the city were made in the form of drawings.

The construction of churches in Tsarev-Borisov, as well as in Sviyazhsk and Yelets, was carried out simultaneously with the foundation of the city. "Spiritual" protection

52 D. I. Bagalei. Edict. op. t. 1, p. 5.

53 Ibid., pp. 7, 8.

54 Ibid., p. 7.

55 Ibid., p. 8.

56 As a rule, existing buildings with high artistic qualities were taken as a model, sometimes their fragments or details, as indicated in the contract entry.

page 60

the latter (the creation of patronage) was given the same importance as its protection from enemies (the construction of fortifications). Patronage of the city and its name were determined by the sovereign decree: "To strengthen just as in the city in the parish of the Crimean tsar and tsarevichs and big people sit fearlessly and securely; yes, to give that city the name of Tsarev-Borisov city, and to put them in the city where the Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary is near. and the Life-giving Trinity and the other church of the holy great Passion-bearers Boris and Gleb and the church structure of the image and book sent " 57 .

Tsarev-Borisov is being built as an agricultural city. The decree definitely says about this: "And how the city will be made completely and they will unsubscribe to the sovereign... Boris Fyodorovich (title) yes, and send a painting yes, then write in the name of the painting what are the rivers near the fortress city and how deep.., what is the land of good or average or bad and what are the forests and how far away the forest is large and you can arrange arable land and pastures near the city and how far away there will be mowing versts according to the estimate of arable land and mowing and other what land rivers and forests"58 . Here, attention is drawn to the fact that, in addition to the drawing, painting and estimates that were drawn up before the city was laid down, after its construction was completed, a new drawing and painting were sent to the orders.

Documents from other cities allow us to clarify the nature of paintings, drawings, estimates entirely for the city and its individual parts, fortifications, gun (built and maintained by the state) churches, state buildings.

New On The Site. A detailed painting from 1644, which has been preserved in full, concerns the city of Novy Narym.

On the square chosen for the city, the deacon or future voivode of the city, sent by the sovereign decree from the Discharge or Siberian orders, determined the place of construction of the fortress, posad, settlement, planned roads, arable and pasture lands that are cut to the city. Novy Narym was planned as a commercial city. The designer advised to put it in a place that was already inhabited. Farmers with families living on the mountain chosen for the city, he suggests to transfer to their arable land: "The sovereign peasants on the mountain above the river is usad, and the name of the river is Sudmi, and in that place there will be a new prison, and those ploughed peasants of usad from that place should be demolished to their peasant arable land, where Kovo's arable land is occupied, in order to mark the place where the sovereign peasants of usad have nowhere to put a prison. And in addition to that farmstead for that prison place and beyond the prison for settlements, where there will be yards of servants and all sorts of people and under the prison and for the release of animals, there will be a need for land in addition from the sovereign's arable land about five tithes, and in that place of arable land that will go under the prison and polmi... And the settlements should have a prison of servants and all sorts of people on both sides of the prison on the mountain. For the fact that in the prison yards of all employees and all sorts of people neustavyattsa. And the prison will have a mountain on one side, a steep place, and on three sides the places are flat. " 59
The author of the mural comprehensively describes the topography of the area, tells about the water and land routes near the mountain, where it is planned to build a Narym. He plans to put the city in such a way that it can be connected with the Ob River. To do this, he suggests connecting the Parabelskaya Channel, near the mountain, with the Syudmyu River, which flows around it.

17 D. I. Bagalei. Op. ed., p. 9.

58. Ibid.

59 TSGADA, f. 214, Siberian Order, stb. 136, ll 83, 84, 85, 86. This document is published for the first time; reference to it is available in N. N. Ogloblin's guide to the Siberian Order (see N. N. Ogloblin. Edict. op., book I).

page 61

but on the other hand, to carry out earthworks to make the channel navigable, and the city commercial. He plans to build a bridge on the Syudmi River, near the lake, and a new pier - on the Parabelskaya Channel, after it becomes navigable. To protect against an attack, a pier should be built in the depth of the channel (then it will not be visible from the Ob). And so that trade, and industrial, and all sorts of people do not pass by the new prison, on the Kete River, a tributary of the Ob, put a guard (l.86).

According to this mural, all the works proposed by the clerk of the Discharge Order were carried out. Until now, the city of Narym has been preserved in the form as it was planned.

The painting was always submitted to the Discharge or Siberian Order together with the drawing. Information about what data was applied to the drawing is provided by materials about the transfer of the Old Narym, laid down in 1596, to a new place. Thus, in a document dated 1611, it is stated that a drawing should be made for "the New City, and all the city fortresses, and all the plowed lands, and all the land"60 . A more precise interpretation of the drawing is contained in the document of 1630: "Yes, in which place up or down the Ob River you will find a place where you can put a prison and arrange a settlement, and you will be told to draw a drawing to that place, how the settlement will be and what fortresses and on which side of the Ob River" 61 . The drawings of cities that have come down to us show that they were different both in content and in the technique of execution: drawings made before the city was laid down differed from those that record an existing city or were drawn up for its reconstruction.

The fact that drawings in the Russian state of the XVI-XVII centuries were very common is evidenced by a number of lists that have come down to us from this time. First of all, these are the inventory of the royal archive of 1575-1584. In it, cases from the reign of Ivan III were stored in boxes. Box 22 contained the files of Ivan III and Vasily III, including the"blueprint of Sebezhsky and Gumyansky". The 25-th box contained "a list of the city of Smolensk with paths and volosts that are drawn to it." The archive names drawings of Luki Veliky, Pskov suburbs with the Lithuanian city of Polotsk, etc. The city murals of Vasil, travel lists of Dmitrov, Ruza, Zvenigorod 62 have been preserved . Only a few drawings were found in the royal archive, but they also indicate the presence of a well-developed cartography already at the end of the XV-beginning of the XVI century.

The bulk of the drawings were kept in the Category, as indicated by the entry in the preface to the book of the Big Drawing, compiled in 135 (1627): "The clerks of the Duma Fyodor Likhachev and Mikhailo Danilov ordered to make a new drawing for the entire Moscow state, for all the surrounding states, applying to the old drawing in the same measure" 63 . In this regard, the old drawing "that survived the fire"was found in the Category. An old painting, "that was made in the Category of former sovereigns", was also kept here. This is also evidenced by the list of 231 drawings compiled before 1666 in the Discharge Order of the Duma clerk D. I. Bashmakov 64 . It names 63 cities and provides an additional list of 17 cities. Attention is drawn to the city of Belgorod and its uyezd, for which 27 drawings were stored in the Category.

60 G. F. Miller. Istoriya Sibiri [History of Siberia], Vol. I. Appendices, pp. 337, § 78.

61 Ibid., T. P. Appendices, p. 370, § 280.

62 "Acts collected in the libraries and archives of the Russian Empire by the Archeographic expedition of the Academy of Sciences", Vol. I. SPB. 1836, pp. 333-335, N 289. The original is kept in the State Public Library named after M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin.

63 "The Book of a Large drawing", Moscow, 1864, pp. 2, 3, 211.

64 "Description of documents and papers stored in the Moscow Archive of the Ministry of Justice", Vol. VI, pp. 15-29.

page 62

The description of the drawings shows that they were made frequently, almost annually, and reflected the work that was carried out by voivodes in the city or county. These drawings were mostly made locally and sent to the Category. The earliest drawing of Belgorod dates back to 1640. This was also the case in the town of Karpov, where 8 drawings were drawn up from 1640 to 1652. According to Yablonov, 14 drawings were made from 1639 to 1666. Drawings of Voronezh (15 in total) began to be sent to the Category in 1636. The fact that drawings were an integral part of urban planning records management is confirmed by the decree of the Siberian Order of September 18, 1697 on the production of local drawings of cities. The order explains that "the drawings were made in cities in order that in the Siberian order there are no drawings for Siberian cities and vedati does not care" 65 .

Information about the methods of making drawings, maps, and city plans is still very scarce, but they nevertheless shed some light on this issue. The voivode of the Akhtyrsky regiment in 194 (1696) asked the Rank to send him a draftsman or icon painter to draw up a plan of the city: "And for that matter, give a draftsman or icon painter from Sevsk, and if there is no other place in Sevsk, give it from Rylsk." Since the right person was not found in Sevsk this time, " Fyodor Yakimov, one of the Rylsk icon painters, was given for drawing "66 . Drawings of lands, villages and cities kept in the Local Order, executed in watercolors, indicate that icon makers took part in their compilation 67 . Other documents show that the drawings were made in the Category of various people who were specially sent in advance to survey the areas on which the city was to be built (for example, Tsarev-Borisov, Kozlov and others) 68 .

Estimates, as well as drawings, were an integral part of urban planning documentation, compiled in the Category. A huge scale of urban development work in the vast expanses of the southern and eastern lands could only be carried out if planning and budget planning were well organized. In the files of the Discharge Order, it was possible to find a fully preserved estimate for three new cities, which was compiled by employees of the Discharge Order. Sukhotin and Y. Yuryev. It is included in the "extract (1637) from the boyar verdict on the construction of cities, forts and fortifications along the zasechnaya line and related expenses" 69 . Sukhotin and Yuryev were sent to the site of the proposed construction of residential towns on the "Field". They were guarded by 200 military personnel. In addition, the Discharge Order provided the expedition with geographical maps and an approximate version of the construction of fortifications and cities, compiled on the basis of a survey of local people and residents of nearby cities - Belgorod, Oskol, Kursk (ll.8, 17). The expedition worked for two months and returned to Moscow on December 26, 1636 with drawings, a detailed description of the area, a plan for the construction of new fortifications and a general estimate (l.17).

In addition to the general estimate, estimates were drawn up for three residential cities, which accurately indicated their location (they did not have names yet).: the first city is "on the Sosna River at the spur of the Ternovsky Forest", on the Kalmiyuska Sakma (that is, the main road), the second - "on the Kalmiyuska Sakma up the Sosna River at the mouth of the Userd River, on the lower gorodishche", the third - " on the Muravsky shlyakh on the Vorsklu River

65 PSZ. Vol. III, N 1532.

66 "Description of documents and papers stored in the Moscow Archive of the Ministry of Justice", Vol. IV. Moscow, 1884, pp. 230-231.

67 TSGADA, f. 1209, Local order drawings.

68 City plans and other drawings of the XVII century (TSGADA, ff. 1209,210,214).

69 Ibid., f. 210, Bit order of the Belgorod table, columns, p. 73, l. 58. Further, NN sheets are indicated in the text.

page 63

on Karpovsky storozhenye". Cities are designed for 1 thousand service people, who need to " arrange for housing with land and all sorts of land." All three cities were supposed to be surrounded by several additional "standing towns", earthen ramparts depart from the cities. In all cities, mounted and foot service people are settled, who are supposed to protect the builders, " while the city is satisfied." The estimate indicates from which places "to take wood for urban affairs and housing". Additionally, a separate estimate is made for fortifications. It was assumed that the first two cities will need 8 thousand logs, the third - 6 thousand. The estimate was made in monetary and grain terms in three different versions, depending on the complexity of the work on the construction of the city: the amount of salary paid to military men for the protection of builders, the cost of the work of the builders themselves and materials for all three cities were determined. Detailed estimates were also given for the construction of ramparts, standing towns, trenches and other fortifications around the city. At the end, the total amount was indicated: "Both three cities and eight prisons for military men, and from the earth and from the nadolbny business to give money under the big article 111574 rubles 15 altyn, and rye bread and oats 24000 chet" (ll. 58-69).

In the Russian state, new cities were small, so it is not by chance that the estimated unit of account is 1 thousand men. The entire population of such a city with wives and children was approximately 5-6 thousand people. Another document shows that the size of the city was regulated by the government and there was a certain optimal version of it. In 1680, natives of Right-bank Ukraine wanted to build a city on the bank of the Bityuga River. The Boyar Duma allowed them to settle in Russia, but offered them another place. She passed the following sentence:: "And bude them will come a large crowd and in one city they will settle nemochno and they will build cities between Polatov and Valuiki and Novy Oskol on both sides of the Oskol River and along the Seversky Donets above Tsarev-Borisov city and between Userd and Polatov on the tops of the Sosny River in pleasing places" 70 . Consequently, according to the boyar verdict, the newcomers had to establish several cities, since they "could not settle in one city."

Two estimates for the construction of wooden fortifications are preserved in the documents of Staraya Russa. Staraya Russa, as we know, was founded in the pre-Mongol period. In the 17th century. it was reconstructed. In 1629, the question of restoring the old town was raised. The government sent a letter to the Old Russian voivode K. Suponev and subdeacon A. Lyalin signed by the sovereign deacon B. Bolin, in which it ordered "to mark the Old Russian prison case". Two speculations were sent back 71 . The first project and estimate provided for leaving the city in its old place, despite the fact that it is washed out by hollow water when the Polisty, Porusy and Pererytitsy rivers flood. According to the second estimate, it was proposed to move the city to a new, higher place. On this occasion, the voivode writes: "And we, sire... according to your sovereign (title) decree and by letter from the headman and tselovalniki and with posatsky people and with about Russian peasants and with carpenters of the Old Russian prison and towers and Taras and nadolby smechali. And the old prison, sire, the forest is not suitable for any prison business, all rotted and fell apart, because the prison and towers and tarasas and pillars and nadolby were made from the old horomnovo forest last year in 125"

70 Ibid., p. 1530, l. 32.

71 Ibid., f. 141, d. 32, Voivodeship replies, paintings, petitions in the prison case of the city of Staraya Russa. The source cited below has not been published. SRT sheets are further indicated in the text.

page 64

(1616) (l. 2). Further, Suponev writes about how much new wood will be needed for work on the old prison (l. 3). The Voivode suggests cutting down another prison to the old prison; in his opinion, this should be done due to the fact that the population in and around Staraya Russa has increased. He reports that if the old city is not expanded ,then "the Old Russian Posatsky and near-Russian pogosts will have nowhere to accommodate the peasants in the old prison" (l. 3). Suponev and Lyalin claim that both these fortresses - "the old Russian prison on the old sole and with a new increase in decoration will become 1974 Rublev 12 altyn" (L. 3).

The second proposal of the Old Russian voivode and subdeacon was to build a prison in a drier place, " near the stone temples of the former cathedral churches of Boris and Gleb and near the Great Martyrs of Friday near the Porus of the Salt Lake River. And then, sire, the place has become high and fearful and cavernous, and the earth is easy to dig." They suggest building a new city around the old posad with stone churches measuring 476 fathoms in size. "From Peter and Paul to Otgorottsskaya Street and to the Porus of the Prokopati River, the moat is 325 fathoms wide, two oblique fathoms wide, and a quarter-fathom deep dig with a slant." Suponev and Lyalin claim that " the Old townspeople of Posatsk and the peasants of the Okolorusky churchyards say from the old town that there were many wells with fresh water at this place. And now the de wells are crumbling from destruction and from fires." A new prison in another place, according to their calculations, will cost 20 rubles 27 altyn and 5 money cheaper than the old one (ll. 4, 5). The estimate made based on the description of all the details of the fortress, indicating the material, its range, quantity and cost indicates that the builders perfectly imagined the final result - the overall appearance of the fortress, as well as the amount of costs for its construction.

One of the little-studied issues of construction of picturesque cities is the issue of land surveying of urban territory. Since the squares, streets and dead ends of the city curved freely and smoothly on the terrain, the researchers had the impression that they appeared spontaneously. However, even the little information we have suggests otherwise. The third Novgorod Scribe's Book of the 15th century contains materials on the planning of Staraya Ladoga. They give instructions to build buildings in rows on empty spaces, put the second row behind the first, focusing on the division of courtyards into temples 72 . Streets were also measured in Novgorod. In the Nikon Chronicle under 1531, it is said that Moscow clerks were sent to Novgorod to demarcate 73 streets . Information from the middle of the 17th century has been preserved. about how the land was measured for the settlement of service people in the city of Naberezhnye Chelny:"For yards and vegetable gardens along thirty fathoms, and across ten fathoms to a person" 74 . The documents of the Ufa prikaznaya izba of the mid-17th century indicate the amount of land allocated to each resident of the city. Under the Ufa voivode, there was a special clerk who was in charge of surveying urban land and issuing land plots to residents of the city of Ufa . The case of Yakunka Arzamastsev shows that no one in the city could increase their land plot or carry out redevelopment without permission and without a "sovereign decree". The latter, in order to cut himself an empty plot, had to turn to the sovereign 76 .

72 P. P. Smirnov. Cities of the Moscow State in the first half of the 17th century. Vol. I, p. 14.

73 PSRL. Vol. XIII, p. 60.

74 TSGADA, f. 1209, kn. 156, ll. 156-157.

75 Ibid., f. 1173, op. 1, dd. 502, 511, 537 - 544, 610.

76 Ibid., units hr. 599, ll. 1, 1 vol., 2.

page 65

The activities of the Discharge Order for the construction of new cities, the coordination of its actions with the instructions of the tsar and the Boyar Duma, as well as with the opinions of voivodes can be traced in the documents of the construction of Kozlov and Kozlovsky uyezd (1635-1637). First, a survey was made of "service people" familiar with the topography of the area, who proposed to put a new city on Urlyapov the ancient settlement on which, as they remember, Boris Godunov wanted to found a city back in the XVI century .77 Having collected information about Urlyapov's ancient settlement, the Discharge Order handed them over to the sovereign for consideration. On August 22, 1635, the palace received "an extract to the report on the case in the Discharge Order for the construction of a city on the site of Urlyapov's ancient settlement." "For the city structure, the sovereign ordered Ivan Birkin and Mikhail Speshnev to go" (ll. 12-13). Hence it is clear that the builders of the city were appointed by the government. The peculiarity of the construction of Kozlov lay in the fact that Birkin and Speshnev, having familiarized themselves with the Urlyapov settlement, refused to build a city there, since they looked for the best place for it, which belonged to S. Kozlov (ll. 77, 189, 191). Their choice was approved by the Rank. The city was built "on the Kozlov tract" (l. 189).

Documents on the construction of Yelets, Tsarev-Borisov, Kozlov indicate that the leaders of the construction of these cities were their future governors. As a rule, two voivodes were at the head of the work. They had great rights, but they also had great responsibilities. They were able to adjust preliminary projects, were fully responsible for choosing the location for the future city, for carrying out construction in accordance with the instructions received in the orders, and for the quality of work. This is confirmed by the materials of the Siberian Order for the cities of Tyumen, Tobolsk, Tura, Pelym, Berezov, Surgut, Narym, Yakutsk, Tomsk, Verkhoturye, Mangazeya, Kuznetsk, Yeniseysk, Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk 78 .

Let's sum up the results. In the Russian state of the XVI-XVII centuries, the Discharge and Siberian orders were determined by the decision of the sovereign and the Boyar Duma to determine the location for the foundation of a new city and its construction, as well as the reconstruction of old cities in the Russian state of the XVI-XVII centuries. For the laying of the city, the Order drew up a drawing, painting and estimates. The choice of a site for the city and the management of construction works were usually carried out by two voivodes of the future city (who received special knowledge and skills in construction). In the Discharge or Siberian Order, they were given the necessary specialists to help them - urban planners, fortifiers, artists, messengers, etc.City fortifications, gun temples, government and public buildings were built with state funds by craftsmen. Residential buildings and parish churches were built by the residents themselves on plots allocated to them by the sovereign decree of the voivodes of cities. But private construction was subject to strict regulations; it was carried out under the control of the State. The settlement of the new city was carried out in an organized manner, by transferring young families of all classes from the old cities by government decrees. Each inhabitant of the new city was given residential money and a grain salary by special orders of the emperor. The construction of new and reconstruction of old cities was carried out very quickly. Small towns were built in 2-3 weeks, large ones-in 1.5-2 years. The appearance of Russian cities was also determined by state orders. Cities, as well as individual buildings, were built according to models. The choice of this or that sample, as a rule, was also entrusted to the voivode-builder of the city.

77 Ibid., f. 210, Bit order of the Belgorod Table, columns, p. 201, ll. 3-9. Further, the sheets of the document are indicated in the text. This document is being published for the first time.

78 Academy of Sciences of the USSR, f. 21, op. 5, ed. hr. 14, ll. 15-23.

page 66

Permanent link to this publication: