The death of a scientist full of days, who has made a major and fruitful academic journey in science, of course, is full of sadness, but usually, sadness is bright and somehow satisfied. Peace be upon him! - we whisper to ourselves and add: - God forbid, and we are at least half the same. But when this death passes unnoticed, the place of bright sadness is taken by sharp bitterness. The death of Leonid Efimovich Shepelev, which followed a week ago, unfortunately, remained almost unnoticed by anyone. And it's unbearably sad.

It is perhaps unnecessary to talk about the contribution of Leonid Efimovich to science. Let us give only an incomplete list of his monographs - it is more than eloquent: "Archive research and research" (M., 1971); "Joint-Stock Companies in Russia" (L., 1973); "Ranks, titles and titles canceled by history in the Russian Empire" (L., 1977), later revised into "Titles, uniforms, orders in the Russian Empire" (L., 1991; M .: SPb., 2005; M .: SPb ., 2008), "Tsarism and the bourgeoisie in the second half of the 19th century: problems of commercial and industrial policy" (L., 1981), "Tsarism and the bourgeoisie in 1904-1914: Problems of commercial and industrial policy" (L., 1987), "Sergey Yulievich Witte: Chronicle. Documents. Memoirs "(St. Petersburg, 1999); "The bureaucratic world of Russia, XVIII - early XX century." (St. Petersburg, 2001), "Heraldry of Russia, XVIII - early XX century." (St. Petersburg, 2003; St. Petersburg, 2010) "Joint-stock companies in Russia: XIX - early XX century" (St. Petersburg, 2006); "Problems economic development countries in the 19th and early 20th centuries. : documents and memoirs of statesmen" (St. Petersburg, 2007) "The fate of Russia. Problems of economic development of the country in the XIX - early XX centuries. : documents and memoirs of statesmen" (St. Petersburg, 2007); "Apparatus of power in Russia. The era of Alexander I and Nicholas I "(St. Petersburg, 2007),"Capital Petersburg. City and Power" (together with E.I. Zherikhina, M.: SPb., 2009). And this is only a small part of what has been done. A lot of articles and publications of sources, the yearbook "Angliyskaya Embankment" ... one life - albeit a long one - was enough to master such a gigantic work. And not just work. Let us pay attention to the repeated reprints, to the numerous editions of the last fifteen years. The scientific work of Leonid Efimovich was not only valuable, but also deeply in demand, causing constant interest even in our superficial and unreadable times.

But with the death of L.E. Shepelev, we have lost not just a brilliant researcher, a dedicated archivist, historian in the best, classical sense of the word. We have lost one of the most principled and harsh critics of the St. scientific world and this loss is irreparable. Many disliked and feared Leonid Efimovich. Because nothing is friendly relations, nor administrative circumstances could save low-quality, especially dishonest work from its never emotional, but inevitably substantive, irresistible analysis. When the author of these lines asked Leonid Efimovich to be an opponent of his Ph.D. thesis, many thought that I had gone crazy and for some reason decided to deliberately "cut off". How many times, being present at rather weak defenses, we had to hear: "If only Shepelev did not come." It seems to us that this fear is the best recommendation that a real scientist in the professional community can deserve. Unbiased and objective criticism is the only true bond of real science, its heart and blood, what, in fact, allows science to become science, its only defense against dishonesty and amateurism - terrible ulcers, alas, corroding history today. And Leonid Efimovich was a true - one of the last - knight of science, without fear and reproach, not by virtue of the cold dictates of the mind or emotional outbursts, but by the call of the heart, by the strength of the soul itself, always, everywhere and to the end stood for its purity. He simply could not, could not do otherwise.

Leonid Efimovich did not live for science - he lived for science; science was for him not a profession, but nature, the harmonious essence of his nature. In the service of science for him there was neither ambition nor personal scores. When in 2001 a certain G.A. Murashev published the book "Titles, ranks, awards" - an absolute plagiarism of the most popular (four editions) work of Leonid Efimovich - friends and colleagues were indignant, urged to sue, and Leonid Efimovich ... rejoiced! Yes, he was happy! "So, I wrote a good book," he said. "And now it will sell even wider. It's wonderful! And under whose name - what difference does it make?"

Any researcher was afraid to fall under the criticism of Leonid Efimovich. But it was a real pleasure to work with him. Always immaculately elegant, always friendly and with a subtle sense of humor, he was a wonderful colleague and a worthy leader. It is no coincidence that in 1994 he became deputy head of the State Heraldry under the President of the Russian Federation, in 1995 - president of the St. Petersburg Scientific Society of Historians and Archivists, from 1999 to 2004 he was deputy chairman of the Heraldic Council under the President of the Russian Federation. He was not afraid to take on new, daring things and knew how to organize them in a special, only inherent spirit. Without haste, fever and pressure, without a desperate desire for an immediate result, but with the necessary thoughtfulness and thoroughness, with the same deep professionalism, with an eye on years to come and for a result that will not be momentary. Leonid Efimovich took on a lot, providing his colleagues and subordinates with wide freedom of creativity and initiative. And he was never afraid to put an end to it if he considered the topic exhausted or if his further participation in the work was unpromising.

Now Leonid Efimovich is no longer with us. The St. Petersburg historical world has been orphaned. And nothing will make up for this loss.

To narrow the search results, you can refine the query by specifying the fields to search on. The list of fields is presented above. For example:

You can search across multiple fields at the same time:

logical operators

The default operator is AND.
Operator AND means that the document must match all the elements in the group:

research development

Operator OR means that the document must match one of the values ​​in the group:

study OR development

Operator NOT excludes documents containing this element:

study NOT development

Search type

When writing a query, you can specify the way in which the phrase will be searched. Four methods are supported: search based on morphology, without morphology, search for a prefix, search for a phrase.
By default, the search is based on morphology.
To search without morphology, it is enough to put the "dollar" sign before the words in the phrase:

$ study $ development

To search for a prefix, you need to put an asterisk after the query:

study *

To search for a phrase, you need to enclose the query in double quotes:

" research and development "

Search by synonyms

To include synonyms of a word in the search results, put a hash mark " # " before a word or before an expression in brackets.
When applied to one word, up to three synonyms will be found for it.
When applied to a parenthesized expression, a synonym will be added to each word if one was found.
Not compatible with no-morphology, prefix, or phrase searches.

# study

grouping

Parentheses are used to group search phrases. This allows you to control the boolean logic of the request.
For example, you need to make a request: find documents whose author is Ivanov or Petrov, and the title contains the words research or development:

Approximate word search

For an approximate search, you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of a word in a phrase. For example:

bromine ~

The search will find words such as "bromine", "rum", "prom", etc.
You can additionally specify maximum amount possible edits: 0, 1 or 2. For example:

bromine ~1

The default is 2 edits.

Proximity criterion

To search by proximity, you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of a phrase. For example, to find documents with the words research and development within 2 words, use the following query:

" research development "~2

Expression relevance

To change the relevance of individual expressions in the search, use the sign " ^ " at the end of an expression, and then indicate the level of relevance of this expression in relation to the others.
The higher the level, the more relevant the given expression.
For example, in this expression, the word "research" is four times more relevant than the word "development":

study ^4 development

By default, the level is 1. Valid values ​​are a positive real number.

Search within an interval

To specify the interval in which the value of some field should be, you should specify the boundary values ​​in brackets, separated by the operator TO.
A lexicographic sort will be performed.

Such a query will return results with the author starting from Ivanov and ending with Petrov, but Ivanov and Petrov will not be included in the result.
To include a value in an interval, use square brackets. Use curly braces to escape a value.

About the book

USSR Academy of Sciences

Series "Pages of the history of our Motherland"

L. E. Shepelev

Leningrad, "Science", Leningrad branch, 1991

Book of Doctor of Historical Sciences L. E. Shepeleva talks about the system of military, civil, court and family titles and ranks and the uniforms and orders corresponding to them in the Russian Empire (XVIII century - 1917).

The publication is intended for historians, art critics, archival and museum workers, as well as for a wide range of readers interested in Russian history.

Responsible editor Corresponding Member USSR Academy of Sciences B. V. Ananyich

Leonid Efimovich Shepelev

Titles, uniforms, orders in the Russian Empire

Approved for publication by the Editorial Board of Serial Editions of the USSR Academy of Sciences

Publishing house editor R. C. Paegle

Painter V. M. Ivanov

Technical editor Ya. N. Isakov

Correctors L. Z. Markova and K. S. Friedland

Handed over to the set 11/30/89. Signed for publication 6.03.91. Format 84×108 1 / 32 . Photocomposition. Literary typeface. Offset paper No. 1. Offset printing. Conv. oven l. 11.76. Conv. kr.-ott. 12.15. Uch.-ed. l. 12.95. Circulation 40,000 copies. Zach. 20386. Price 3 rubles.

Order of the Red Banner of Labor, Nauka publishing house.

Leningrad branch. 199034, Leningrad, V-34, Mendeleevskaya line, 1. TsKF VMF

ISBN 5-02-027196-9

On the cover of the book - drawings of varieties of uniforms.

On the front side of the cover: ceremonial uniform with top-level sewing. 1834

On the back cover:

1. Uniform of the end of the 18th century. (caftan of the German sample).
2. Uniform frock coat of military cut (for ringmasters and Jägermeisters). 1834
3. Ceremonial uniform of the first third of the XIX century. (French caftan).
4. Parade uniform. 1834
5. Ceremonial uniform of military cut. 1869
6. Uniform coat. 1904
7. Outer uniform (coat and cap). 1904
8. Uniform for court officials (civil cut). 1856
9. Ceremonial dress for court ladies. 1834

A characteristic feature of the estates is the presence of social symbols and signs: titles, uniforms, orders, titles. Classes and castes did not have state distinctive signs, although they were distinguished by clothing, jewelry, norms and rules of conduct, and a ritual of conversion. And in a feudal society, the state assigned distinctive symbols to the main class - the nobility. What exactly was it?

Titles - verbal designations of the official and estate-generic position of their holders, established by law, briefly defining legal status. In Russia in the 19th century, there were such titles as general, state councilor, chamberlain, count, adjutant wing, secretary of state, excellency, lordship, etc.

Uniforms - official uniforms that corresponded to the titles and visually expressed them.

Orders are material insignia, honorary awards that complemented titles and uniforms. The order title (“cavalier of the order”) was a special case of the title, a special order dress was a special case of the uniform, and the order badge itself was a common addition to any uniform.

The core of the system of titles, orders and uniforms was the rank - the rank of each civil servant (military, civilian or courtier). Before Peter I, the concept of "rank" meant any position, honorary title, social status person. January 24, 1722 Peter 1 in Russia introduced new system titles, the legal basis for which was the "Table of Ranks". Since then, "rank" has taken on a narrower meaning, referring only to public service. "Table" provided for three main types of service: military, civilian and court. Each was divided into 14 ranks, or classes.

The civil service was built on the principle that an employee had to go through the entire hierarchy from bottom to top, starting with the length of service of the lowest class rank. In each class it was necessary to serve a certain minimum of years (in the lower 3-4 years). There were fewer higher posts than lower ones. The class denoted the rank of the position, which was called the class rank. The name "official" was assigned to its owner.

Only the nobility was allowed to public service - local and service. Both were hereditary: the title of nobility was passed on to the wife, children and distant descendants according to male line. Married daughters acquired the estate status of a husband. Noble status was usually formalized in the form of a genealogy, family coat of arms, portraits of ancestors, legends, titles and orders. Thus, a sense of continuity of generations, pride in one's family and a desire to preserve its good name gradually formed in the mind. Collectively, they constituted the concept of "noble honor." The total number of nobles and class officials (including family members) was equal to one million in the middle of the 19th century.

The noble origin of a hereditary nobleman was determined by the merits of his family before the fatherland. The official recognition of such merits was expressed by the common title of all nobles - "your honor." The private title "nobleman" was not used in the byggu. Its replacement was the predicate "master", which eventually came to refer to any other free class. In Europe, other substitutions were used: "von" for German surnames, "don" for Spanish ones, "de" for French ones. In Russia, this formula has been transformed into an indication of the name, patronymic and surname. The nominal three-term formula was used only in an appeal to the noble class; use full name was the prerogative of the nobility, and the half-name was considered a sign of belonging to the ignoble estates.

The upper layer of the noble class was the titled nobility, that is, noble families that had baronial, count, princely and other generic titles. In Europe they are different degrees vassalage. Until the 18th century, only a princely title existed in Russia, denoting belonging to a family that in ancient times enjoyed the right to reign ( government controlled) in a given area. Under Peter I, the family titles of Western states were first introduced: count and baron. In the 18th century, the title of count was regarded as equal to or more honorary than that of a prince.

Princes and counts could be: 1) possessing (valid), having a land plot, 2) titular, not owning land. In Russia, at the end of the 19th century, there were 310 count families, 240 barons, 250 princes (of which 40 were descended from the descendants of Rurik and Gediminas).

Family titles were granted and inherited. The highest degree The princely title was the title of Grand Duke, which could only belong to members of the imperial family. The Grand Duke - the heir to the throne (usually the eldest son of the emperor) also had the title of "Tsesarevich". The emperor had the general title "your imperial majesty", and the heir and other grand dukes - "your imperial highness". In 1914, the imperial family numbered more than 60 people.

In the class hierarchy of Russia, achieved and attributed (born) statuses were very intricately intertwined. The presence of a pedigree indicated what was attributed, and its absence indicated what was achieved. In the second generation, the achieved (granted) status turned into ascribed (inherited).

Adapted from source: Shepelev L. E. Titles, uniforms, orders. M., 1991.

Abstract of the publisher: The book of Doctor of Historical Sciences L. E. Shepelev tells about the system of military, civil, court and family titles and ranks and the uniforms and orders corresponding to them in the Russian Empire (XVIII century - 1917). The publication is intended for historians, art critics, archival and museum workers, as well as for a wide range of readers interested in Russian history.

"Table of ranks of all ranks"

Noble titles, coats of arms and uniforms

Nobility

Nominal formula and family relationships

Family titles

Family coats of arms

Military and retinue titles and uniforms

Military ranks

Naval ranks and uniforms

Retinue ranks and uniforms

Titles and uniforms of civil servants

Civil ranks

Civil ranks and uniforms

Spiritual Orders and Robes

Court titles and uniforms

Ranks and titles

Order signs and robes

Elimination of titles, uniforms and orders in 1917

Literature

Dictionary of major private and general titles

Notes

Titles, uniforms and orders as a historical and cultural phenomenon

The concepts listed in the title are internally related. Titles are statutory verbal designations of the official and estate-generic position of their holders, briefly defining their legal status. General, Councilor of State, Chamberlain, Count, Adjutant Wing, Secretary of State, Excellency and Lordship are some of these titles. Uniforms - official uniforms that corresponded to the titles and visually expressed them. Finally, the orders are an addition to both: the order rank (cavalier of the order) is a special case of the title, a special order attire is a special case of the uniform, and the badge itself is the usual addition to any uniform. In general, the system of titles, uniforms and orders was one of the foundations of the royal state machine and an important element social life Russia XVIII - early XX century.

The core of this system was the rank - the rank of each civil servant (military, civilian or courtier) according to the fourteen-grade "Table of Ranks of all ranks ..." established by Peter I and which existed for almost 200 years. More than a hundred years ago (in 1886), Secretary of State A. A. Polovtsov (one of the organizers and leaders of the Russian historical society) wrote to Alexander III: "The time will come when it will be difficult for the historian to explain what the rank was, this one and a half hundred years formed, rooted in the habits of Russian ambition," a phenomenon with which it was "impossible to reckon with." The validity of the prediction is now beyond doubt. Next, we will take a closer look at the history of the emergence and content of this phenomenon, and here we will only note that the rank gave the right to fill civil service positions, as well as to a set of rights, without which, according to the authoritative testimony of a contemporary (V. Ya. Stoyunin), "a person, even if somewhat developed and educated, it was unbearable to live in society" (especially before the abolition of serfdom).

It can be said that titles (and especially ranks), along with uniforms and orders, were the most noticeable sign of the era, they penetrated so deeply into the public consciousness and life of the propertied classes. Along with this, they were reflected in historical sources, memoirs and fiction, in fine arts: sometimes - these are arguments that directly affect the problems of public service and social relations; more often - private mentions of titles, uniforms and orders of specific persons in order to indicate their legal status or simply name them.

Faced with the mention of titles, uniforms and orders, the modern reader (and sometimes a specialist historian) often finds it difficult to understand their meaning. And this is natural, since the system of titles, uniforms and orders that existed in the Russian Empire was abolished as early as 1917 and has since been thoroughly forgotten. There are no special reference books about them (with the exception of encyclopedias and dictionaries, in which the corresponding terms are given separately, in a general alphabetical order). Before the revolution, the need for such reference books was not great, since there were departmental instructions, and the very tradition of using titles, uniforms and orders was alive. The difficulties are aggravated by the fact that the mention of titles, uniforms and orders in literature is not always formally correct and can be replaced by the bureaucratic or high-society jargon accepted at that time. So, in different contexts, we can talk about "bestowing lordship", about granting a court or other uniform, key or cipher, about receiving "white buttons" or "cavalry", about rewarding "cranberries" for a saber, etc. In this In this case, reference to directories is generally impossible for obvious reasons.

There are many examples of this kind. Let's point out some of them.

Here is what we read in the diary of the Minister of Internal Affairs P. A. Valuev (1) for 1865: "January 1. In the morning in the palace. I saw Prince Gagarin with a portrait, Butkov with diamond signs of St. Alexander, Milyutin - in the uniform of a member of the State Council, Chevkin - with the ribbon of St. Vladimir. And here is the entry for October 28, 1866: "Count Berg was promoted to field marshal. Generals Kotzebue and Bezak were given St. Andrew's ribbons, adjutant generals Grabbe and Litke were elevated to the dignity of a count, and the first of them was seated in the Council. Members of the State Council, except for him , the Tsarevich, General Dugamel, Admiral Novosilsky, Prince Vyazemsky, N. Mukhanov, Count Alexander Adlerberg and Prince Orbeliani were appointed. Prince Vyazemsky, in addition, was granted, along with Venevitinov, Ober-Shenki. " How to understand such a passage from the same diary for 1867, which gives the impression of some ambiguity: "April 16. Bright Sunday. At night in the Winter Palace ... Count Panin takes away the diamonds of St. Andrew in parting, and Zamyatin - the diamonds of St. Alexander"?

It is not immediately possible to understand the meaning of the story of the head of the III Department and the chief of the gendarme corps, Count P. A, Shuvalov. In 1686, in a circle of close acquaintances, he recalled how 20 years ago Count M. N. Muravyov (the suppressor of the Polish uprising of 1863, and in 1866 the chairman of the Supreme Investigation Commission in the case of the attempt on the life of D. V. Karakozov on Alexander II ) asked Shuvalov in connection with the end of the investigation (which was conducted "with great brutality") "to report to the sovereign that he ... wants to be appointed adjutant general."

When this was handed over to the tsar, he exclaimed: "My adjutant general - for nothing! .. Give him diamond St. Andrew's signs, but without a rescript." Muraviev, "dissatisfied with the fact that he was not given the reward he asked for, went to his Luga estate," where he died suddenly. "The courier who brought him diamonds there found him dead..." (Let's pay attention to the fact that Shuvalov's story characterizes not only morals, but also the scale of the value of various awards).

In the same 1886, A. A. Polovtsov considered it important to write down in his diary as a characteristic feature of the time that he found Field Marshal Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolayevich Count P. A., Shuvalov, "who in a white uniform came to thank the Grand Duke for petitioning this dainty costume." Here, too, not everything is clear: what kind of "white uniform", what did it mean to receive it?

In the book by K. A. Krivoshein about his father - prominent statesman pre-revolutionary Russia - it is said that in May 1905 A. V. Krivoshey "was appointed a comrade-in-chief" of the department of land management and agriculture and "awarded the chamberlain's uniform, being in the position of chamberlain, corresponding to the general rank of a real state councilor." First of all, we note that an inaccuracy was made here: A. V. Krivoshey at the time of the award was not "consisted in the position of chamberlain", but was granted to it through "awarding the chamberlain's uniform." What kind of "position" is this, and should A. V. Krivoshey have combined it with the position of a comrade-in-chief? Let us explain right away that in reality such an award did not mean an appointment to the post of chamberlain, but the award of an honorary court title, absurdly called "in the position of chamberlain."