The article examines the existing points of view in the literature on the historical and geographical terms "Kyrgyz border" and "border volosts", which are repeatedly found in Russian documents of the XVII century related to the history of Tomsk. For a long time, the point of view of V. S. Sinyaev was generally accepted. However, after A. H. Elert published G. F. Miller's historical and geographical descriptions of Tomsk and Kuznetsk counties, it became obvious that this issue requires revision. Establishing the true meaning of the" Kyrgyz border " and its localization is possible only with a deep and thorough analysis of the act material.

Key words: "Kyrgyz frontier", borderline volosts, yasach volosts of Tomsk Uyezd, Tomsk Uyezd.

Problem statement

In Russian documents of the 17th century relating to the history of Tomsk, the historical and geographical terms "Kyrgyz border" and "border volosts" are repeatedly found. One of the earliest references to the" Kirghiz frontier " is contained in the reply of the Tomsk voivode Prince I. F. Shakhovsky, dated December 1620. The voivode reports that the Mongolian and Kyrgyz ambassadors "Tarkhan-loba s tovaryschi" returning from Moscow arrived in Tomsk on October 5, "129", from where they were released "to their lands" accompanied by 20 mounted Cossacks led by foreman A. Guba " to the Kirgiskovo border... October on the 8th day" [Russo-Mongolian relations..., 1959, N 53, pp. 108-109]. S. U. Remezov's "Drawing of the Land of the Tomsk City" described what this milestone looked like at the end of the 17th century, but it also did not accurately reflect the realities that had developed by that time [1882, p.11]. We know even less about the "Kyrgyz turn" in the middle and beginning of the century. Perhaps his images appeared already on the first drawings of the Tomsk Uyezd, which, unfortunately, have not reached us.

Within the" Kyrgyz border " there were also border volosts. The same reply from I. F. Shakhovsky says: "And Ondryushka Guba from tovaryschi, having arrived, sire, in the Tomsk city of October on the 22nd day, we, your serfs, were told that they had spent a great time de Altyn-tsar and the Mughal lands and the Kirghiz ambassadors Tarkhan-loba from Tovaryschi to the Kirghiz border. Yes, we, your serf, Ondryushka Guba and tovaryschi were told that de, the sovereign, ordered to us, your serf, of the Kirghiz border Prince Kurcheyko on his wool..."[Russo-Mongolian relations..., 1959, N 53, p. 109]. Thus, it is impossible to consider the issue of localization of the "Kyrgyz border" and border volosts in isolation from each other. Precise localization of the latter will help clarify the south-eastern border of Tomsk Uyezd with the "Kyrgyz land".,

Localization of the "Kyrgyz border" and border volosts will be considered separately.

page 113
and the identification of the main coordinates of the "Kyrgyz border" - the territorial boundaries of border volosts. There is an opinion in the literature that this boundary has hardly changed during the entire 17th century. Only in the middle of the century did minor changes occur in its configuration. The boundary line shifted slightly from south to north, which also led to changes in the territory of Yasach volosts, including "borderlands" (Rezun, 1984, pp. 27-28). How well-founded is this opinion and did it correspond to the realities of that time?

Historiography

З. Ya. Boyarshinova, noting the difficulty of establishing the boundaries of Tomsk Uyezd in the first half of the XVII century, in connection with the Russian colonization of Siberia and the delimitation of "spheres of influence between Russian colonization centers - cities and prisons", also points out that at this time "the territories of yasach volosts that were part of the uyezd were not permanent either." Outlining the approximate boundaries of the county, she goes on to write: "The southern border was even more uncertain. Here were the "borderlands" volosts, which were constantly in the sphere of influence of the Kyrgyz principalities. Kyrgyz princelings considered the inhabitants of the border volosts their "kyshtym". These "borderland" volosts throughout the XVII century were the object of intense struggle between Tomsk voivodes and Kyrgyz princes, the struggle for the right to exploit the local population, for the right to collect yasak. In the Tomsk city, the inhabitants of the border volosts introduced non-folding yasak" [Boyarshinova, 1950, pp. 31-32]. The author does not even roughly outline the southern border of the county, but notes:"...on the southern border of the Tomsk Uyezd, in the so-called "neokladny volosts", there were small groups of Shusts and Kamlars" [Ibid., p. 40]. It follows from this that the borderlands include: Ya. Boyarshinova referred to Shuiskaya and Kamlara volosts. However, not only the location of the borderline Yasach volosts, but also their number in its work is still not very clear. Below, the author notes that mentions in the yasach books about the arrival of furs from the border volosts appear mainly from the 30s of the XVII century, and gives the following entries:: "And in the current year 140, soft junk was collected from new volosts... Shusha parish... z gornoy s Choinskoy volost... "(1632); in 1637 "two people were found in the borderlands in Soksun volost..." [Ibid., p. 102].

З. Ya. Boyarshinova makes no attempt to establish at least approximately the location of these volosts. And it's not that this problem is not part of its scope. The scientist is convinced that " the population of the border volosts was unstable; the native inhabitants of the border area either migrated to the territory of the Tomsk uyezd and had to pay yasak to the state treasury here, or went to the Kyrgyz territory and became "kyshtyms" of the Kyrgyz princes there " [Ibid.].

A. P. Dulzon made an attempt to localize the yasach volosts of Tomsk Uyezd. As a linguist, he was primarily interested in questions of the origin and classification of the language of the Chulym Tatars, and he did not specifically consider the question of the "Kyrgyz border" and "border volosts". However, to characterize the Chulym language and its local features, the author needed to make a map of the yasach volosts of the Prichulym region. On the basis of the published written documents available at that time, A. P. Dulzon identified the Yachinskaya, Koryukovskaya, Kurchikova, Meletskaya, and Tutalovskaya volosts in the middle Chulym and its tributaries Yae, Cheti, and Kiye, and the Achinskaya, Basagarskaya, Kamlarskaya, Shuya, and Kyzyl volosts in the upper Chulym River (1952, pp. 83-85). At the same time, under the upper Chulym, they understood the part of the river from the mouth of the Uryup to the confluence of the White and Black Iyusov. Such borderline volosts as Kurchikova and Koryukovskaya are marked on the map in the Kii River basin, Kamlarskaya - in the southern part of Arginskaya Luka, and Shuiskaya-in the Uryup and Beloe Ozero River basins.

Tomsk researcher V. S. Sinyaev tried to clarify the southern border of Tomsk Uyezd in the 17th century. He based his constructions on the "act material", which" makes it possible to significantly clarify not only the border of the XVII century with the South Siberian nomads, but also to map almost all volosts of forest Turkic-speaking groups of the population, nomad ulus and individual Russian and native settlements " (Sinyaev, 1956, p.82). However, due to objective circumstances, the entire "act material" was limited to a few documents known to the author at that time. These are voivodeship replies published in the appendix to the" History of Siberia "by G. F. Miller, in the" Supplements to Historical Acts "and"Monuments of Siberian History".

V. S. Sinyaev draws two lines of the "frontier" - for the middle and end of the XVII century. They are slightly different from each other. Since the researcher had at his disposal the only reference point that dates back to the very end of the XVII century - the "Drawing of the land of the Tomsk City" from the atlas of S. U. Remezov [1882, p. 11] - it was taken as a basis. According to the" Drawing", the "boundary" began approximately from the mouth of the Sisim River, a right tributary of the Yenisei, then crossed the Chulym River at the confluence of the Bolshoy and Maly Syrov Rivers, continued to Beloe Ozero, where it turned south towards Maly and Maly Syrov Rivers.

page 114
It passed between the two lakes, then went to the northwest and crossed the Kiya River at the confluence of the Kozhukha River (Sinyaev, 1956, pp. 80-82).

In the middle of the century, the "frontier" also began from the mouth of Sisim. Halfway between Chulym and the Seryozha River, before reaching the White Lake, it turned to the southwest. In the area of the confluence of the Black and White Yuses, on the right bank of the latter, V. S. Sinyaev, guided by the" Map of Siberia of the first half of the XVII century " compiled by K. N. Serbina based on the materials of the second volume of the "History of Siberia" by G. F. Miller [Ibid., p. 80; Serbina, 2000], placed the Achinsk prison in 1641. In this regard, the author was forced to make a protrusion on this section of the "boundary" with its tip pointing to the south, skirting which the border went further strictly to the north in the direction of White Lake, where it again turned to the west, crossing the Kiya River near the mouth of Kozhukha. According to V. S. Sinyaev, the" Kirghiz frontier " in this form was already outlined in the first decade of the XVII century, and in the future only partial changes occurred associated with the construction of the Kashtatsky prison, the destruction of the old Achinsk prison, and other events [1956, p.87].

Regarding the "borderline volosts", the author writes that they were located "north of the Lake of God along the "border" " [Ibid., p. 82]. Below, he specifies who belonged to these volosts: Kamlars, Shusty and Kyzyl, who lived respectively to the north, west and east of the White Lake [Ibid., pp. 83-85].

In 1955, a large article by S. V. Bakhrushin entitled "The Yenisei Kirghiz People in the 17th century"was published. It does not include the term "Kyrgyz border". However, the author describes the concept of "Kyrgyz land" in detail, outlining its main territories [Bakhrushin, 1955a, pp. 176-177], which allows us to outline the approximate contours of this "boundary"in the presence of other materials. In addition, S. V. Bakhrushin paid much attention to the relations between the Yenisei Kyrgyz and the Russians. He described in detail several campaigns of the Cossacks in the "Kirghiz land", including under the leadership of Ya. E. Tukhachevsky in 1641. As S. V. Bakhrushin notes, the voivode "managed to fulfill its main task - to put the Achinsk prison on Chulym", which became "on the border of the Kyrgyz steppes" a new defensive outpost "for further advance to the south" [Ibid., p. 205]. However, what the researcher meant by the "border of the Kyrgyz steppes" is not clear. Apparently, S. V. Bakhrushin, like V. S. Sinyaev, relied on the map of K. N. Serbina to determine the location of the Achinsk prison. In this case, he placed the southern border of the "Kyrgyz Steppes" in the area of the confluence of the White and Black Yuses.

For the characterization of the "Kyrgyz frontier", another important point in the work of S. V. Bakhrushin is important. The campaign against the Kirghiz, which took place in 1680 under the leadership of the Tomsk children of the boyars R. I. Starkov and I. M. Grechaninov, resulted in the establishment of the border between the Russian and Kirghiz possessions, which was recognized as the river Yus. The researcher cites a fragment of an unpublished agreement concluded between the Russian authorities and the Kirghiz princes from the Siberian Fund of the Russian State Academy of Fine Arts: "...and the Russian people were not allowed to go to their land for the Jus war, and they were not allowed to go under the sovereign's cities and prisons for the Jus either" [Ibid., p. 219]. S. V. Bakhrushin did not explain which river was meant, apparently believing that the document refers to the White and Black Poles. At least, the "Index of Geographical and ethnographic Names" of this volume does not contain the works of the historian hydronym Yus, but there are "Yuses (White, Black)" (Bakhrushin, 1955b, p.290). In this case, the "Kyrgyz border" in the understanding of S. V. Bakhrushin is not much different from the scheme of V. S. Sinyaev. At the same time, the context of his other work implies a different idea of the border with the Kyrgyz possessions: "Insignificant development of mining operations in the Krasnoyarsk uyezd... It is also explained by the fact that the areas rich in metal deposits - iron ores in the Tuba basin and on the upper reaches of the Abakan, gold placers on the Iyusy and along the Sisim, Tuba, Amyl and Kyzyr rivers, which later became famous, were in the hands of the Kirghiz in the XVII century and inaccessible to Russian capital. Levandianis ' first experiments on Kashtak give an idea of the conditions under which ore mining began on the borders with the Kyrgyz land "(Bakhrushin, 1959, p. 119).

In the work of L. P. Potapov on the results of the campaign of 1680, it was said: "Here on Yuse there was a conversation about the territorial border between the Russian possessions and the nomads of the Kirghiz. The Bely and Cherny Iyusy rivers were recognized as this border: "on this side of the Yussov Mountains", i.e., on the northern side, adjacent to Tomsk, was the Russian land, and on the other side "Kirghiz nomads "" [1957, p. 50]. In the author's opinion, " in the second half of the 17th century, the boundaries of the nomads of the Yenisei Kirghiz people shifted to the south and seemed to expand due to the southern direction. The region of White Lake was now considered the edge of Kyrgyz land in the north. And the southern edge of the Kirghiz land was now considered, as follows from the reply of the Krasnoyarsk voivode in 1655, the territories along the Abakan and Yenisei - "on this side (i.e., the northern part) of the Sayan Kamen" "[Ibid., p. 16].

Regarding the first half of the XVII century, L. P. Potapov wrote:"...The Kirghiz nomads were scattered over the vast territory of the upper Chulym basin and the White and Black Iusov Rivers, which form the Chulym at their confluence. This territory included the Uryup River (a left tributary of the Chulym), the areas adjacent to the Bozhy and Bely Lakes, and

page 115
In the north, it reached Achinsk. <...> Due to the fact that the prince of the Kyi volost Kurcheyko in documents of this time is called "the Kirghiz border of the princes Kurcheyko", it can be argued that the western border of the Kirghiz land was considered the Kiya River (a left tributary of the Chulym). In the east, the border was close to the Yenisei River" [Ibid., p. 15].

L. P. Potapov focused his work on clarifying the location of Chulym volosts. He first noted that in one document of the early 40s of the XVII century. " Kyzyl... the parish stands in the middle of the Kyrgyz land on the Iuse River", and in another - " it sits on the Iuse in White near the Stone Town in two bottoms...". In addition, L. P. Potapov pointed out another document from the Siberian Fund of the RGADA, which states that " the Enik River flowed in the Kizil land, which was located not far from the Krasnoyarsk ("in two bottoms")". Following I. E. Fischer, he identified the Yenik with the Indzul River (Inchul or Izyndchul), which flows into the Seryozha River. Without commenting on the documents, the author further writes: "... on Remezov's map, Kizilskaya volost is listed on the right bank of the Chulym River near the confluence of the Bolshoy and Maly Syrov Rivers." Regarding the Basagara volost, L. P. Potapov also gave references to documents according to which at the beginning of the XVII century the Basagars lived "in the Chulym peaks"together with the Kizil people, which gives reason to consider the Basagars living in the course of the White Yus." In a document dated 1659. it is said that "Basagarskaya volost is located along the Chulym River near the Kangaly River", and on Remezov's map it is "shown on the left bank of the Uryup, near its confluence with the Chulym". About Achinsk volost L. P. Potapov writes:"...it also referred to the volosts living in the upper reaches of the Chulym River, " the Kyrgyz lands are ahead... on Bely Ius and Syzyrim Lake""; "at Remezov, Achinsk volost is marked on the right bank of Seryozha, and Messerschmidt in 1721 noted the population of this volost along the Tai River" [Ibid., pp. 146-147]. Analysis of all the above suggests that L. P. Potapov supported the point of view of Z. Ya. Boyarshinova, according to which the territories of these yasach volosts were not constant during the XVII century.

B. O. Dolgikh generally accepted the localization of yasach volosts of Tomsk uyezd proposed by Z. Ya. Boyarshinova. He made only some clarifications, guided by the instructions of the "atlas of S. U. Remezov and information about the settlement of descendants of members of Tomsk volosts of the XVII century at the end of the XIX century, taken from S. K. Patkanov". According to B. O. Dolgikh, "in general... It was possible to determine the location of all volosts in Tomsk County, with one exception. Namely, we did not have enough material to establish the territory of all mountain border volosts separately, and we had to show all these six volosts in one contour. We have more or less definite information only about the location of the Shusha (Shuya) volost, which was located in the upper reaches of the Kii River along the Tisulke and Kashtaku (Kaichaku) rivers. It is known that the Kashtatsky prison was built on the land of Shushtsy. The population of the Kymny volost was nomadic on the Bolshoy Kitat River. It should also be noted that the basin of the upper reaches of the Kii, if it does not show mountain border parishes, remains empty. Based on this consideration, as well as taking into account data on the migrations of Shushans, on the settlement of neighboring volosts in Tomsk and Kuznetsk counties, and on the settlement of other peoples (Sagais, Kirghiz), we determined the territory of mountain border volosts" [Dolgikh, 1960, p. 100] (see also: [Dolgikh, 1968]). The issue of the "Kyrgyz border" was not considered in the paper, but the author made a reservation: "... in some cases, we could not avoid schematism in determining the territory of individual volosts of Tomsk Uyezd, especially in the upper reaches of the Chulym River at the border with the Kyrgyz. In 1661 and 1681, residents of mountain border volosts (Shusha, Kamlar, Choin, and Tastar) fled from the Kirghiz people to the Tom River, in particular, to the Tyulyubersk volost" (Dolgikh, 1960, p. 100). It must be assumed that by the "Kyrgyz border" B. O. Dolgikh understood all the upper reaches of modern Chulym. In addition to the above-mentioned mountain border volosts of Tomsk Uyezd, he also included the Mountain Volost, but without any attempt to localize it [Ibid., Table 33]. According to the author, all the border volosts became part of Tomsk Uyezd only in the 60s of the XVII century. [Ibid., pp. 97, 99].

The final work on this issue was the book by D. Y. Rezun. His conclusion was categorical: "For a long time, the main flaw in the method of determining the location of yasach volosts and borders of the Russian state was the idea that this border gradually moved south and, the closer to the end of the XVII century, the further it supposedly went to the territory of Khakassia. In the works of Potapov and Bakhrushin, this idea was shaken*, and a complete revision of it was made in the article by V. S. Sinyaev on the southern borders of Tomsk Uyezd in the XVII century. According to his scheme, the Russian borders in the first half of the XVII century reached the confluence of the Black and White Jus and even a little further, where the Achinsky prison was located from 1641, and at the end of the XVII century. The "Kyrgyz frontier" was already passing through the Lake of God.<...> This approach also seems to us correct, I would just like to add that by the end of the XVII century, the territories of the Yasachny

* Neither S. V. Bakhrushin nor L. P. Potapov claimed anything of the sort. On the contrary, the conclusion of scientists is unambiguous: the Kyrgyz were forced, albeit very slowly, to move their nomads to the south, to the Abakan River.

page 116
volosts could not only move to the north, but also change among themselves" (Rezun, 1984, p. 27).

Starting from G. F. Miller's indication that Ya. O. Tukhachevsky put a prison near the lake. Rezun located the Achinsk prison in 1641 "on the Bely Ius River, not far from the modern Bile Lake, but in the immediate vicinity of the lake. Syzyrim" [Ibid., p. 33]. It was unclear only with which of the modern lakes of Khakassia the author identifies the mysterious lake. Syzyrim. However, he soon changes his point of view and writes that "as a permanent Russian settlement, Achinsky ostrog arose in 1641 as a result of the campaign of the Tarsky voivode Ya. O. Tukhachevsky near Lake Sizirim or Syzyrim-kul near the Chulym River, opposite the current village of Dorokhova, 5 versts above the western tributary of the Chulym River Adadym" [Rezun Vasilevsky, 1989, p. 90]. For greater clarity, it is located about 30 km west of the present-day town of Nazarov, Krasnoyarsk Krai, and about 150 km north of the confluence of the White and Black Yuses. The researcher does not explain why he changed his point of view*.

In connection with the topic of our work, we should briefly focus on the historical and geographical map of Siberia compiled by K. N. Serbina (2000), already mentioned above, since it had a certain influence on the formation of researchers ' views on the "Kyrgyz border" and "border volosts", although almost no one directly refers to it. Trust this map carefully. There are quite a lot of mistakes on it, which cannot be explained only by the fact that K. N. Serbina was not an expert on the history of Siberia. Thus, the Achinsk prison of 1641 on the map is located on the right bank of the White Iuse at its confluence with the Black Iuse, which is incorrect. However, in this case, G. F. Miller himself is to some extent responsible, who, speaking about the construction of the Achinsk prison, did not mention a single geographical landmark for its localization [Miller, 2000, p. 98]. Abinskaya volost, located on the Aba River, is shown on the map in the Abakan River basin. Some Chulymsky volosts are also incorrectly localized. The Kiya River is not on the map at all, and Koryukovskaya Volost is located in the steppe part of Chulym. Similar examples can be continued.

Conclusion

From the presented review, it can be seen that researchers do not have a single opinion about the localization of the "Kyrgyz border", nor about the number and location of "border volosts". In the light of the above, this issue needs to be reviewed. Localization of the "Kyrgyz border" and "border volosts" should be based not on individual quotations taken out of context, but on a thorough analysis of the documents at our disposal in combination with the historical, geographical and ethnopolitical realities of the XVII-early XVIII centuries.

First of all, the solution of this issue is impossible without the context of the ideas of service people about the territorial limits of Kyrgyz nomads throughout the XVII century. When reading rather sparse lines of voivodeship replies, article lists, "inquiries" and petitions of service people who visited the "Kyrgyz Land", the history of Russian-Kyrgyz relations of this time and the expansion of the spatial representation of the "land"itself gradually emerge. Taking into account the literature [Abdykalykov, 1968, p. 6-10; Butanaev and Abdykalykov, 1995, p. 9-28; Kyzlasov and Kopkoyev, 1993, p. 135-145; Potapov, 1957, p. 11-69; Bakhrushin, 1955a, p. 176-180], which covers the issue of the territory inhabited by the Yenisei Kyrgyz in the XVII century, however, it should be noted one significant drawback. The authors of these works give a static picture of Kyrgyz nomads, ignoring territorial changes throughout the century and their causes. Meanwhile, an analysis of the available documents in chronological order shows how gradually the ideas of the service people about the territory of nomadism of the Kirghiz people were formed, and reveals at first almost imperceptible, but by the end of the XVII century. an increasingly pronounced tendency for the latter to retreat to the south, to Abakan.

List of literature

A. Abdykalykov Yenisei Kirghizs in the XVII century: (historical essay). Frunze: Ilim Publ., 1968, 138 p.

Bakhrushin S. V. Eniseyskiye kirghizi v XVII v. [The Yenisei Kirghiz People in the XVII century] / / Bakhrushin S. V. Nauchnye trudy, Moscow: Izd - vo AN SSSR, 1955a, vol. 3, part 2, pp. 176-224.

Bakhrushin S. V. Poklav geograficheskikh i etnograficheskikh nameniy [Index of geographical and ethnographic names]. In: Moscow: Izd - vo AN SSSR, 1955b.-vol. 3, part 2. - pp. 287-297.

Bakhrushin S. V. Ocherki po istorii Krasnoyarskogo uyezda v XVII v. [Essays on the history of the Krasnoyarsk uyezd in the XVII century].

Boyarshinova Z. Ya. Population of Tomsk uyezd in the first half of the XVII century // Tr. Vol. of the State University. 1950, vol. 112, pp. 23-210.

Butanaev V. Ya., Abdykalykov A. Materials on the history of Khakassia of the XVII-early XVIII centuries. - Abakan: Khakas State University, 1995. - 257 p.

* This was probably due to the publication in 1988 of G. F. Miller's "Historical and Geographical Description of Tomsk Uyezd" (Ehlert, 1988, p.75).

page 117
Dolgikh B. O. Generic and tribal composition of the peoples of Siberia in the XVII century, Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1960, 622 p.

Dolgikh B. O. Karta rasprostraneniya etnicheskikh gruppov, rasseleniya plemen i rodov narodov Sibiri v XVII v. [Map of distribution of ethnic groups, settlement of tribes and clans of peoples of Siberia in the XVII century].

Dulzon A. P. Chulym Tatars and their language. TSPI. - 1952. - Vol. 9. - pp. 76-211.

Kyzlasov L. R., Kopkoev K. G. Khakassia v XVII - nachale XVIII v. [Khakassia in the XVII-early XVIII centuries]. Istoriya Khakasii s drevneyshikh vremen do 1917 goda [History of Khakassia from ancient times to 1917], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1993, pp. 135-195.

Miller G. F. Istoriya Sibiri [History of Siberia]. - 2nd ed., additional-M.: Publishing house of the company "East Lit." RAS, 2000. - Vol. 2. - 796 p.

Potapov L. P. Origin and formation of the Khakass people. - Abakan: Khak. kn. izd-vo, 1957. - 307 p.

Rezun D. J. in the Russian Average the E in the XVII-XIX centuries: (Problems of socio-economic development of small towns in Siberia). Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1984, 196 p. (in Russian)

Rezun D. Ya., Vasilevsky R. S. Letopis sibirskikh gorodov [The Chronicle of Siberian Cities]. Novosibirsk: Kn. izd-vo, 1989, 304 p. (in Russian)

Remezov S. U. Draftnaya kniga Sibiri [Drawing book of Siberia]. St. Petersburg: Archeogr. commission, 1882. - 58 p.

Russian-Mongolian relations. 1607-1636: collection of reports. / Comp. by L. M. Gataullina, M. I. Golman, G. I. Slesarchuk; ed. by I. Ya. Zlatkin, N. V. Ustyugov. - Moscow: Publishing House of Oriental Literature, 1959. - 352 p.

Serbina K. N. Karta Sibiri pervoi poloviny XVII v. [Map of Siberia in the first half of the 17th century]. - 2nd ed., additional-M.: Publishing house of the company "East Lit." RAS, 2000. - Vol. 2. - Map-insert.

Sinyaev V. S. On the issue of the southern border of the Tomsk uyezd in the 17th century // Tr. Tom. region. kraev. the museum. 1956, vol. 5, pp. 79-88.

Elert A. H. Istoriko-geograficheskoe opisanie Tomskogo uyezda G. F. Miller (1734) [Historical and geographical description of the Tomsk uyezd by G. F. Miller (1734)]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1988, pp. 65-101.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 09.11.09.

page 118

Permanent link to this publication: