serf province fishing Arzamas

In the Nizhny Novgorod province, rumors about freedom among the serfs appeared long before their liberation, and already from 1812 they increasingly began to reach the local authorities. In the same year, rumors appeared among the courtyards of the landowners who lived in Nizhny Novgorod that "the French would soon free them from dependence on the landowners and that the master's peasants would not pay them dues." Such conversations were conducted openly in public taverns.

In 1842, when a decree was published on obligated peasants, granting landowners the right to allocate plots of land to their serfs for use for established duties and conclude agreements with them by mutual agreement, in the Arzamas, Vasilyevsky and Semenov districts there were several cases of misunderstanding between serfs and landowners; in many places, the peasants ceased to obey their masters, being convinced that the landowners were obliged to conclude agreements with them. In some places the serfs openly declared that a decree had been issued to select them for freedom; they even said that they would take 25 rubles for liberties. from the soul.

Often the case was not limited to one rumor; greedy for all sorts of rumors about "freedom", the serf peasant environment quickly turned rumors into convictions. Huge districts, seized as if by an epidemic, were agitated, and the most energetic of the serfs irresistibly strove for the light that shone in the darkness; but the deceptive light turned out to be a wandering light, and they perished.

At the end of 1857, the government's views on the peasant question became known, expressed in connection with the decision of the nobles of the Kovno, Vilna and Grodno provinces to free the landlord peasants from serfdom. A circular about this by the Minister of the Interior dated November 24, 1857, received by the Nizhny Novgorod governor Alexander Nikolayevich Muravyov, produced, as the governor reported to the minister, some general bewilderment. On December 30, the Supreme Rescript was received in Nizhny Novgorod, given on December 24 to the Nizhny Novgorod military governor, on the opening of a provincial committee in Nizhny Novgorod to draw up a draft regulation on the arrangement and improvement of the life of the landlord peasants of the Nizhny Novgorod province. The news of the forthcoming "improvement of the life of the landlord peasants" quickly spread throughout all the provincial corners of the province. Everyone understood it as news of freedom, and of course the serfs greeted it without “bewilderment”: they had been waiting for it for a long time, and soon many of the serfs, under the influence of this news, began to doubt the right of the landowner to use their labor. So, for example, already at the end of December 1857, the peasants of the village of Shargoley, Gorbatov district, the estate of Prince Cherkassky, forbade their steward to send the collected quitrent to the master, being convinced that everyone would soon be free and their money would be lost. Such convictions of the peasants in the forthcoming resolution of the problem did not arise suddenly, but were cherished from time immemorial, and not only by the landowners, but by all the peasants in general; they stubbornly persisted in their midst, were expressed very often in different places and sometimes in a rather positive form. For example, one specific peasant, Zheleznov, from the village of Dubovka, in the Ardat district, passing through the village of Seryakushami of different localities, in the same district, said to the peasants who were carrying manure in the field: ; a letter about this has already been received from St. Petersburg from the marshal of the nobility Karamzin.

At the beginning of 1858, the serfs of the landowner Salov, the village of Puzyrikha, Knyaginensky district, refused to pay the dues to the landowner and answered with rudeness to the demand of the steward that they were now free. The police officer, having arrived in the village, read the sovereign's rescript addressed to the Nizhny Novgorod governor to the peasants and explained to them that they should continue to be in complete obedience to the landowner. The peasants were convinced by the arguments of the bailiff and said that they still did not know about their real position, and according to rumors among the people they considered themselves free, therefore they believed that they should not pay quitrent.

“The spirit of the people in the county is extremely bad and unfavorable to tranquility: in many estates, unrest and disobedience to the authorities constantly arise, so that I myself have to travel almost constantly, and only thanks to my influence on the peasants is order and calm restored. But cases of disobedience are becoming more frequent, and this influence is finally beginning to wane. There were examples that after my departure from the estate, where order was established, riots began again. The reasons for all this are understandable, - it is said further in relation to the leader, - serf relations have actually already collapsed, although this law does not yet exist; and now, from the indeterminate relationship of the two estates, the principle of freedom entered into a struggle with serfdom, which had outlived its time. And with the continuation of such uncertainty, who knows what dimensions this struggle may take.

For the most a short time the word rebellion became so commonplace in the lexicon of the county and provincial administration that it lost its sharpness, completely, so to speak, ran out of steam, and they began to treat it completely indifferently, without any criticism. In many estates, unrest arose not so much under the influence of the excitement of the serfs with the idea of ​​​​freedom, but rather the unfair and sometimes cruel treatment of them by their masters and especially the managing stewards, moreover, rumors about freedom only increased the discontent of the serfs and caused them to protest. For example, the serfs of the landowner Pashkov in the Sergach district refused to pay dues and obey the manager. His peasants, as the governor reported to the Minister of the Interior, were brought by harsh and unfair treatment to the point that they were afraid of being among two or three people openly meet and talk in the villages.

As far as the documents in our hands allowed, we saw what and how impatiently the serfs expected from the reform, we saw that the hope for a broad will "with all the land" was not an isolated phenomenon among the peasants. Now let's look at the attitude to the peasant question of the nobility of the Nizhny Novgorod province. To this end, we have at our disposal very interesting materials, consisting in the works of the provincial committee for organizing and improving the life of the landlord peasants. In this committee, the nobility, through their representatives, very clearly expressed their views on the peasant reform.

At the end of December, the Imperial Rescript addressed to the governor was received with an expression of pleasure "for new evidence of the constant readiness of the Nizhny Novgorod nobility to contribute to the fulfillment of the government's intentions" and permission to open a committee. The committee was opened on the day of accession to the throne, February 19, with an excellent speech by Muravyov. “The desire for the great and good undertaking is not weakening,” he reported, “and portends a successful continuation and completion of it.”

The mention of the Gorbatov nobles is interesting, here are the original expressions written in places a little dark: “Unfortunately, the thoughts and feelings of the nobles - landowners in our time are too often distorted in public opinion and in the eyes of our most beloved sovereign. The opinion that we are indifferent to the condition of our peasants and do not sympathize with the reform undertaken to improve their way of life puts us in that false light in which it is difficult to both feel and think. We have always warmly sympathized with the lofty and good views of our sovereign, which we expressed in our resolution of December 17, 1857. We firmly believe that only our strong and close alliance with our monarch constitutes a reliable bulwark of the peace and happiness of Russia. “But the actions and orders of the persons standing between him and us, but the official propaganda of our bureaucracy, more than once planted in our hearts an involuntary doubt of mistrust.”

By September 30, the draft regulation was completed. At the end of the work of the committee, the provincial marshal of the nobility Bolotin, in a letter to the governor, in the following in general terms characterized the activities of the committee: “The majority of the committee found it difficult to part with the interests of the past, while the other half, on the contrary, was well acquainted with the unfortunate situation of the Baltic peasants, and not seeing, without the right of ownership of the peasants to the land, a solid pledge in the future for the welfare of our fatherland, constantly protested against the majority and, not sharing his convictions, drew up her own draft position.

It was difficult, of course, to expect from the nobility of that era a clear awareness of the general state benefit and to demand that, in the name of state necessity, it should renounce its narrow estate interests, when even the government itself did not yet have a clear and definite view, for example, on redemption and gave the peasants field land - one of the most important points of the peasant reform. Although, at the same time, it must be admitted that much of the Committee's activity is not at all justified by historical necessity. But with all the greater respect we will remember the names of representatives of another part of the nobility who managed at this most important moment in the history of the Russian people to rise to the height of their position and not weaken in the struggle, often vicious and hateful.

Finally, “the great chain broke through”… But not all of a sudden. According to the provisions of February 19, the former binding relations continued to remain with some restrictions between peasants and landowners until the introduction of charters, for which a two-year period was appointed. Before the expiration of this period, the peasants were obliged to pay quitrent to the owner or to work out corvée in the same amount, however, so that corvee does not exceed three days a week from the tax, and all additional fees and tributes that existed earlier were canceled by rural products.

The serfs weren't expecting that. They hoped for a complete and one-time abolition of all the rights of the landowners over them and of their obligations in relation to the latter, and many did not believe the new situation, believing that they were hiding their real will from them. Shortly after the promulgation of the Regulations on February 19, news of this began to be received from the counties. So, on April 21, 1861, the Lukoyan marshal of the nobility wrote to the provincial marshal that "almost all the peasants are waiting for something new and positively do not believe in the present situation."

Around the same time, the governor received a report from the Sergach leader, who also wrote that “the peasants sharply show complete distrust of the local authorities, so that, after reading some of the points of the highest approved position, they demanded that the police officer give them a receipt that what has been read, for a common signature with me.

In other places, the peasants did not understand the situation itself and asked not to read it, but to explain it; but there were also police officers, such as, for example, Lukoyanovsky, who reported to the authorities that such requests from the peasants "were not decided to fulfill, without having permission from anyone, or instructions on this subject."

It is understandable that in such cases the peasants began to turn to literate people from among themselves or to "pleasers" for clarification of the situation. The former sought in a new position an answer to their cherished dreams of freedom, sought the fulfillment of their desires and often found what they needed, interpreting in their own way the places of the position that were incomprehensible to them; The “pleasers” from selfish types tried to support errors in the peasants, and were often the cause of unrest between the former serfs. The princely leader of the nobility complained, for example, about one such petitioner in the city of Knyaginino, a certain retired clerk Antonsky, to whose apartment the peasants of the landlord estates constantly came in crowds to compose requests and interpret the situation, “as a result of which great unrest arose in the estates and the peasants showed disobedience to the local to their superiors."

Cases of disobedience and disorder on the landlords' estates soon began to be discovered in various parts of the province. On April 12, the Gorbatov leader of the nobility wrote to the governor that "many of the temporarily obliged peasants settled on the landowners' lands of the Gorbatov district evade the performance of legal duties, both worldly and in relation to the nobles." At the beginning of June, the Sergach police officer reported that the peasants on Kuznetsov’s estate, the village of Berezovka, did not pay dues to the landowner because, he learned, one of the peasants, Svaykin, received a letter from the son of a soldier in St. Petersburg, in which, according to the peasant , sent, "so that the gentlemen do not pay dues and do not perform work." Here is an interesting letter “on freedom”: “My dear parents, I inform you of the year 1961, on the 5th of March, the Sovereign Emperor deigned to allow and declare the will of all the master's people. Now, I notify you that you are free. We read it on the 5th of March and announced it. I have the honor to congratulate you free. And do not take any taxes for two years - the order is true. “My dear brother, Fyodor Nikolaevich, I have the honor to announce to you that you have the right to bow to your master: you are now free and I congratulate you on your freedom.”

The Sergach uyezd was especially full of various perplexities among the former serfs. Akhmatov, marshal of the nobility, reported to the governor on May 1 that "the state of affairs in the district is extremely bad and in almost all villages general unrest and unrest is noticeable." By May 5, the leader received complaints from the following landlords: Stanker, Zybina, Kondratiev, Voronetskaya, Kryuchkov, Bolotins, Pashkov, and others. position. The serfs of the landowners Kryukov and Prince. Urusov refused to carry out field work not only on the landowners, but also on the land allotted to them for use, dissatisfied with the small allotment and poor quality of the land. In other respects, in all these estates, with the exception of the Kryukov estate, where a military team was introduced to pacify the peasants, the peasants agreed to fulfill their duties in relation to the landlords after a simple suggestion from the police officer. However, there were also such estates where the peasants had no opportunity to fulfill the legal requirements of their former owners. Here is what turned out, for example, in the estate of E.A. Stanker, in the village of Novaya. Its peasants, who accounted for 97 hardships, had only 97 acres in the use of field land. The same amount of land, but best quality, was in the use of the owner herself. With such a shortage of land, the peasants of the city of Stanker became poorer every year and most of them fell into extreme poverty. The last blow that destroyed the remnants of their well-being was the hailstorm in 1861, when all the sown grain was gone. When the working time came, the peasants, who had long been without bread a place to go to corvée, went to beg in the neighboring villages. Poverty, although not on such a scale, forced the peasants of Prince. Urusov to refuse field work for the landowner. The peasants had nothing to sow their own fields.

The landowners did not want to know the plight of their former serfs and demanded that they fulfill all obligations; meanwhile, they still had a duty before the introduction of statutory charters, for food and for the contempt of their peasants, defined by articles 1103, 1104, 1105 (T.9 of the Code. Zach. serf owners was one dead letter of the law even during the existence of serfdom, and it is not surprising that it was not remembered after the emancipation of the peasants. On the other hand, there were, for example, cases when landowners complained that their former serfs did not send underwater duties (the village of Yekaterinovka, Sergachsky district, of an unknown landowner).

And they don’t want to fulfill more than three days of corvee, and also pay all the fees that were required before (in the Shepilovo estate of the Sergach district); and the Sergach leader Akhmatov, the person on whom the direct duty lay, to explain and interpret the new position, which, therefore, could not help but know the content of the position, even if only as a landowner, reported on these refusals of the peasants to fulfill the lawful demands of the landowners as disobedience . The repetition of such unsubstantiated complaints forced the governors to ask the provincial marshal to explain to the district marshals, and through them to the landlords and estate managers, that they should not exaggerate their complaints against the peasants and that “it cannot be considered a rebellion of misunderstandings, occurring mostly from an inaccurate understanding by the peasants of the highest manifesto and provisions and from non-fulfillment by the owners themselves and their managing stewards of all articles, which determine certain rights granted to the peasants from the day the imperial manifesto was promulgated; and this kind of case in which misunderstandings have occurred due to untimely exacting and unfounded demands - cannot be presented as disobedience and disorder.

The zemstvo police were also overwhelmed with requests from the landlords for the obedience of the peasants, and also often found their requests unfounded. The Makarievsky police officer, P. Zubov, reported, for example, to the governor on March 20, 1861, that “the peasants are ready to obey every legitimate demand of the patrimonial authorities, but, unfortunately, they try to clothe these last actions and orders in such forms that will inevitably harden the people and make it extreme dissatisfied. Every minute I must be afraid that the tense situation will not be expressed in some kind of disorder, and only because two or three people are sad to part with their former self-government and self-will. Meanwhile, the peasants "are quiet in their actions and modest in their desires, despite the efforts of the patrimonial chiefs to show their disobedience no matter what."

The introduction of statutory charters in the Nizhny Novgorod province also did not do without some difficulties for the peace mediators. In some places, the peasants still continued to hope that they would be sent a "real will" and were not trusting of the authorities' orders, and in other places they even resisted them. So, in the estate of the count. Bludov, in the village of Garyakh, Ardatovsky district, the peasants refused to elect and empower six conscientious peasants to be present at the verification of the charter drawn up by the owner, despite all the convictions of the local conciliator. - “We are waiting,” the peasants said, “letters from the tsar, and what the tsar sends, it will be so; We don’t give faith to the master’s literacy and we don’t believe in the announced position, but we expect a new one. - “Another, similar to the above, case was in Vasilsky district, on the estate of Prince Gagarin in the village of Vysokova. The peasants impudently refused to accept a statutory charter from the conciliator, did not give the workers to the surveyor, and they treated the compound bailiff, whom the mediator called to bring the peasants into order and obedience, even more rudely. The peasants of the village of Bogorodsky Gorbatovsky district, the estate of S.V. Sheremetyeva, not trusting the composition of the government in compiling false information about the number and type of industrial establishments for the composition of the charter, they sealed all the affairs of the government on February 5, 1863 and put a guard on them, and finally, they chose a new headman.

From the material studied in this chapter, we can conclude that the abolition of serfdom was perceived differently in different social strata. On the one hand, most of the nobles at that time were not ready for the abolition of serfdom, but among the nobles there were those who supported and recognized the need for this reform. The expectations of the peasants from this decree also did not materialize. Most of them longed for a broad will "with all the land", but the reform led to the landlessness of the peasants, in some areas this led to an almost complete loss of livelihood, so the peasants are increasingly beginning to develop handicrafts.

The life of our region in the past was determined, of course, not only by the cities and monasteries located on its territory. As in other places, in the districts closest to Sarov there were noble estates, life in which, apparently, was not much different from the life of landlords in other regions. Russian provinces known to us from Russian literature of the 19th century. P. Melnikov-Pechersky confirms this impression: “... it is always fun in Ardatovo, especially in winter, when several district landowners come here after long trips from village to village for guests. These trips, one might say, are the only ones of their kind: the landowner, bored with living at home, orders two or three horses to be harnessed, and with all the children and household, people and horses, goes to a neighbor. There he feasts for a day or two, and even if his conscience does not see, then a week. Having feasted here, he goes to another neighbor who lived from his village, about fifty versts, to say, then he goes further and further, and when he has been everywhere, he returns home. Not to pay back such a visit is considered the greatest crime: although you are sick, go ahead - that's how it is. However, they say, now such trips are not as frequent as they used to be; the landlords settled down at home and, thank God, they even forget about dog hunting.

Of course, an adjustment for scale is necessary: ​​the richest court nobles had their estates near the capitals, and in our area everything was more modest and more provincial. But even among the inhabitants of our lands there were people known in Russia.

The history of the nobility, who owned land in the Ardatovsky district, is still waiting for its researcher. The names are impressive: the princes Gagarins (the village of Kuzhendeevo), Durnovo (Sakony), the Bludovs (Gary), the princes Volkonsky (Kruglovo), the princes Shakhovsky (Kichanzino), the counts Zakrevsky (Kremenki), the counts Lansky (Mechasovo), the princes Obolensky and many others. Which of the counts and princes lived on the territory of the county, and who only owned property, remains to be seen. Below we will talk about what we already know.

A.N. Karamzin

The Bolshoi Makatelyom estate in Pervomaisky district is located approximately 55 km from Sarov. It belonged to Alexander Nikolayevich Karamzin, the son of the historian and writer Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin (1766-1826). This is the history of this estate.

In 1797, the villages of Bolshoi and Maly Makatelemy in the Ardatovsky district of the Nizhny Novgorod province were given to Prince A.I. Vyazemsky (father of Pyotr Andreevich Vyazemsky - a friend of Pushkin and a poet). Vyazemsky inherited this estate from his illegitimate daughter Ekaterina Andreevna Kolyvanova (1780-1851), who in 1804 became the wife of N.M. Karamzin. This was his second marriage.

N.M. Karamzin had never been to this estate, after his death, Ekaterina Andreevna disposed of the Makatelems, then she transferred the estate to the possession of her son Alexander.

Alexander Nikolayevich Karamzin was born on December 31, 1815 (old style) in Moscow. Having received a good education at home, he supplemented it with studies at the Faculty of Law of the University of Dorpat. In his youth, he tried himself in literature: he wrote poetry. Despite his recognized abilities, Alexander Karamzin never became a real writer. His only major work - the story in verse "Boris Ul'in", published in 1839, was sharply criticized by V.G. Belinsky. Nevertheless, acquaintances with A.S. were of great importance for him. Pushkin, M.Yu. Lermontov, V.A. Zhukovsky.

Since 1833, Alexander Karamzin has been in military service, which he left in 1841 with the rank of lieutenant. After some time, he settled in the family estate - Big Makatelem.

After the death of Nikolai Mikhailovich, his family was in need of money, and the well-being of the Karamzins mainly depended on income from the estate. “I will not tire of repeating to you that you save money; so many are leaving; but we don’t have too many of them, things are bad with income, because things are bad in Makatelemy,” Ekaterina Andreevna wrote to her eldest son Andrei in 1836.

The topic of money also occupied Alexander Nikolayevich. Here is an excerpt from his letter to the same Andrei Karamzin, written in 1837. “In general, I have long noticed that money is a tempting little thing, but at the same time it is vile, very vile, worldly vanity, everything is decaying, and the moment when I become a legislator, my first law will be that no one dares to demand money as a ungodly thing and a diabolical invention, but simply would give away everything for free, especially horses, oats, hay, straw, gloves, boots, oysters and coachmen's clothes. After the camp, I certainly ask for 28 days on vacation and go to the village in order to inspire the peasants that their first virtue, duty to heaven and earth and a direct path to paradise after the end of the stomach is to send as much money as possible to their masters and even more than possible. If they listen to me, then I'm pan, if not, then I'm lost, unfortunately. The last case is more plausible. However, in comparison with eternity, this is all nothing!”

In order to better make ends meet, the Karamzins started a cheese-making production on the estate and achieved success, if not economic, then gastronomic: "Mrs. Karamzina's cheese" received a large silver medal at an agricultural and craft exhibition in Nizhny Novgorod in 1849.

In 1850, Alexander Nikolaevich married Natalia Vasilievna Obolenskaya. As a dowry, Karamzin received some funds, and together with his wife, they decided to continue their entrepreneurial efforts. In 1852, Karamzin filed a petition for permission to build on the land that belonged to him, a metallurgical plant with one blast furnace. The application was accompanied by a plan of the proposed plant and a piece of local iron ore weighing 20 pounds. Permission was granted and construction began. The place for the plant was chosen on the bank of the river Umoch in the middle of the site of the explored ore deposit.

In the construction of the plant, Alexander Nikolayevich was greatly assisted by his brother Andrei, who lived for some time in the Urals and was married to the widow of the breeder P.N. Demidov. Andrei sent specialists to help his brother, and also bought from him the first batch of cast iron, which the plant produced in 1853. The plant was named Tashinsky, after the home name of Karamzin's wife Natalia - Tasha. This was the beginning of the city of Pervomaisk, which bore the old name Tashino until 1951. This was not the only toponymic experience of A.N. Karamzin. Since the plant was built in a deserted place, he moved some of his peasants to new villages closer to him. The new villages were named Nikolaevka (in honor of their father), Yekaterinovka (in honor of their mother), Tsyganovka (they say that in memory of their beloved dog).

Things at the Tashinsky plant went well. By 1863, in addition to the blast furnace, five more puddling and welding furnaces were operating - for processing pig iron into iron. The production of various products made of cast iron was mastered. In addition, in 1863, Karamzin also founded a distillery on his estate.

The Karamzins' estate was built near Bolshoi Makatelem in a place called Rogozhka. They say that earlier there, in the ravines, the peasants soaked their bast for matting, hence the name. A park was laid out next to the house (now it occupies an area of ​​30 ha, experts count 42 species of trees and 70 various kinds shrubs). Ponds were made on the estate, which have survived to this day.

But the main thing is that the income from Karamzin's entrepreneurial activities was also spent for the benefit local residents, a hospital in Rogozhka was built at his expense. After the war with Turkey, Makatelem peasants who suffered in the war were placed in it, there was also a shelter for orphans and cripples. Until now, in the vicinity of Rogozhka, stories about Karamzin as a kind and caring gentleman are passed down from generation to generation. In the 1870s, Karamzin transferred the hospital to the Nizhny Novgorod provincial zemstvo council, but until the Soviet era it retained its name Karamzinskaya. Until his death in 1888, Alexander Nikolayevich was a trustee of the hospital. However, he also held other elective positions, including being the marshal of the nobility of the Ardatovsky district. At the same time, Karamzin's interests did not extend beyond the affairs of the county. “I have completely withdrawn from the world; I only know my county and my factory,” he wrote in 1880 to I.S. Aksakov.

In 1892, N.V. also died. Obolenskaya-Karamzina. The care of the hospital and the almshouse was taken over by the landowner Varvara Petrovna Shcherbakova. The hospital, like the manor house, was wooden, and in 1893 it burned down. In 1895, instead of the burnt one, a stone building was built, in which the hospital is located now. Funds for the construction were given by Shcherbakova and Countess Ekaterina Petrovna Kleinmikhel (nee Demidova), A.N. Karamzin.

Karamzin Hospital

Princes Shakhaevs

Very little is known about the landowners Shakhaevs. But it is necessary to mention them, if only because they left the only surviving monument of manor architecture on the territory of the Diveevsky district - the landlord's house in Osinovka (15 km from Sarov).

The land "on the Aspen ravine" was granted to Murza Ivakay Shakhaev in 1653, since then the Russified Shakhaev family settled in the nearby Sarov district. The princes Shakhaevs were among the first benefactors of the Sarov desert, Prince Fyodor Shakhaev was buried in a monastery near his cathedrals in 1755. The house in question was apparently built in the middle of the 19th century. The memoirs of the writer Boris Sadovsky about the last owner of this house, Prince Nikolai Sergeevich Shakhaev, have been preserved.

He was “a hospitable and womanizer, of immense thickness, sociable and cheerful. “The deceased mother” (as he called his mother), in addition to the estate, refused her son a capsule with money. The prince began to revel and play.<…>He had a stud farm and rode in a Russian harness with bells and bells, sometimes on a trio of bays, sometimes on a trio of whites. Dinner at Shakhaev's was Russian: fatty cabbage soup with buckwheat porridge, fattened geese and piglets. The wine cellar kept an old chateau ikem. The owner himself went into the cellar and did not give the key to anyone.

The prince called his mistresses "coupons". The first he married and began to look for another. In the search was not shy. - "Come to me, most respected: what a little thing I got myself, with a voice." After dinner: "Well, darling, sing to us." And listened to her shrill singing with pleasure. She then moved away from him, and the prince, already ruined, built a house in Temnikovo for her and gave five thousand in money. When Shakhaev became completely impoverished, she, dying, refused him this money according to her will. Lately Prince Zemstvo chief lived on Vyksa with a third "coupon". It was a very young "thing", and also with a "voice". She buried him.

The prince occupied half of Osinov's house downstairs, and a "coupon" lived in the other half. The uninhabited boarded-up top was all painted with bosquet. Above the top is a girlish one, turned into a mezzanine. The lower rooms were cluttered with old furniture and many wall and dining room clocks. In a huge closet there is a warehouse of all kinds of things, even from the “deceased mother”. Family documents and scrolls were scattered in the closet; Shakhaev had no books.

A certain princess E.S. appears in the hagiographic literature about Seraphim of Sarov. Shakhaeva, she met with the monk, while living not far from the monastery. Perhaps this was the aforementioned "deceased mother."

At the end of his cheerful life, apparently unable to support him, N.S. Shakhaev handed over his house to the Ardatov district zemstvo. A medical center was set up there, later transformed into a hospital, which existed in this building for almost a century. In 1976, the hospital was transferred to the regional center, and former house The Shakhaevs were handed over to workshops. For some time in the 1990s, the building was not used, now it is a nursing home.

Princes Shakhovsky

Two people who bore this beautiful ancient surname left a bright mark in the history of the neighboring Ardatovsky district. The first of them is Nikolai Grigoryevich Shakhovskoy (1754-1824), who is considered the founder of the Nizhny Novgorod theater. Generally speaking, at the end of the 18th century there were several theaters in the province, but all of them were kept by wealthy landowners on their estates, for example, the Batashevs on Vyksa, the Georgian princes in Lyskovo. He kept the fortress theater and N.G. Shakhovskaya in the village of Yusupov, Ardatovsky district (50 km from Sarov). In 1798, the prince first brought his theater to Nizhny. At first, performances were given in Shakhovsky's own house, then in the hall of the noble assembly. Since 1811, the theater has given performances in a building specially built for it. During the work of the Nizhny Novgorod Makarievskaya fair, a temporary pavilion was put together there and performances were also played. They staged both dramatic and musical performances - operas and ballets.

Yusupovo. Church

Another famous countryman of ours is Prince Fyodor Petrovich Shakhovskoy (apparently, Nikolai Grigorievich and Fyodor Petrovich Shakhovskoy were not closely related). He was born on March 2, 1796 in the estate of his parents in the Pskov province. From the age of 16, Fedor Petrovich was in military service, and being quite young by today's standards of youth, he participated in the foreign campaign of Russian troops in the war against Napoleon. Shakhovskoy served in St. Petersburg, where he joined one of the Decembrist societies - the Union of Salvation, organized in 1816. Among his friends and acquaintances are the Decembrists Muravyovs, Bestuzhev-Ryumin, Muravyovs-Apostles, Pestel, Yakushkin and many others. In 1818, Shakhovskoy asked to be transferred to Moscow - closer to the bride, and this request was granted. And soon the wedding took place. Shakhovsky's wife was Princess Natalia Dmitrievna Shcherbatova (1795-1884), in whose dowry he got the village of Orekhovets, Ardatovsky district (52 km from Sarov). They say that many people courted Natalia Dmitrievna; Ivan Yakushkin was going to even commit suicide because of her, and A.S. Griboedov, not having achieved reciprocity, made her the prototype of Sofia Famusova in the comedy "Woe from Wit".

In Moscow, Shakhovskaya becomes a member of another secret free-thinking society - the Welfare Union. Soon, however, Fyodor Petrovich began to move away from the activities of secret societies. The reason is the complicated financial situation, which required closer attention to their own affairs. Shakhovskoy, with the rank of major, retires and, together with his wife, moves to live permanently in Orekhovets. “On arrival in the village,” he later recalled, “we found the peasants in great poverty and, wanting to alleviate them, invested considerable capital, using part of it to improve their arable farming and economic institutions.” And indeed, Shakhovskoy reduced the corvée on his estate, endowed the peasants with better land and helped them acquire more advanced agricultural implements. The results were not long in coming: the incomes of both the peasants themselves and their master soon increased. The indignant neighbors of Shakhovsky - the landowners of the Ardatovsky district - wrote a denunciation against him to the Minister of Internal Affairs.

The prince was wide an educated person and tried to follow the novelties of literature and science in the Nizhny Novgorod outback. The catalog of his Orekhovets library, compiled by himself, contained the titles of 1026 books in Russian, French, English, German, Italian and Latin.

Despite the fact that Shakhovskoy lived quietly and was more preoccupied with affairs on his own estate than with events in the capitals, tacit surveillance was established behind him, which intensified after the uprising on Senate Square on December 14, 1825. And on March 1, 1826, Fedor Petrovich was arrested and taken from Orekhovets to Nizhny Novgorod. Almost immediately he was transferred to St. Petersburg, where an investigation was conducted for several months. In May of the same year, Shakhovskoy was imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress, where by that time many people involved in the uprising and suspects were already languishing. During the investigation, it turned out that Shakhovsky belonged to secret societies in the past, and in July a sentence was announced: life exile in Siberia. In August, in commemoration of the accession to the throne of Nicholas I, the life exile was replaced by a twenty-year one. Shakhovskoy was already on his way at that time.

Orekhovets. Church

The city of Turukhansk was chosen as a place of exile for him. The wife could not go to Siberia with her husband, she was pregnant, with her five-year-old son Dmitry in her arms, and it was not allowed to take children into exile. The provincial city of the Yenisei province of Turukhansk at that time was a very modest settlement with a population of only about a hundred people. But even there, Prince Shakhovskoy tried to lead active image life, helping the local population. The police rank informed the governor about him: “I have the honor to convey that with regard to the morality of Shakhov’s outward debauchery, it has not been noticed that from the inhabitants of Turukhansk, as well as from those living from Turukhansk up the Yenisei, he acquired a special disposition through lending them money, with a promise to improve their condition through cultivation of potatoes and other garden vegetables, proclaiming to them the cheapness of bread and other things necessary in peasant life. A curious answer was received from the governor to such a report: “If he grows potatoes and other various vegetables that were not previously in Turukhansk, and distributes and sells them to residents, then this cannot bring any harm except good.” In addition to these studies, the exiled prince studied pedagogy, botany and pharmacology, applying the acquired knowledge in practice. He corresponded with the director of the Petersburg botanical garden and even asked to send him a microscope.

In the period from 1714 to 1719, by decree of Peter I, a regional reform was carried out, within the framework of which new separate subjects were identified. On the basis of this decree, the Nizhny Novgorod province was removed from the Kazan province and made an independent unit with the center in Nizhny Novgorod.

Stages of formation

Administrative division in 1708 led to the annexation of Nizhny Novgorod to the Kazan province. Six years later, its northwestern part was separated into a separate independent province of Nizhny Novgorod. Only three years after its formation, it was again attached to the Kazanskaya. It received its final independence on May 29, 1719. In the period from the seventeenth to the eighteenth centuries, various crafts actively developed here. The effective plowing of new lands, the establishment of a social division of labor, the development of a commodity-money economy brought the province to a new level.

local crafts

Most of the inhabitants were involved in the production of potash. This chemical was used at the time in soap making, glass and paint making, and gunpowder. Arzamas district was the center of its production. The villages of the Nizhny Novgorod province were also famous for their skilled blacksmiths and carpenters. The inhabitants of Balakhna mainly worked on shipbuilding and were engaged in salt mining. The villages of the Nizhny Novgorod province included several villages. So, for example, the village of Bogorodskoye included nine villages at once, each of which was famous for its noble tanners. The industry also developed rapidly in the region. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, a large anchor factory was built on the territory of the Gorodetsky volost. In the middle of this century, the iron and iron factories of Demidov began their work. chief industrial center was Nizhny Novgorod. Here they were engaged in rope production, shipbuilding, metalworking, leather dressing, brewing, malt, brick and steel production, and much more. Also, the province was famous for good merchants who delivered supplies to various cities and even reached Siberia.

The composition of the counties before the revolution of 1917

In 1779, the government decided to create the Nizhny Novgorod governorship, which would include thirteen counties. In 1796, the governorship ceased to exist, so the Nizhny Novgorod province was formed. Such a change led to the abolition of the Knyagininsky, Makaryevsky, Sergachsky, Pochinkovsky and Pyanskoperevozsky counties. Eight years later, the first three were under restoration. As a result, at the time of the 1917 revolution, the Nizhny Novgorod province consisted of eleven counties. The largest of them was the Nizhny Novgorod district with a population of 90,053 people. Arzamas and Balakhna districts were also in the top three with 10,592 and 5,120 people, respectively. Then came the Gorbatovsky, Sergachsky, Vasilsursky, Semenovsky and Ardatovsky counties. The smallest were Knyagininsky, Lukoyanovsky and Makaryevsky counties.

Post-revolutionary life of Nizhny Novgorod residents

After a year, the Nizhny Novgorod province was enriched with new counties. Counties were not only added, but also partially renamed. 1918 is the date of renaming Gorbatovsky district to Pavlovsky. At the same time, Voskresensky uyezd was formed. Two years later, as a result of the renaming of Makaryevsky, Lyskovsky district appeared. 1921 led to the formation of three more - Vyskunsky, Pochinkovsky and Sormovsky. Also this year, Balakhna County became known as Gorodetsky. A year later, the Nizhny Novgorod province took under its wing two counties and 6 Kostroma volosts, almost the entire Kurmysh uyezd and four volosts that had previously belonged to Tambov. Such large-scale territorial changes led to the creation of the Kanavinsky working area. The emergence of new counties contributed to the abolition of the old ones and their annexation and unification with larger ones. So the Pochinkovsky, Kurmyshsky, Knyagininsky, Voskresensky, Vasilsursky, Varnavinsky and Artdatovsky counties went down in history. The Krasnobakovsky district appeared this year. In 1924, four volosts became part of the Mari Autonomous Region. The North Dvina province expanded by one volost, which seceded from the Nizhny Novgorod province. As for the formation of new subjects, they were the Rastyapinsky and Balakhna working districts. Also in 1924, Somovsky uyezd was transformed into a working district. As a result of post-revolutionary changes, in 1926 the Nizhny Novgorod province included eleven counties and four districts.

Nowhere in Russian Empire there was no more developed handicraft industry than in the Nizhny Novgorod lands. In pre-revolutionary times, there were a huge number of publications describing this activity. The most striking and significant for history is the three-volume book "Nizhny Novgorod province according to the research of the provincial zemstvo". His second volume thoroughly describes all the subtleties of the handicraft industry in this part of Russia. Attracts not only the content of the book, but also its execution. Flipping through the pages, the reader encounters a huge number of unique illustrations. They depict most of the production, from the primary firing of coal to the most complex creations of skilled blacksmiths.

Memo to a contemporary

Today, almost every contemporary is trying to collect maximum amount information about their origin. Find out if a person born in the current Nizhny Novgorod region, to the nobility, or his ancestors were simple artisans, helps the genealogical book of the Nizhny Novgorod province. You can find out online through the "United Center of Pedigree", or contact the local archive. Genealogical books describe employees of various structures. From here you can find out what position the ancestor was in: a doctor or a postman, a judge, or maybe a forester. The data on the site are presented in 1847, 1855, 1864 and 1891. You can also look for information about your origin in address books and calendars.

Sociology knows all kinds of divisions of people into groups. But despite any classifications of mankind according to individual criteria, workers and employers coexisted at all times, like love and separation. And the relationship between them happened to be far from love and ended in separation.

Groans of the working strata of the population are heard from everywhere at the arbitrariness and "brutalism" of employers. Considering that the next anniversary of the abolition of serfdom is approaching (in early March, according to a new style), the conversation about oppressive employers and oppressed workers thirsting for freedom seems quite relevant to us. Especially if we take into account the lifetime and hereditary attachment of an employee to his employer that existed before 1861.

The economic potential of the nobility

The “powerful ones” have always been distinguished by some economic advantages. Now the elite governs banks, enterprises, disposes of securities, has already "climbed" into education. A century and a half ago, the criteria for elitism were somewhat different. On the eve of the abolition of serfdom, the elite was considered the nobility, whose wealth was measured by the number of lands and serfs. The latter, not having technical innovations, cultivated the master's land with their own hands, using plows, sickles and scythes, invented back in ancient times. Not bad if all this was supplemented by a position bestowed for public service, as well as your own house in a provincial city or capital. The Nizhny Novgorod nobility differed little from the nobility of other provinces. However, special mention should be made of the sources of well-being.

The myth of public consciousness

It is generally accepted that the chief (ruler, master) is always rich, in contrast to the people he oppresses. It is precisely this opinion that has developed about the ruling class of feudal Russia, largely shaped by the efforts of some historians and poets. Many representatives of the older generation remember the poetic lines about the malnourished poor man and the gentleman who feeds hunting dogs to their fill. Of course, there have always been rich landowners. But there were, although it is difficult for some citizens to imagine, the landowners are poor. By the time of the abolition of serfdom in the Nizhny Novgorod province, there were 1515 landowners' estates. Of these, only in 546 estates the number of serf souls was 100 or more people (including courtyards). Consequently, in the remaining 969 estates, each had less than 100 serf souls and courtyards. In fairness, it should be noted that men were considered. With women, the number of the subject population of each master naturally increased. But serf women did not pay cash taxes and were used by the landlords for land work and for other natural duties. As for the main taxpayers - peasants, their number did not always coincide with the number of "taxable" (paying taxes). Peasants could get sick, be incapacitated due to injuries. Syphilis, smallpox, disease internal organs, according to Zemstvo statistics, mowed down the peasant population of the Nizhny Novgorod province. And the gentlemen remained masters. Sometimes they were liberal with their slaves, but most often they tried to extract from the “baptized property” (the publicistic name for serfs in the 19th century) the possible or maximum possible benefit. However, a peasant without land and other work is only labor power without application. So what material resources did the landowners of the Nizhny Novgorod province have on the eve of the abolition of serfdom? If you ask yourself the question: were those born rich among the Nizhny Novgorod aristocrats, then the answer will be positive. Yes, there were lucky ones who did not have to think about increasing their fortunes, since they had long been multiplied by their ancestors.

Colonel's Legacy

Colonel Sergei Vasilievich Zybin had land and people in 5 out of 11 districts of the province. On the eve of the abolition of serfdom, he had 2719 male souls and more than twenty villages and villages. And this is not counting the wealth in other provinces. However, Sergei Vasilyevich was not considered the richest landowner in the province.

Silent daughter of not a holy father

Another thing is Anna Georgievna Tolstaya, who had much more people and land. Only in the Nizhny Novgorod province, she owned 15 villages (3051 male souls) in the Nizhny Novgorod district, the village of Katunki and 70 villages (1589 male souls) in the Balakhna district. To this should be added the village of Bolshoe Murashkino in the Knyagininsky district (547 male souls), as well as the village of Lyskovo and numerous villages in the Makaryevsky district (1821 male souls). However, she was Tolstaya by her husband, and it was not wealth that captivated the soul of Anna Georgievna. Being nee Georgian, she was the daughter of the famous leader of the Nizhny Novgorod nobility, Prince Gruzinsky, who became famous for his despotism and love of criminal adventures. The father turned out to be a real disaster for the province. Harboring fugitives, publishing false passports, organizing robbery attacks on merchant ships ... Here is an incomplete list of the deeds of the elusive provincial marshal of the nobility. But a modest God-fearing daughter was born to an unbridled father. She avoided secular society. Marriage with Alexander Petrovich Tolstoy was childless and most of all resembled a platonic relationship. Anna Georgievna spent huge amounts of money on charity. Persons of the clergy were welcome guests in her house. So an apple from an apple tree, contrary to famous saying fell far.

Clan of the Kozlovs, possessions of the Karataevs

The uncomplicated and widespread surname Kozlov (a) in Russia, as documents show, is not always a sign of mediocrity and may even indicate a noble origin and property security. Praskovya Andreevna Kozlova inherited from her father (Andrey Bogdanovich Priklonsky) lands, manufacturing and factory enterprises and, with her fortune, could compete with the richest noble families of the Nizhny Novgorod province. In the Nizhny Novgorod and Gorbatovsky districts, she owned at least 17 villages and villages. But the landowners Kozlovs were strong not only with their wealth, but also with their clan unity, as well as participation in public life province and merits on public service. Among the landowners of the Nizhny Novgorod district, we notice Alexander Pavlovich, Vladimir Pavlovich, Stepan Pavlovich, Mikhail Pavlovich and Alexei Pavlovich Kozlov (the latter is the husband of Praskovia Andreevna). The father of the Kozlov brothers was Pavel Fedorovich Kozlov, a real state councilor. His wife held the position of maid of honor to the Empress. Behind each of the brothers were villages and a certain number of serf souls. At the same time, Mikhail Pavlovich Kozlov was an amicable mediator during the peasant reform (intermediary in relations between landlords and peasants), was repeatedly elected a vowel of the zemstvo district assembly.

Many tales begin with three brothers. And in the Nizhny Novgorod province, the Karataev brothers lived: Ivan, Gennady and Alexander Yakovlevich. If the land holdings of the Kozlovs were concentrated mainly in one county, then the material wealth of the Karataevs, like a wave breaking into drops, was scattered throughout the Nizhny Novgorod province. In the official inventories of the landowners' estates, on closer examination, these brothers are constantly mentioned. And if Ivan Yakovlevich gravitated towards some property isolation, then Gennady and Alexander Yakovlevich often appear as co-owners of landlord estates. Modest at first glance, the Karataevs here and there were owners of small estates. In the Makaryevsky district, they owned 8 villages (782 male souls), in the Lukoyanovsky district, the Yakovlevichs owned the village of Gulyaevo (318 souls). To this should be added three settlements in the Vasilsur district (240 souls) and one more village and village in the Gorbatovsky district (119 souls). Do not forget about the isolated estate of Ivan Yakovlevich in the Nizhny Novgorod district (village, village and 255 souls). This is how a vivid idea of ​​​​the famous Russian proverb is formed: “From the forest to the pine” (“From the world to the thread”).

At the bar factory

Some illustrious gentlemen did not at all seek to bury themselves in the problems of centuries-old landownership, but walked, as they say, along the path of industrial progress, relying on the exploitation of the labor of all the same serfs. In the Ardatovsky district, 1,460 peasants worked at the mining plant of the Shipovs. According to official documents other duties for peasant souls were not provided. Moreover, the Shipovs decided to pay for the labor of the factory peasants in cash, as the labor of civilian workers. The serf worked at the factory 25 days a month, receiving from 20 to 60 kopecks a day for his work. Women and children were involved in the work at the enterprise, whose work was paid more modestly (from 10 to 15 kopecks per day).

A certain consolation for the factory poor fellows was the free use of meadows and firewood from the master's forest, which grew in abundance in Shipov's possessions. However, some bar breeders believed that the peasants should not relax among firewood and meadows. A cloth factory operated on the estate of Mrs. Zakrevskaya. Serf laborers not only produced factory products, but also brought firewood, and also had to clean the master's fields. For overtime work, the lady Zakrevskaya paid extra from her generosity.

tight-fisted gentlemen

Yet wealthy landowners were a minority among their classmates. And if Sergei Vasilyevich Sheremetyev, offended by the fair (!) Governor's justice, could calm down in Paris, admiring the course of the Seine, then many landowners of our province saw only hay in front of them. Landscapes of their own and peasant arable land were added to this view. The dull rural monotony was enlivened by hunting and living in a provincial town. In such cases, the illustrious gentlemen had a very meager arsenal of means of production. However, people always want to eat, especially since the Nizhny Novgorod landlords were drawn into the inexorably impending market relations.

Well, where, one wonders, to look for funds, if there are no small factories, no rich heritage of ancestors? Many landlords in our province used to maintain a decent life all the property complex at their disposal: arable land, meadows, forests (if there were any) and the working hands of serf men and women. It is good when there are thousands of acres of forest. The least enterprising landowners relied on fixed cash dues (from the soul or tax) or profitable forest acres, renting out all their arable land for peasant cultivation. Many of them even allowed peasants into the forests.

However, with the abolition of serfdom, the entrance to the master's forest for the peasant was closed, as happened in Makaryevsky district. The land was poor in quality. So the men roamed about in search of suitable job. More inventive, but equally unenterprising gentlemen pressed the peasants with all the means at their disposal. The serfs carried firewood from the forest to the manor's yard, repaired the master's mills, mowed the master's hay and worked on the master's arable land. In such cases, women were driven out to help them in the field. At the same time, the landowners squeezed out the same cash dues from their subjects. And the most stingy gentlemen also collected tribute in kind: canvas, linen and even food. And I still had to work on my site ...

That's it! What hasn't been written about yet? Oh yes, about the bloody mistress (this is really a film where much is distorted and mutilated). But more on that some other time.

A. M. Podurets (Sarov)

HISTORY OF THE LOBIS FAMILY, LANDMANS OF THE ARDATOV DISTRICT OF THE NIZHNY NOVGOROD PROVINCE

The house in the village of Kavley is probably the only landowner's house that has been preserved in the countryside of the Ardatovsky district of the Nizhny Novgorod region, and for this reason alone it deserves attention. But, as always in such cases, starting to understand a particular piece of local history, the researcher discovers interesting plots and interesting characters that our past is so rich in.

For the first time I saw this house in 1999 thanks to two local historians: Sarov - Vladimir Mikhailovich Gankin and Ardat - Alexander Vladimirovich Bazaev. The building immediately made an impression - it is very uncharacteristic of our modern collective farm landscape. The house does not even stand on the edge of the village, but, as it were, at a distance, on a hill, which is the edge of a mighty forest, in which the secret ancient Mordovian sanctuary is hidden - the Granovoy stone, which deserves a separate story. To the south, the forests open up, lying beyond the Kanerga River, uninhabited for many kilometers. Nearby, the contours of ponds are guessed, which once cascaded down to the river. In general, the location of the estate corresponds to the classical principles characteristic of similar buildings of the 18th-19th centuries.

Now a few words about the village itself. Kavlei stands on both banks of the river of the same name, which is sometimes called Kavleika, near the place where it flows into Kanerga. The name is of Mordovian (Erzya) origin and is composed of two bases: kev– ‘stone’ and lei– ‘stream’, ‘river’. L. L. Trube translated the name as “stony stream” and expressed the opinion that the name indicates only the nature of the area1. N.V. Morokhin explains the origin of this name differently. In his opinion, the river got its name from the ancient Mordovian sanctuary located near it 2 , with which, it seems to me, we must agree. The sanctuary, which we mention once again in passing, is a clearing, in the center of which there is a large boulder. Apparently in the past given place played a significant role in the spiritual life of the Mordovian population, and this provision is recorded in toponymy.

The house in Kavlei would probably have remained a beautiful mystery for us if it had not been found out that Nikolay Vasilyevich Artyomov (1919-1995), a local historian who did a lot to study the history of Ardatov, Arzamas and their environs, was interested in its history at one time 3 . In his unpublished materials, now stored in the funds of the historical association "Sarov Pustyn", notes relating to the history of both the house itself and the people who lived in it have been preserved. In addition, among the collection of boundary maps collected by Artyomov, there were two dozen sheets relating to Kavlei of the 19th century. We will explain this abundance of cartographic material a bit later.

The oldest of these maps was drawn in 1817 and is a copy of a map from 1815 (Fig. 1). According to her, the estate then belonged to the young sons of the "lieutenant, who later was a major general" Fyodor Ivanovich Remer - Alexander and Nikolai. According to this plan, 2621 acres of land were assigned to them. The village at that time consisted of two streets (right-bank and left-bank relative to the Kavley River). There is no landowner's house on the plan.

We only know about General F.I.

In 1831, according to the data of N. V. Artyomov, the owner of the Kavlei estate was already the titular adviser Akim (Joachim) Danilovich Lobis. He owns 203 serfs and 6 yard peasants.

Residents of the Ardatovsky district have always been interested in the origin of the unusual surname of their neighbors. The writer Boris Sadovskoy in his "Notes" mentioned many noble families of the county at the end of the 19th century, including the Kavlei Lobis4. With his light hand, a version went for a walk that the head of this family once had the Russian surname Lobysov, but, in the fashion of that time, Germanized it. It seems to us that Lobis is still a natural surname. Why? One of the daughters of Akim Danilovich was named Adelaide. Why was it necessary for a Russian person to call a child a name that is absent in Orthodox saints? Subsequently, Adelaide was baptized, and she became a completely Orthodox Claudia.

In 1858, when A. D. Lobis was no longer alive, his widow Elizaveta Andreevna became famous for the fact that the provincial noble assembly received a complaint from the village peasants about unjust oppression. The marshal of the nobility of the Ardatovsky district confirmed the validity of the complaint. According to him, the peasants of the village of Kavlei were "brought to a miserable state." The landowner took the best land closest to the village for the master's crops, leaving the peasants with the worst and more distant land. Of the 77 households, the peasants had horses only in 49. The inhabitants of Kavlei did not have enough of their own bread, and they were forced to buy it, starting in November. For her cruel and unfair treatment of the peasants, E. A. Lobis even earned the nickname “Ardatovskaya Saltychikha” 5 .

The fact that the Kavleian peasants, apparently, were not very lucky with the landlords, is recorded in the memories of the villagers that have existed almost to our time, passed down from generation to generation. Stories about a cruel master (or mistress) and peasant protests were recorded both by N. V. Artyomov in the 1960s, and already at a later time6.

In 1860, apparently, after the death of the mistress, the Kavlei estate was divided equally among all the heirs by "amicable agreement". The Lobis had six heirs - three sons (Victor, Arkady and Apollo) and three daughters. By the time of the division, two daughters were already married: Varvara to Lieutenant M. Loginov, Claudia to the provincial secretary Prince P. Zvenigorodsky. The third daughter, Elizabeth, married later - to staff captain M. Palilov.

The division of the estate was a complex land surveying and geometric task. Each of the heirs was to get equally forests, arable land and meadows, in addition, the corresponding peasant households engaged in their processing should adjoin these lands. It was relatively simple with the peasants: each received 31 male and 31 to 35 female souls, the number of households in the share was from 8 to 11, depending on the presence of male souls in them. But with the land it was more difficult, and in order not to offend anyone, the entire dacha of the village was divided into 16 parts quite complex shape, and these parts have already been distributed among the heirs in their entirety. Accordingly, the map of the Kavlei dacha after 1860 no longer consisted of one (as under F.I. Remer), but of 16 separate maps. Hence the abundance of cartographic material in the collection of N. V. Artyomov. In the post-reform period, Kavlei land began to be divided into even smaller plots: the owners kept part of the land for themselves, and part was transferred to temporarily obligated peasants. Boundary maps of this time are also in the Artyomov archive, judging by them, the process of disengagement from the peasants went on from the second half of the 1860s to the beginning of the 1880s.

In addition to the actual cartographic information, boundary maps of the 19th century also contain information about the owners, sometimes about previous owners, as well as about neighboring landowners. For our study, these maps turned out to be a valuable written source; the Lobis genealogy given here is almost entirely compiled on the basis of the information contained on the maps.

Unfortunately, it turned out that we do not have a complete set of 16 cards. But the presence of a general map of the land before the division (1817) and the experience of folding cardboard mosaics (puzzles) made it possible to obtain a general scheme for the division of the land in 1860 as a result. We also did not have a map of the land plot on which the house stands, but the analysis of the division of the estate described above revealed that this plot of land went to Viktor Ioakimovich Lobis.

There is no exact date of construction of the manor house in Kavlei in the documents that we have. Some recent documents, compiled by contemporary villagers and administration officials, date the building from the 1750s to the 1810s. Apparently, the landlord's house is younger. There is no mention of the house in the documents of the division of the estate in 1860. In addition, in these documents, Kavley is called a village, that is, by definition, a settlement in which there is neither a church nor a landowner's house. In a document of 1866, Kavley was first called a "village", this definition means a settlement with a manor house. The name "village of Kavley" is then repeated on the boundary plans relating to 1868, 1881 and 1882. Therefore, the construction of the house can be presumably attributed to the years 1860-1866.

An argument against such dating is that the construction of a large manor house is an expensive undertaking, which was easier to carry out before the division of the estate than after it. Thus, it should be recognized that the dating of the construction of the house requires further clarification.

In 1908, a three-year school was opened in Kavlei, the initiator of its creation was the daughter of V. A. Lobis, Nadezhda Viktorovna Lobis. She handed over the family estate to a school, she herself bought a small house in the village and moved there, being at the same time a teacher in this same school. The villagers kept the memory of this woman for a long time. She was said to have worked as a school teacher until the 1920s. Brother of Nadezhda Viktorovna - Mikhail Viktorovich Lobis was in late XIX century zemstvo doctor. In addition to Kavlei, the Lobis also owned an estate in the village of Chetvertov in the same Ardatovsky district; in the 1890s, the son of Apollo Ioakimovich Ivan lived there (in Chetvertovo, the remains of a garden of the 19th century 7 were preserved). But the entire extended family called Kavlei "our Mesopotamia", meaning by this, apparently, that it was in Kavlei that the roots of their clan 8 .

Now a descendant of the owners of this wonderful house lives in Nizhny Novgorod. Dmitry Alexandrovich Lobis, a civil engineer, is the great-grandson of Viktor Ioakimovich Lobis and, what is most valuable to us, he managed to preserve a particle of the history of his family - several old photographs depicting his ancestors, as well as the Kavlei manor house, as it was on turn of the XIX-XX centuries. For a hundred years, the house, of course, has changed. Balconies, columns and other decorative elements have disappeared, the facades have become simpler, having lost their former grace. Outbuildings or outbuildings were also lost, which, judging by the map from the Mende atlas 9, formed a regular symmetrical rectangle (Fig. 2).

Undoubtedly, the Lobis house has survived to this day only due to the fact that it housed a school. In the mid-1990s, the school in Kavlei was closed, and the house began to deteriorate. Now its condition inspires serious concern, the house is used as a residential building, there is no proper supervision of it as a monument. And I really want this building to be preserved as long as possible and serve as a clear evidence of the history of our region.

The author thanks Marina Alekseevna Lipyanina, who helped him understand the intricacies of the division of the estate, and Tatyana Pavlovna Vinogradova, who introduced him to Dmitry Alexandrovich and Inna Leonidovna Lobis.

1 Trumpet L. How did geographical names Gorky region. - Gorky, 1962.

2 Morokhin N.V. Nizhny Novgorod Toponymic Dictionary. - Nizhny Novgorod, 1997; he is. Our rivers, cities and villages. - Nizhny Novgorod, 2007.

3 Podurets A. M. The fate of a local historian // Provincial anecdote. - Shuya, 2004. - Issue. 4. - S. 123; Famous people of the Ardatovsky region of the XVI-XXI centuries. - Ardatov-Arzamas, 2002. - S. 13.

4 Sadovskoy B. Notes // Russian archive. - M., 1991. - Issue. 1. - S. 124.

5 Famous people of the Ardatovsky region of the XVI-XXI centuries. - S. 126.

6 Ardatovsky region: past and present. - Nizhny Novgorod, 2000. - S. 321-322.

7 Baulina V. Gardens and parks of the Gorky region. - Gorky, 1981. - S. 70-72.

8 Sadovskaya B. Decree. op.

9 A commission led by AI Mende worked on compiling topographic maps of Russia in the 1840s-1860s. We do not know the exact date of this map.