Candidate of Historical Sciences Anastasia Dunaeva. Book about V. f. Dzhunkovsky - Anastasia Dunaeva. Family traditions and family upbringing

480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Dissertation - 480 RUR, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week and holidays

Dunaeva Anastasia Yurievna. V.F. Dzhunkovsky: political views and government activities: late XIX - early XX centuries. : dissertation... candidate of historical sciences: 07.00.02 / Dunaeva Anastasia Yurevna; [Place of protection: Ros. state humanitarian University (RGGU)]. - Moscow, 2010. - 392 p.: ill. RSL OD, 61 10-7/562

Introduction

Chapter 1. Stages of formation of a new type of statesman 28

1.1. Family traditions and family upbringing 28

1.2. Page Corps 48

1.3. Adjutant of the Moscow Governor General 61

1.4. Moscow Metropolitan Trusteeship of People's Sobriety 77

Chapter 2. Activities of V.F. Dzhunkovsky as Moscow governor 89

2.1. V.F. Dzhunkovsky and the Stolypin modernization program 89

2.2. Relations with members of the public 123

2.3. The motto “To God and neighbor” in the gubernatorial practice of V.F. Dzhunkovskogo 133

Chapter 3. The role of V.F. Dzhunkovsky in reforming political investigation bodies 145

3.1. Transformations in political investigation in the context of police reform in Russia 146

3.2. Changes in the composition of internal and external agents 167

3.3. Reforming the structures of political investigation bodies 218

3.4. Relationships with security officials 260

3.5. V.F. Dzhunkovsky and R.V. Malinovsky 271

3.6. The case of Lieutenant Colonel S.N. Myasoedova 283

3.7. V.F. Dzhunkovsky and G.E. Rasputin 293

Chapter 4. Behavioral strategies of V.F. Dzhunkovsky during the First World War and the Bolshevik dictatorship 339

4.1. On the Western Front in the situation of the revolutions of 1917 339

4.2. In Soviet Russia 356 Conclusion 369

Introduction to the work

Relevance of the dissertation is determined by a stable scientific interest in the problems of the formation and functioning of the bureaucracy, which, in the conditions of post-reform Russia, sought to correspond to the trends of the modernization process. Among these representatives of the bureaucratic elite was Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky (1865 - 1938), whose personality and activities deserve close research attention. The relevance of the topic is determined by the fact that V.F. Dzhunkovsky belonged to the Stolypin-type administrators who realized the need to implement comprehensive transformations of the country. This stable trend was reflected both in his administrative activities as Moscow governor (1905 - 1912) and as a fellow minister of internal affairs (1913 - 1915), when he personally took responsibility for reforming one of the key government structures.

The reforms Dzhunkovsky carried out in the system of state security agencies give rise to different assessments. However, they were still considered, on the one hand, outside the context of his previous activities, and on the other, in isolation from his general reformist plan. In historiography, there are attempts to only fragmentarily illuminate certain aspects of his activities in the political search outside the general system of his value priorities, outside the context of transformations carried out by the bureaucratic elite in conditions of a systemic political crisis. An urgent problem continues to be the analysis of the consequences of Dzhunkovsky’s transformations for political investigation agencies.

The pre-governor period of V.F.’s biography has not been studied at all. Dzhunkovsky, when his personality was developing, the principles of state activity were being formed, and the first administrative experience was acquired.

For researchers, the final stages of Dzhunkovsky’s biography are no less important (service in the army during the First World War, followed by the October period in Soviet Russia). Recently, many versions have appeared about the demand for V.F.’s professional experience. Dzhunkovsky by the Soviet special services and about his participation in the famous KGB operation “Trust”, etc. In connection with all the questions that have arisen, the main problem of this study is to reconstruct a holistic image of Dzhunkovsky as a person and statesman of the era of Stolypin reforms and to assess his contribution to the process of modernization of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century.

The degree of knowledge of the problem. Dzhunkovsky is known to researchers primarily as the author of multi-volume memoirs, which, like the memoirs of other famous statesmen (S.Yu. Witte, V.N. Kokovtsev, V.I. Gurko), are the basic source on the history of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. and are used in famous works of domestic and foreign historians 1.

Assessments of Dzhunkovsky's political views in the works of Soviet researchers were diametrically opposed. So, A.Ya. Avrekh believed that Dzhunkovsky, appointed to the post of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs" under the patronage of N.A. Maklakov, "was just as extreme right-wing as Maklakov," although he "enjoyed great respect and authority in the liberal-bourgeois circles of both capitals precisely for something that demonstrated the level of respectability and competence necessary for power from the point of view of these circles.”

1 Dyakin B.S. The Russian bourgeoisie and tsarism during the First World War (1914 - 1917). L, 1967; A crisis
autocracy in Russia, 1895-1917. L., 1984; Avrekh A.Ya. Tsarism on the eve of its overthrow. M., 1989; Wortman
R.S. Scenarios of power. Myths and ceremonies of the Russian monarchy. T. 1-2., M., 2004; Robbins R. Famine in Russia
1891-1892, New York, 1975; Robbins R. The Tsar's Viceroys: Russian Provincial Governors in the Last Years of
the Empire. Ithaca (N.Y.). 1987.

2 Avrekh A.Ya. Tsarism and the IV Duma. M., 1981. P. 263.

5 opinion, they represented a mixture of protective and guardianship ideas, official anti-bourgeois liberalism and “police socialism” 3.

Research interest in Dzhunkovsky as an independent personality arose relatively recently, in the 90s. XX century Thus, A. Semkin was one of the first to emphasize the high moral qualities of Dzhunkovsky 4. A series of essays about his life and work belongs to I.S. Rosenthal 5, who positively assessed the transformations of Dzhunkovsky, who “did not like provocateurs” 6, covered in detail his activities to reform the search authorities on a “completely new basis”, in strict accordance with the law 7 and posed an important question for researchers: “Are the innovations still in force? Dzhunkovsky after his resignation? 8 . Specialists involved in the rehabilitation of victims of Stalin's terror also showed interest in Dzhunkovsky's biography, since he was shot at the Butovo training ground near Moscow in 1938 on charges of counter-revolutionary activities, and in 1989 he was officially rehabilitated.

In general monographs and dissertations on the history of the political police of Russia, published in the 90s. XX century and at the beginning of the new century 10, we find coverage of individual transformations of Dzhunkovsky on the wanted list. Critical assessments of these transformations are also beginning to appear, which began in the memoirs of the heads of security departments, who accused Dzhunkovsky of weakening the search authorities due to the desire to please the public.

3 Crisis of autocracy in Russia, 1895-1917. L., 1984. P. 413.

4 Semkin A. Such an atypical gendarme // Soviet police. 1991. No. 10.S. 28.

5 Rosenthal I.S. Ill-fated portrait // Soviet Museum. 1992. No. 4. pp. 39-41.
b Rosenthal I.S. Did he not like provocateurs?//Motherland. No. 2. 1994. pp. 38 -41.

7 Rosenthal I.S. Pages of the life of General Dzhunkovsky // Centaur. 1994. No. 1. P. 94.

8 Ibid. P.99.

9 Butovo training ground. 1937-1938 Book of memory of victims of political repression. Vol. 3. M., 1999.P. 82.,
Golovkova L.A. Lyubimova K.F. Executed generals. URJL: 8/

10 Ruud C.A., Stepanov S.A. Fontanka, 16: Political investigation under the Tsars. M., 1993; Peregudova Z.I.
Political investigation of Russia (1880 - 1917). M., 2000; Lauchlan I. Russian Hide-and-Seek. Helsinki, 2002.

In the abstract of his doctoral dissertation, the famous researcher of pre-revolutionary political investigation Z.I. Peregudova writes that “serious changes (not for the better) in the Special Department occurred after 1913. They are largely associated with the arrival of Comrade Minister V.F. to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Dzhunkovsky. He weakened the structures of local political investigation and destroyed secret agents in army units and secondary educational institutions. During the same period, there was a change in the leadership of the Special Department, which significantly reduced the capabilities of the department and its role in the fight against the liberation movement” 11.

In the preface to the memoirs of the leaders of the political investigation Z.I., published in 2004. Peregudova also notes that as a result of Dzhunkovsky’s abolition of security departments and district security departments, an important link in the structure of the political investigation was eliminated, and “the measures taken by Dzhunkovsky did not contribute to either strengthening the political police or improving the situation in relations between its leading cadres” 12 .

Particularly noteworthy is the monograph of the American researcher J. Daly, in which a separate chapter is devoted to Dzhunkovsky, “The Moralist at the Head of the Police Apparatus.” Daly believes that for the political police of the last years of the old regime, nothing was more important than the reform program launched by Dzhunkovsky in 1913. “A man with a deep sense of honor, or at least obsessed with the desire to appear as such, Dzhunkovsky directed his energies and attention to cleanse police institutions,” the author writes. - He wanted to protect and maintain public order, but hated the methods by which this was usually done. Perhaps the fact that Dzhunkovsky’s actions caused little resistance from the official authorities, the court and right-wing circles

11 Peregudova Z.I. Political investigation of Russia (1880 - 1917): Author's abstract. day.... Dr. ist. Sci. M., 2000. P. 67.

12 Peregudova Z.I. "Security" through the eyes of the guards // "Security". Memoirs of leaders
political investigation in 2 vols. M., 2004. T. 1. P. 11.

13 Daly J.W. A Moralist Running the Police Apparatus II The Watchful State: Security Police and Opposition in
Russia, 1906-1917. DeKalb (111.). 2004. P. 136 - 158.

7 testified to the attitude of the elite towards the political police, especially in the wake of “Azefism-Bogrovism.” The police apparatus won the war against revolutionaries and terrorists, but lost the battle with society. Probably, a decent Dzhunkovsky could win the trust of society” 14.

Negatively assessing Dzhunkovsky's reforms as weakening the search and emphasizing that they were carried out solely on his own initiative, Daly makes a general conclusion that Dzhunkovsky certainly had the best intentions. The overall police budget decreased, he further writes, the network of semi-autonomous security departments created by Zubatov disappeared, most of the district security departments created by Trusevich were liquidated, officers of the provincial departments dressed in gendarmerie uniforms carried an increased workload, secret agents no longer penetrated the gymnasiums and military units, key figures of the “security”, who, according to Dzhunkovsky, were not trustworthy, were dismissed from service. “And yet, it seems that Dzhunkovsky was unable to inspire respect for the gendarmerie uniform, win public confidence for his ministry, improve relations between the political police and the civil administration and eradicate unsavory practices in the secret hiding place of the Police Department, although this hiding place was now called “9 -th Office Work”, and not “Special Department,” Daly continues his thought and sums it up. “The most important question for this study, however, is whether or not Dzhunkovsky’s reforms undermined the government’s ability to defend itself against revolutionaries during World War I?” 15 .

Having set such a task, the author, however, does not analyze the consequences of the reforms. At the same time, his position is quite clearly stated in the epilogue of the monograph. “In reality,” writes Daly, “the monarchy did not collapse because of the coordinated efforts of professional or other

14 Ibid. R. 136.

15 Ibid. R. 158.

8 revolutionary activists, but due to incompetence at the highest levels of government and the delegitimization of the monarchy, as well as due to mutiny of the troops, discontent among the elite, and war fatigue of the population, which was reinforced by constant revolutionary propaganda. There were two other flaws in the system. First, the political police lacked a think tank that would authorize the adoption of special measures. The special department collected a lot of information, analyzed it competently and realistically, and yet could only report on the mood of the people and the general situation, setting out dry facts. To change this situation in a state of crisis, the director of the Special Department had to have access to the emperor’s ears and his trust, but he did not have them. Secondly, when it really mattered, during the First World War, the police did not have informants in the army. This was a huge omission. Nicholas II was deeply confident in the loyalty of the troops and believed that they would be beyond the reach of propagandists. He and Dzhunkovsky both cherished outdated fantasies about the honor and dignity of the armed forces, whose leaders also insisted on their immunity to the revolutionary contagion” 16.

Domestic researcher K.S. also critically evaluates Dzhunkovsky’s reform actions. Romanov 17. The most negative impact on all subsequent activities of the political investigation, in his opinion, was the abolition of district security departments by Dzhunkovsky. The author believes that no one tried to recreate them again after Dzhunkovsky left. Romanov claims that the leaders of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Police Department understood perfectly well that “many of the transformations carried out on the eve of the war, in the new conditions, began to have a negative impact on the activities of the political police,” but they failed to eliminate them. “Thus, the reforms of V.F. Dzhunkovsky due to the sudden change

16 Ibid. R. 224.

17 Romanov K.S. Transformations by V.F. Dzhunkovsky // Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia on the eve and during the years
The First World War (1913-1917): dis.... cand. ist. Sci. St. Petersburg, 2002. pp. 130-150.

9 foreign and domestic political situation not only complicated the work of political investigation bodies, but also significantly weakened it” 18.

At the same time, Romanov, like Daly, does not believe that the reforms were caused by Dzhunkovsky’s liberalism or voluntarism. “The change in the internal political situation in the state led to the fact that wide sections of society, as well as many dignitaries, considered it necessary to put an end to the “emergency” of the post-revolutionary years, the most striking manifestation of which was the activity of the political police. This prompted Dzhunkovsky to begin her transformation. As a result of those carried out in 1913 -1914. reforms began the process of transforming the political investigation system. It was supposed to end with the formation of a qualitatively new system that carried out its activities on the basis of completely different principles. However, the favorable environment for such transformations did not last long. After August 1, 1914, their further implementation was stopped, but the results of those already implemented were so significant that many features in the work of the political police during the war period were predetermined by them” 19 .

However, further, Romanov, like Daly, does not conduct a documentary analysis of the consequences of Dzhunkovsky’s transformations, suggesting only that attempts were made to restore the internal agents from the soldiers that had been abolished by Dzhunkovsky, but “it was apparently not possible to restore the destroyed agents. Information about the mood in the army environment in

The police department still did not receive it." His assumptions are more of a hypothesis. Since both Daly and Romanov use in their works the memories of political intelligence leaders who do not agree with Dzhunkovsky’s transformations, it can be assumed that it is their point of view that forces the authors to draw such conclusions. It is also impossible not to notice that, although both authors devote part of their work to Dzhunkovsky,

18 Ibid. P. 148.

19 Ibid. P. 150.

20 Ibid. P. 149.

10 he exists for them only as a comrade of the Minister of the Interior, and his transformations are not associated with his previous experience.

At the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century. works appear where Dzhunkovsky appears exclusively as the Moscow governor. So, I.S. Rosenthal gives a more balanced characterization of Dzhunkovsky's political views than his predecessors. “By that time, the idea of primacy in the state of the noble class, which was defended by the ruling elite, not excluding Dzhunkovsky, seemed archaic. This idea could not be reconciled with the economic weight and growing claims of the big bourgeoisie,” writes the researcher. And he adds: “If we use a modern political dictionary, the Moscow governor wanted to be a centrist; he was disgusted by any extremes - both left and right. This infuriated the leaders of the right-wing monarchist Black Hundred groups. He considered their interference in government affairs impermissible” 21.

In his monograph “Moscow at the crossroads. Power and society in 1905-1914." I.S. Rosenthal concluded: “It would be wrong to say that after the shocks of the first revolution there was no desire in the bureaucratic environment to comprehend their causes and consequences. Apparently, it was impossible to continue a career without fitting into the partially reformed political system” 22. In his opinion, Dzhunkovsky also belonged to those who considered changes in the state structure irreversible.

We find a similar assessment in the work of the American scientist R. Robbins 24, who expresses a constructive, in our opinion, idea about a new generation of Russian administrators - the “Stolypin generation”, born during the Great Reforms and reaching

21 Rosenthal I.S. Governor during the state service//Public service. 1999. No. 1. P. 41.

22 Rosenthal I.S. Moscow is at a crossroads. Power and society in 1905 - 1914. M., 2004. P. 45.

23 Ibid. P. 62.

24 Robbins R. Vladimir Dzhunkovskii: Witness for the Defense // Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian
History, 2 (Summer, 2001). P. 635-54.

greatest successes before the First World War, whose careers were interrupted by the Revolution of 1917. 25 They, Robbins believes, demonstrated respect for the law and legality, were experienced professionals,

felt the importance of the ever-growing connection between government and public organizations. Dzhunkovsky, in his opinion, is an example of such an administrator 26.

In addition to the interest in Dzhunkovsky’s reforms and his bureaucratic practice as governor, in recent historiography, versions about Dzhunkovsky’s participation in the work of the Soviet special services have become unusually widespread. The fact that Dzhunkovsky was in Soviet service since 1924 was first mentioned in the comments to the American edition of A.P.’s memoirs. Martynov, published under the editorship of R. Vraga in 1973. 27 In the comments of American scientists T. Emmons and SV. Utekhina to the diary of Yu.V. Gauthier is the first to indicate that Dzhunkovsky “according to some information, later (i.e. after June 15, 1921 - A.D.) collaborated with the GPU (in particular, he was a consultant on the provocative operation “Trust”).”

The opinion about Dzhunkovsky's liberal bias in the works of some historians has grown into the assertion that he, being a Freemason, consciously worked to destroy Russian statehood. O.A. Platonov and A.N. Bokhanov interprets Dzhunkovsky's activities in monitoring Grigory Rasputin in a new way, believing that he was deliberately engaged in discrediting Rasputin, carrying out the program of a Masonic conspiracy against the empire." Dzhunkovsky's work in Soviet special agencies, in their opinion, once again confirms his treacherous nature.

V.A. was the first to write about the “new generation of bureaucrats” who appeared after the 1905 revolution and realized the need to work together with the Duma. Maklakov in his memoirs “Authority and public at the decline of old Russia.” Paris, 1936. P. 601.

26 Robbins R. Op.Cit. P. 636, 647-643.

28 See Gauthier Yu.V. My Notes // Questions of history. 1993. No. 3. P. 172. See also P. 358.

29 The version that Dzhunkovsky’s speech against Rasputin was connected with the offensive
parliamentarians and opposition leaders, cites in his monograph SV. Kulikov. See Kulikov SV.

12 A.N. is extremely categorical in this sense. Bokhanov. “A considerable number of the highest military officials of the empire in the last period of its existence shared a skeptical attitude towards power. Among them were liberals and even republicans who renounced the oath of allegiance to the Tsar and betrayed their oath long before the last monarch resigned his powers. And then they didn’t prove themselves to be the best. They served in command positions in the Red Army, and some even more: they began to work in the bodies of the workers’ and peasants’ government,” he writes and clarifies. - Among the latter was the former tsarist general V.F. Dzhunkovsky, who worked closely with the Cheka-GPU-NKVD for several years. Although this chapter of the general’s life is not replete with details, the fact itself is beyond doubt. Kneeling before the “people's power,” however, did not allow the former brilliant officer of the Preobrazhensky Regiment to die in peace and quiet. In 1938, by decision of the NKVD, he was shot.”30 Bokhanov, like other historians, does not provide any documents confirming that Dzhunkovsky was indeed a “Soviet employee,” as if considering this an already proven fact.

In the article “Was Vladimir Dzhunkovsky the father of the Trust?: In Search of Credibility,” R. Robbins gives a number of arguments that make Dzhunkovsky’s participation in this operation possible, although in the end he says that this has not been proven.

Thus, the process of studying Dzhunkovsky’s activities went through parallel stages in domestic and American historical science: the study of Dzhunkovsky as an administrator of the era of the Duma monarchy in the framework of biographical sketches, the study of his reforms in the political investigation, as well as other areas of his police activities.

The bureaucratic elite of the Russian Empire on the eve of the fall of the old order (1914 - 1917). Ryazan, 2004. pp. 50-51.

30 Bokhanov A.N. Rasputin. Anatomy of a myth. M., 2000. P. 231.

31 Robbins R. Was Vladimir Dzhunkcvskii the Father of the "Trust"? : A Quest for the Plausible//Journal of Modern
Russian History and Historiography. 1 (2008). P.l 13 - 143. R. Robins' arguments are given on page 359.

13
At this point, it is natural to move on to the next

historiographical stage - a systematic study of him as a statesman. This stage is embodied in this dissertation, as well as in the biography of Dzhunkovsky, which is currently being written by the American researcher R. Robbins.

Purpose of the study consists in recreating the holistic image of V.F. Dzhunkovsky and the study of his political views and government activities as a representative of the bureaucratic elite, directly related to the modernization of the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century.

To achieve this goal, it seems necessary to solve the following research problems:

Trace the process of formation of Dzhunkovsky as a state
figure, taking into account the traditions of his family, the education received and early
administrative experience;

Explore the government practice of Dzhunkovsky in office
Moscow governor in the context of Stolypin's reforms,
draw conclusions about his political views formed to this
time, and trace their possible evolution in 1917.

analyze the motives for which Dzhunkovsky began reforms in the political police, consider the entire complex of reforms as a single plan of the reformer, and also find out the actions of the heads of the search after his resignation;

explore myths about Dzhunkovsky associated with well-known historical stories (G. Rasputin, R. Malinovsky, “The Myasoedov Case”, Operation “Trust”), based on an analysis of available archival documents.

Object of study became the political biography and government activities of Dzhunkovsky, captured in sources of personal origin (memoirs, letters, notebooks, photographs) and in various official documents and materials (circulars, orders,

14 reports, instructions, certificates, reports, interrogation protocols, formal lists, official correspondence, surveillance diaries, press materials), as well as the actions of political police officials after the resignation of Dzhunkovsky from the post of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs.

Subject of research in the dissertation are the system of values, political views of Dzhunkovsky and the principles of his state activities, implemented by him during public service.

To solve the problems posed in the dissertation, the author involved extensive source base, consisting of unpublished and published documents. Unpublished documents for the study were identified in the collections of six archives - GA RF, RGVIA, OR RSL, RGIA, CIAM, OR GCTM named after. Bakhrushin. The basis for the dissertation was the materials of the State Archives of the Russian Federation (GA RF). Materials from Dzhunkovsky’s personal fund in the RF GA (F. 826. Inventory 1, 1084 items) contain information about all periods of his life, except for the Soviet period, as well as information about his ancestors. The memoirs of Dzhunkovsky deserve the greatest attention (F. 826. Op. 1. D. 37-59), which are separate volumes in folio of handwritten and typewritten text. Handwritten volumes contain documentary inserts into the text - newspaper clippings, menus, theater programs, letters, telegrams, official documents, which Dzhunkovsky later retyped on a typewriter, so that the typewritten text looks uniform. The memoirs cover the period from 1865 - the time Dzhunkovsky was born - to the end of 1917, when he officially retired. Since Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs are one of the basic sources for this study and, in addition, have independent significance as a source on the history of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, it is necessary to dwell on the history of their creation. The history of the memoirs is, in fact, the history of the Dzhunkovsky Foundation at the Russian Civil Aviation.

After the October Revolution, Dzhunkovsky remained in Russia, was arrested on September 14, 1918, tried by a revolutionary tribunal in May 1919 and spent about 3 years in prison. He was released on November 28, 1921.

We can't say exactly when he started working on the memoirs. So, according to Rosenthal, Dzhunkovsky began writing his memoirs while still in prison. However, according to V.D. Bonch-Bruevich, who bought Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs at the beginning of 1934 for the Central Literary Museum, “the idea of writing memoirs was given to him by representatives of the Cheka when he was sitting in Taganskaya prison after the revolution and it was told to him so well that, upon leaving prison, he At first he began to remember everything, then he was drawn to paper and he began to write notes” 33.

Already on February 1, 1934, assistant to the head of the Secret Political Department of the OGPU M.S. Gorb requested M. Kuzmin’s archive and diary, as well as Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs, “for study.” On April 28, 1934, a special commission of the Cultural and Propaganda Department of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks checked the work of the State Literary Museum. Particular attention was paid to the museum's expenditure of funds on the acquisition of manuscripts 34.

The commission reported the following to the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks about Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs: “Acquired materials of the former General Dzhunkovsky for 40,000 rubles. have nothing to do with literature and are of no value to the museum, because consist solely of a description of the general’s life.” Bonch-Bruevich was forced to defend his employees in a letter to the People's Commissar of Education A.S. Bubnov on May 20, 1934: “You yourself looked through these memoirs and know their value. It is unlikely that there will be more than 5 printed pages in all these eight volumes about the “personality” of the “general” himself... The great significance of Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs lies in the fact that he does not become friendly to anyone, writes in his old manner, and

32 Rosenthal I.S. Pages of the life of General Dzhunkovsky // Centaur. 1994. No. 1. P. 101.

33 OR RSL. F. 369. K. 187. D. 17. L. 40.

34 Bogomolov N.A. Shumikhin SV. Preface to the diaries of M. Kuzmin // Kuzmin M. Diary. 1905 - 1907
St. Petersburg, 2000. P. 13.

therefore I am most sincere... I affirm and will always be able to prove that these memoirs will be an era in the memoir literature of our Russia" 35.

“...I really always walk everywhere with my stick, I still walk with it now, when I write these lines 7 years later,” 37 Dzhunkovsky wrote in his memoirs for 1917. It is not difficult to calculate that these lines were written in 1924 .

In the first volume of memoirs, describing his youth in the Corps of Pages and the teachers, Dzhunkovsky says that history was taught to them by Menzhinsky, whose son “at the present time, when I am writing these lines, is at the head of the GPU” 38. That is, it is obvious that this was written in 1926.

The memoirs for 1892 were definitely written in 1926 (“Elizaveta Alekseevna Skvortsova has been the midwife from the very founding of the orphanage to this day (1926)” 39).

Finally, in the memoirs for 1904 we find the following paragraph: “At the present time, when I am writing these lines, the icebreaker invented by him (SO. Makarov - A.D.) is used by the Soviet government, and until recently one of these icebreakers, renamed “Krasina” accomplished a feat in the ice, saving several people from the Nobile expedition” 40. That is, we can assume that this part was written in 1928 - 1929.

Right there. See Shumikhin SV. Letters to People's Commissars/Knowledge is power. 1989. No. 6. P. 72.

GA RF. F. 826. Op. 1. D. 50. L. 335 rev. - 336.

GA RF. F. 826. Op. 1. D. 59. L. 158-158ob.

Right there. D. 38. L. 26.

Right there. D. 40. L. 71-rev.

Right there. D. 45. L. 414.

In the printed version of the first volume, next to the words “took place

moving to a new apartment - also a government apartment in the barracks of the L. Guards. Equestrian

regiment against the Church of the Annunciation" Dzhunkovsky wrote by hand: "Now

this church does not exist; it was destroyed in 1929.” 41.

Thus, it is logical to assume that Dzhunkovsky began writing memoirs in 1922 from his governorship and in 1924 reached 1918, the time of his retirement. And then in 1925 he began to write from the very beginning of his life and by 1929 he completed the entire manuscript and in 1930 - 1931. started retyping it. By August 1933, most of the manuscripts had been typed 42.

Dzhunkovsky's memoirs are a documented chronicle of the state life of the Russian Empire, which he witnessed. If most memoirists, as a rule, place themselves and their view of current events at the center of the narrative, then for Dzhunkovsky the state is at the center of the narrative, and he himself is only a witness of events, holding one or another government post. Of course, at the beginning of the story, when we talk about childhood, there are not many events in public life. To the greatest extent we can talk about memories - chronicles from the position of governor. But in general, his main goal was to show a panorama of the life of the monarchy and to be as documentaryly accurate as possible. Day after day, apparently using his diary, Dzhunkovsky describes the events that took place in the Royal House (mainly the ceremonies of the highest exits, coronations, burials), events in the State Duma, and, moving to his Moscow province, meetings of the provincial and district zemstvo assembly and city duma, national celebrations, public events, opening of monuments, etc.

41 Ibid. D. 38. L. 8.

42 OR RSL. F. 369. K. 265. D. 12. L. 1.

18
On the pages of memoirs we meet many famous
personalities - D.A. Milyutina, F.N. Plevako, V.O. Klyuchevsky, Fr. Joanna
Kronstadtsky and others. With special attention from Vladimir Fedorovich
used by the artists of the Maly Theater, with whom he was very friendly.
Dzhunkovsky usually attended celebrations of famous people and
at their funeral. But also completely unknown residents of the province
are present on the pages of his memoirs - for example, the peasant Galdilkin,
who died rushing after robbers who committed armed
attack on the house of the merchant Lomtev. Such documentary memoirs
Dzhunkovsky is not accidental. After all, he had the opportunity to use them
writing his archive, deposited in the Pushkin House, which he
collected almost from childhood and which later became his personal
fund. h

When the “Academic Case” began in 1929, it was the storage of Dzhunkovsky’s archive in the Pushkin House that served as one of the reasons for accusing S.F. Platonov and his colleagues in anti-Soviet activities. Particularly emphasized was the fact that the former comrade of the Minister of the Interior could freely use his archive. In this regard, 2 searches were carried out at Dzhunkovsky’s place and he was summoned to the OPTU to testify about how his archive got into the Pushkin House. On November 9, 1929, Dzhunkovsky wrote a memo addressed to A.S. Enukidze, in which he outlined in detail the history of his archive. “From the very young years of my life, even from the Corps of Pages, in which I was brought up,” he wrote, “I collected memories of various events, newspapers, letters, and folded them very carefully, continuing this way until my retirement in 1918. Thus, I accumulated piles of folders on various events... In 1913, at the very beginning, I left Moscow, where I served as governor for 8 years. Moscow saw me off absolutely exceptionally. I received a lot of addresses, bread and salt, gifts, albums, groups, images, I was given scholarships, etc., literally from all segments of the population and from everyone

19 institutions, more than half of which were not directly related to me, such as theaters. All this formed the basis of my archive” 43.

After his resignation from the post of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs in 1915, there was talk of transferring the archive to the Pushkin House. Negotiations about this were held in B.L. Modzalevsky. However, even after Dzhunkovsky returned from the front, the archive could not be transported, and in September 1918 he was arrested. The archive was preserved by the housekeeper Daria Provorova, who lived with the family for more than 40 years, and after Dzhunkovsky was released from prison, he was finally able to transport it for storage to the Pushkin House, having negotiated for himself the right to use it and take it back at any time.

In 1925, upon his arrival in Leningrad, Dzhunkovsky learned that his archive, according to the decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, belonged to the Pushkin House. Every year Dzhunkovsky came to Leningrad to work on his memoirs. Obviously, he took the documents he needed to later rewrite or insert them into the manuscript of the memoirs, and then returned them back.

Among those convicted in the “Academic Case” was SV. Bakhrushin is one of the editors of “Records of the Past”, and in December 1930 M.V. himself. Sabashnikov was arrested on another case, also fabricated by the NKVD. And although the investigation was terminated after a month and a half and M.V. Sabashnikov was released, the publishing house was on the verge of liquidation, the publication of V.F.’s memoirs. Dzhunkovsky was out of the question.

In the V.D. Foundation Bonch-Bruevich has preserved his correspondence with Dzhunkovsky regarding the acquisition of his memoirs by the Central Museum of Fiction, Criticism and Journalism. In his letter dated August 2, 1933, Dzhunkovsky, ceding his manuscripts to the Museum along with the exclusive right to publish them, stipulated the following conditions for publication and royalties: the memoirs should

“Memorandum” by V.F. Dzhunkovsky November 9, 1929 A.S. Enukidze about his archive kept in the Pushkin House // Archaeographic Yearbook for 2001. M., 2002. P. 416.

20 be published no earlier than 20 years from the time of the last event, i.e. not earlier than 1938, the royalties and assignment of copyright were estimated by Dzhunkovsky at 80,000 rubles. (400 rubles per printed sheet) 44. Bonch-Bruevich wrote to him on January 10, 1934: “...we decided to buy your memories for 40,000 rubles. If you want the payment to be made as soon as possible, then deliver your notes to the working rooms of our museum (Rozhdestvenka, 5) and hand them over to N.P. Chulkov" 45.

In 1948, the memoirs were received by the Central State Historical Archive, the current GA of the Russian Federation, and even earlier, in 1941, the materials that made up Dzhunkovsky’s fund were transferred to the Central State Historical Archive from the State Archives of the feudal-serf era. The materials of the fund and memoirs were combined in 1952. 46 In 1997, Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs were partially published in 2 volumes, covering the period from 1905 to 1915. The publication was prepared by I.M. Pushkareva and Z.I. Peregudova, who wrote a detailed biographical sketch, as well as A.L. Panina.

In addition to the memoirs, other matters of the foundation are no less important for this topic: Dzhunkovsky’s family correspondence (letters to him from his sisters and brother), letters from friends and acquaintances, official documents related to the activities of his ancestors (forms), philosophical works by S.S. Dzhunkovsky, a scientist - agronomist, economist, figure of the Enlightenment, as well as a large number of photographic documents. Most of the documents from the Dzhunkovsky Foundation used in this work are being introduced into scientific circulation for the first time.

To characterize Dzhunkovsky’s official activities as governor, we also used other files from his personal fund: copies of governor’s reports, circulars to zemstvo commanders, announcements from the governor to the population, reports on trips around the province, press materials,

OR RSL. F. 369. K. 265. D. 12. L. 1-2.

OR RSL. F. 369. K. 143. D. 51. L. l-1-rev.

See the case of the V.F. Foundation. Dzhunkovsky in the Civil Aviation of the Russian Federation. (F. 826.) P. 3, 14.

21 collected by Dzhunkovsky himself. In addition, the files of the office of the Moscow governor were used (CIAM. F. 17).

To analyze Dzhunkovsky’s transformations in the political investigation, we used the files of the Police Department fund (GARF. F. 102.), related to the office work of the Special Department, as well as materials from the fund of the Headquarters of the Separate Corps of Gendarmes (GARF. F. 110).

The following cases are of fundamental importance: “The case of the publication of the circular dated March 13, 1913 No. 111346 on the destruction of agents in the ground and naval forces” (F. 102. Op. 316. 1913. D. 210) 47, “The case of the abolition of some security departments by circular on May 15, 1913 No. 99149 and 99691 and the renaming of the Don and Nikolaev security departments into search centers" (F. 102. Op. 316. 1913. D. 366), "The case of expanding and changing the staff gendarmerie departments and security departments. 1916" (F. 102. Op. 316. 1916. D. 100) 49.

The work used circulars on various issues sent out by the Police Department, signed by NA. Maklakova, V.F. Dzhunkovsky, SP. Beletsky, V.A. Brune de Saint-Hippolyte, as well as orders signed by Dzhunkovsky as commander of the Separate Corps of Gendarmes.

To characterize Dzhunkovsky’s activities related to the surveillance of Grigory Rasputin, diaries of external surveillance of Rasputin were used, stored in the funds of the Petrograd OO (GA RF. F. 111.) and the Moscow OO (GA RF. F. 63.), as well as a separate case of the Moscow secret police about Rasputin’s stay in Moscow in the spring of 1915 (GA RF. F. 63. Op. 47. D. 484.)

The work also used a file from the G. Rasputin fund - reports to Dzhunkovsky from the head of the Tobolsk provincial gendarme department (GA RF. F. 612. D. 22).

47 This case is analyzed in full and in the context of Dzhunkovsky’s reforms in the literature for the first time.

48 Some fundamentally important data from this case are presented in the literature for the first time.

49 This case is analyzed in full and in the context of Dzhunkovsky’s reforms in the literature for the first time.

In the fund of the office of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs V.F. Dzhunkovsky (GA RF. F. 270) used official correspondence, as well as “The Shornikova Case” (D. 48) and “About Lieutenant Colonel Myasoedov and others” (D. 135).

Interrogations from the fund of the Extraordinary Investigative Commission of the Provisional Government (GA RF. F. 1467) are important for highlighting the role of Dzhunkovsky in the case of R. Malinovsky.

Documents related to Dzhunkovsky’s activities as Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs were also deposited in the RGVIA, in the files of the Fund of the Main Directorate of the General Staff: “Correspondence of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of a fundamental nature” (F. 2000. Op. 15. D. 452), “ About Lieutenant Colonel Myasoedov" (F. 2000. Op. 15. D. 568), "Manual on counterintelligence in wartime" (F. 2000. Op. 15. D. 828.). The collection of service records contains the most complete formal list of Dzhunkovsky, compiled upon his retirement (F. 409. D. 147-521).

The Soviet period of Dzhunkovsky's life is analyzed on the materials of the investigative cases of 1921 and 1937 of the fund of the state security bodies (GA RF. F. R - 10 035, D. 53985 and D. 74952) and materials from Dzhunkovsky's personal fund in the Department of Manuscripts of the State Central Theater Museum named after. Bakhrushin (F. 91), which contains letters from A.F. Koni and E.V. Ponomareva to Dzhunkovsky of the Soviet period.

In addition to archival materials, the study used a wide range of published sources. First of all, these are legislative and regulatory documents: the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire, the Manual on Counterintelligence in Wartime, the Regulations on Field Command of Troops in Wartime, the Regulations on Measures for the Protection of Highest Travel on Railways.

23 In addition, we attracted the Journals of the Council for Local Economic Affairs, various collections of documents 50. The study also used the memoirs of Dzhunkovsky’s contemporaries - V.I. Gurko, D.N. Shipova, V.A. Maklakova, SE. Kryzhanovsky, M.V. Rodzianko. Particular attention in the dissertation is paid to the memories of Dzhunkovsky’s colleagues in the political police - A.I. Spiridovich, A.P. Martynova, K.I. Globacheva, A.V. Gerasimova, P.P. Zavarzina, A.T. Vasilyev, as well as the published testimony that they and other former dignitaries gave to the Extraordinary Investigative Commission of the Provisional Government. In addition to periodicals (newspapers), the dissertation uses materials from the specialized magazine “Police Bulletin” for 1912-1915.

Methodological basis of the dissertation determined by the characteristics of the tasks. According to the principle of historicism, we consider Dzhunkovsky’s activities in the context of specific circumstances and characteristics of the historical era.

However, when analyzing Dzhunkovsky’s world of values, we cannot help but use methodological directions related to understanding the Other. In particular, to correctly assess Dzhunkovsky’s reforms in the political investigation and the reaction of his subordinates to them, it is necessary to understand the peculiarities of the worldview of both Dzhunkovsky and his opponents. Therefore, the application of the principles of the historical-anthropological approach, according to which “the study of mentalities, ideologies inherent in certain groups, their value systems and social behavior is an integral component of research” 51, seems to be very productive in this case.

50 Stolypin P.A. Reform program. Documents and materials. In 2 vols., M., 2002; The case of a provocateur
Malinovsky. M., 1992; Agent work of the political police of the Russian Empire: collection
documents, 1880-1917. M. - St. Petersburg, 2006; The revolutionary movement in the army and navy during the First
world war. M., 1966. Nikitinsky I.I. From the history of Russian counterintelligence. Collection of documents. M.,
1946.

51 Gurevich A.Ya. Historical synthesis and the Annales School. M., 1993. P. 273.

24 The founder of this direction, M. Blok, defined the subject of history “in the exact and final sense as the consciousness of people.” He claims that “the relationships that develop between people, the mutual influences and even the confusion that arises in their minds - these constitute true reality for the historian.” Another prominent representative of the Annales school, L. Febvre, agrees with him, believing that “the task of the historian is to try to understand the people who witnessed certain facts, which were later imprinted in their consciousness, in order to be able to

interpret."

Since this study is biographical in nature, it is important to take into account the latest methodological guidelines developed in the process of developing the genre of historical biography, where recently there has been a turn of interest from the “typical person” to a specific individual, and the extraordinary individual or, at least, comes to the fore least capable of making non-standard decisions in difficult circumstances 55. At the same time, “the personal life and fate of individual historical individuals, the formation and development of their inner world, the “traces” of their activities... act simultaneously as a strategic goal of research and as an adequate means of understanding the historical society that includes them and the historical society they create, and is thus used to clarify social context..." This task requires the study of texts “from the point of view of the content and nature of the complexes of interpersonal relationships, behavioral strategies, and individual identities imprinted in them” 57 .

52 Blok M. Apology of history, or the craft of a historian. M., 1986. P. 18.

53 Ibid. P. 86.

55 Repina L.P. Social history in the historiography of the 20th century: scientific traditions and new approaches. M.,
1998. P. 58.

56 Ibid. P. 59.

Scientific novelty of the research is that for the first time in domestic and foreign historiography, a comprehensive study of the personality and state practice of Dzhunkovsky was undertaken using materials from various funds, which allows not only to create a multifaceted image of one of the brightest representatives of the bureaucratic elite of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, but also to fruitfully solve the problems associated with his activities.

For the first time in historiography, previously very briefly covered or completely undescribed periods of Dzhunkovsky’s life are examined in detail (childhood, the Corps of Pages, administrative activities before the governorship, the period of service in the army during the First World War, the Soviet period), which are important for understanding how the his world of values, and assessments of Dzhunkovsky’s behavior in the situation of its destruction.

An important addition to Dzhunkovsky’s biography is information about his ancestors on his mother’s side (Rashetah), presented for the first time in a work about him. The works of Dzhunkovsky’s grandfather, Stepan Semenovich Dzhunkovsky, a famous scientist and statesman of the 18th century, for the first time introduced into scientific circulation by his father, are of independent significance. New information makes it possible to trace the influence of the tradition of serving the enlightened monarchy, laid down by our ancestors, on Dzhunkovsky’s worldview and political views.

For the first time, the attitude of Dzhunkovsky, the governor, to Stolypin's laws, as well as his relationship with representatives of the liberal public, important for the reconstruction of his political views, is analyzed in detail.

26 which were undertaken by Dzhunkovsky’s successors after his resignation, Dzhunkovsky’s contribution to the reform of political investigation bodies is assessed. In preparing this work, new documents were introduced into scientific circulation that are important not only for the study of Dzhunkovsky’s official career, but also for the history of political investigation and counterintelligence agencies as separate institutions related to the history of Russian state institutions.

The dissertation examines little-studied aspects of stories known in historiography related to Grigory Rasputin (Scandal at the Yar Restaurant), S.N. Myasoedov (“The Case of Lieutenant Colonel Myasoedov”), R.V. Malinovsky (Malinovsky’s entry into the IV Duma and his exit from it), Operation Trust, and the myths about the role that Dzhunkovsky allegedly played in them are exposed. When considering these stories, the reliability of the memoirs of the head of the Moscow security department A.P. is analyzed. Martynov and the head of the Petrograd security department K.I. Mr. Globachev, recently introduced into scientific circulation.

An analysis of the “extracts” from the diaries of external surveillance of G. Rasputin, establishing their reliability, allows us to refute the version about the slandered “holy elder”, which is based on the assertion that the “extracts” are fake.

Practical significance of the study is that its results can be used in the preparation of various manuals and lecture courses on the history of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, in particular on the history of the political police and bureaucratic elite of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century.

Approbation of research results was conducted by the author in the form of reports at a special seminar for graduate students of the Department of History of Modern Russia of the Russian State University for the Humanities (headed by Prof., Doctor of History L.G. Berezovaya) and at four all-Russian conferences “Russian government institutions of the XX-XXI centuries: traditions and innovations” (RGGU, 2008) and “The World in New Times” (SPbGU, 2008,2009,2010).

27 The research results are also reflected in 10 publications (including three journals from the list approved by the Higher Attestation Commission). The scientific results presented in the publications influenced the opinion of the American scientists J. Daly and R. Robbins about the activities of Dzhunkovsky, with whom the author discussed problems related to the topic, and entered into a certain

academic context. The dissertation was discussed at a meeting of the Department of Modern Russian History of the Russian State University for the Humanities and recommended for defense.

The structure of the dissertation corresponds to the main stages of V.F.’s biography. Dzhunkovsky. The work consists of an introduction, four chapters, a conclusion, an appendix (photographs), a list of sources (unpublished and published) and literature.

58 Article “The Corps of Pages of His Imperial Majesty in the fate of Lieutenant General V.F. Dzhunkovsky” // Russian Kyadet roll call. 2008. No. 5. pp. 174-192. URL: : 189 cited in R. Robbins. See Robbins R. Was Vladimir Dzhunkovskii the Father of the “Trust”?: A Quest for the Plausible//Journal of Modern Russian History and Historiography. 1 (2008). P. 140.

Family traditions and family upbringing

According to family legend, the Dzhunkovsky family originates from the Mongolian prince Murza-khang-Dzhunka, who arrived in Moscow in the 16th century. under Vasily III as part of the embassy. From him came the governor Ksendzovsky, who owned the Dzhunkovka estate in Galicia, whose descendants were divided into two branches - Russian and Galician. “The founder of the Russian branch is considered to be Colonel Chernigovsky Kondraty Dzhunkovsky, his son Stepan was the regimental captain of the Nezhinsky regiment, and then archpriest Baturinsky. This latter had a son, Semyon, also a Protopop, and he has three priest sons, one of them Semyon Semenovich is my great-grandfather, and his son Stepan Semenovich is my grandfather,” Dzhunkovsky wrote in his memoirs.

According to genealogist O.V. Shcherbachev, throughout the 18th century. most of the representatives of the Dzhunkovsky family were priests and owned estates in Lebedinsky and Koropsky districts (Novgorod-Seversky governorate, Slobodsko-Ukrainian, and then Kharkov province). From the end of the 18th century. many of them enter military and civilian service. Various branches of the Dzhunkovsky family were included in parts 2 and 3 of the Genealogical Books of Kharkov, St. Petersburg, Poltava, Chernigov and Kaluga provinces. Some branches of the family that did not prove nobility remained in the priestly class.

Immediate ancestors of V.F. Dzhunkovsky were poor landowners. In 1829, his paternal grandfather Stepan Semenovich Dzhunkovsky (1762 - 1839), making amendments to the service record of 1828, crossed out the entry “A small amount of land in the Slobodsko-Ukrainian province in Lebedinsky district, three souls of courtyards” and inscribed “well-acquired estate, courtyards have two souls”61.

However, at the beginning of the formal list the rank of Privy Councilor was indicated (3rd class according to the Table of Ranks), which Stepan Semenovich, having no noble ancestors, received thanks to his outstanding abilities and successful public service. He made a truly historical breakthrough in the position of the family, giving the descendants of the Little Russian archpriests the opportunity to occupy high positions in the government system of the empire.

According to the official biography of S.S. Dzhunkovsky, read after his death in the Free Economic Society, of which he was secretary for more than 25 years, Stepan Semenovich was born in the city of Lebedin, where his father, a nobleman and priest, tried to give him the best education. “Young Dzhunkovsky, being only six years old, already read Russian and Slavic books well, and in those early years he read the entire Menaion-Chetya to his grandmother (the daughter of Hetman Polubotok); When he was eight years old, he went to school every day at about five o’clock in the morning, which was located almost two miles from his parents’ house...”

V.F. Dzhunkovsky and the Stolypin modernization program

Dzhunkovsky became governor at a turning point when, having survived the Revolution of 1905, the country entered a new era - the era of the Duma monarchy. New Prime Minister P.A. Stolypin, with the participation of the people's representative office - the State Duma - implemented the principles of the Manifesto of October 17, 1905 in the form of an extensive reform program - a whole package of legislative acts that were supposed to qualitatively change all spheres of life in Russia.

In the minds of the bureaucratic elite of the Russian Empire, the governor's post was a certificate of administrative maturity and often a necessary stage in a successful career194. A significant part of the heads of central departments had experience in gubernatorial service, not to mention the leadership of the Ministry of Internal Affairs - out of 21 ministers from P.A. Valuev to A.D. Protopopov 13 in the past were either governors-general, governors, or vice-governors. Among them were those who visited all these posts more than once195.

According to the Penza governor I. Koshko, without connections in high society it was almost impossible for a good person to become a governor196. The absence of a fixed procedure for the appointment of a governor was pointed out at the beginning of the 20th century. and the liberal lawyer A. Blinov, who wrote that “everything depends on the case and especially on patronage.” This point of view is shared by modern researcher A.S. Minakov, arguing that “it was impossible to earn the governorship by one’s efforts in the service. As a rule, no one noticed or promoted an official without patronage. But it was easier to “promote” an official who was capable, experienced, and had some merit.”198

At the same time, the American specialist R. Robbins comes to a different conclusion. Without denying the importance of favoritism and connections in gubernatorial appointments, Robbins writes that “over three and a half decades, the Department of the Interior developed and refined the system of criteria by which the professional status of a candidate for the gubernatorial office was determined. Something like a governor’s corps appeared, a kind of personnel reserve for appointment to the post of governor”199. On the decreasing role of the military principle and the strengthening of the civil principle in the gubernatorial service, as well as on the professionalization of gubernatorial activities, especially noticeable from the 2nd half of the 19th century. writes in his monograph and L.M. Lysenko.

In the hierarchy of prestige of the provinces, it was Moscow that stood in first place, the “owner” of this province was especially close to the emperor, kings were crowned here and, unlike St. Petersburg, there were not many high-ranking persons here, i.e. the governor was truly the complete master of the province.

Applying the above to Dzhunkovsky, we can say that in addition to the high patronage of the Grand Duke and Grand Duchess, he certainly had the necessary administrative and economic experience acquired during his work in the Moscow Trusteeship of People's Sobriety, where representatives of both administrative and and public administration of Moscow.

Transformations in political investigation in the context of police reform in Russia

Reform program P.A. Stolypin proposed making certain changes to the structure and methods of the police service. Back in the fall of 1906, an Interdepartmental Commission on the transformation of the police in the empire was created, chaired by Senator A.A. Makarova. The goal of the reform was to create a legal police institution in Russia that would earn respect from the population. The work of the commission dragged on, and only in 1911 Makarov presented a police reform program to the Council of Ministers. At the end of 1912, when the project, after agreeing on amendments, was to be submitted to the Duma for consideration, N.A. Maklakov, who replaced A.A. Makarov as Minister of Internal Affairs, recognized the need to subject the draft law to additional consideration. The project was revised at a special meeting at the Ministry of Internal Affairs chaired by Maklakov, with the participation of some governors and “closest officials of the central department of internal affairs knowledgeable in police affairs.” On September 11, 1913, the project was presented to the IV State Duma, where a special commission was formed to consider it354.

It was Maklakov who invited Dzhunkovsky at the beginning of 1913 to the post of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs, thanks to which he took part in the work of the ministerial meeting and the Duma commission. In the magazine “Police Bulletin” dated January 14, 1913, an article appeared about the new Minister of Internal Affairs, who stated: “We should all have the same goal - strengthening state power, strong, benevolent and calm... working for the benefit of the population of Russia. The path leading to this goal is one, only, there is no other and cannot be: this is the law approved and approved by His Imperial Majesty.” Two weeks later, the Police Bulletin introduced readers to a new comrade of the minister, head of the police, V.F. Dzhunkovsky.

On February 28, 1913, the magazine reported that at a reception the senior officials of the State Housing Department and St. Petersburg introduced themselves to him. 00 Dzhunkovsky expressed the wish that “the information service be established not only widely, but also thoroughly, so that in this way, as far as possible, unfounded searches and arrests are prevented. In addition, those presenting themselves were directly instructed to avoid anything in their activities that could cause significant discontent among the population.”356

This wish was followed by concrete actions by the new comrade minister. On February 28, 1913, Dzhunkovsky’s circular on extending the terms of arrest for persons detained on the basis of the Regulations on measures to protect state order and public peace was sent to governors general, governors, mayors, heads of provincial, regional, city and district housing and public organizations. Dzhunkovsky reminded of the need to strictly implement the previous circular of July 5, 1911, according to which such an arrest could not last more than 2 months. In the case of a request for an extension, it was necessary to indicate why the “protective correspondence” could not end within this period. Dzhunkovsky proposed to be guided by this circular in cases where petitions “are initiated against persons who have already been detained for a month by order of local authorities.” At the same time, he allowed the extension of the arrest for the future only for one month, with the exception of particularly valid cases (the need to identify illegal persons, traveling long distances to carry out investigative actions, postal communications with remote areas)

Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, Grand Duchess
Elizaveta Fedorovna and Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky:
a story of friendship and spiritual communication

Moscow Governor, His Majesty's Retinue, Major General V.F. Dzhunkovsky
(GA RF. F. 826. Op. 1. D. 890. L. 6, 19.)

Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky (1865 - 1938) was an outstanding statesman of the Russian Empire at the beginning of the twentieth century. He is known to historians as the Moscow governor (1905 - 1912), comrade of the Minister of Internal Affairs and commander of the Separate Corps of Gendarmes (1913 - 1915), as well as the author of multi-volume memoirs - a kind of chronicle of late imperial Russia. Dzhunkovsky's memoirs cover the period from 1865 to 1917. Memoirs for the years 1905 - 1915 were published in 1997. However, beyond the scope of this two-volume publication there remained a very interesting period in the life of Vladimir Fedorovich, associated with his formation as a statesman. From 1892 to 1905, Dzhunkovsky served as adjutant to the Moscow Governor-General, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, and constantly communicated with both the Grand Duke and his wife, Grand Duchess Elizaveta Feodorovna. Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs, as well as his correspondence with his sister Evdokia Fedorovna, allow us to penetrate into the world of friendly communication that has developed between Vladimir Fedorovich and the grand ducal couple, to see those informal episodes of this communication that best characterize the personalities of its participants.

It should be said that the Dzhunkovsky family was officially recorded in the Nobility Book of the Poltava Province only in 1845. Under the coat of arms, the motto was written in Latin - “Deo et Proximo”, which translated means “To God and Neighbor”. The motto of the Dzhunkovsky family reproduced in abbreviated form the two main commandments left by the Savior.

“This motto,” wrote Vladimir Fedorovich, “my parents carefully kept in their hearts and followed it throughout their lives, trying to educate us in the same spirit, and if any of us did not observe it in all severity, then it is our fault no longer our parents, but ourselves.”

The family motto was organically supplemented by the commandments of the Knights of Malta, on which he was raised in the Corps of Pages of His Imperial Majesty, an elite military educational institution where Vladimir Fedorovich received his education.

Serving as an aide-de-camp to the Moscow Governor-General, the instructions given to him by Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, allowed Vladimir Fedorovich not only to develop administrative abilities, but also to bring to life the motto of the family. Subsequently, Christian charity and the desire for moral justification of his powers of power were always present in Dzhunkovsky’s activities, in his attitude towards his subordinates and the population. It seems that in this sense he was influenced by communication with the Grand Duke and Grand Duchess, those examples of merciful attitude towards his neighbor, which he could observe in relation to himself.

In 1884, after graduating from the Corps of Pages, Vladimir Fedorovich was released into the Preobrazhensky Regiment, commanded by Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich. Relations with the regiment commander and his wife, Grand Duchess Elizaveta Fedorovna, developed well. Subordination on the part of Dzhunkovsky in relation to them as representatives of the Royal House was never violated, but these relations later grew from official to friendly.

Elizaveta Fedorovna struck Dzhunkovsky with her beauty even during her wedding to Grand Duke Sergei in 1882, when he accompanied her carriage as a page.

“Grand Duchess Elizaveta Feodorovna was charming, she talked to everyone with such attention, she captivated everyone with her beauty, grace and amazing modesty and simplicity, that it was impossible to look at her other than with admiration,” recalled Vladimir Fedorovich. His archive contains a poem by the poet K.R. that he rewrote. :

I look at you, admiring you every hour.
You are so inexpressibly beautiful!
Oh, true, under such a beautiful appearance
Such a beautiful soul!

In Ilyinsky. Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich and Grand Duchess Elizaveta Feodorovna surrounded by members of their retinue.
Right: V.S. Gadon (standing), V.F. Dzhunkovsky (sitting), Count F.F. Sumarokov-Elston.
To the left of the Grand Duke is Princess Z.N. Yusupova. (GA RF. F. 826. Op.1.D. 889.L.2.)

Dzhunkovsky's position could have changed significantly already in 1886, when he was first hinted at the possibility of becoming an aide-de-camp to Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich. While taking his leave to the Grand Duke on the occasion of his departure on vacation, he unexpectedly received an invitation to stop by for a few days at Ilinskoye, and the Grand Duke made him promise to telegraph so that horses would be sent for him. Dzhunkovsky, not without embarrassment, drove up to the estate and felt very embarrassed at first; out of excitement he spilled vodka on the tablecloth during lunch, despite the fact that the environment in which he found himself was the most friendly. Grand Duchess Elizaveta Feodorovna said that she had already been waiting for him all these days. Gradually, thanks to the naturalness with which the grand ducal couple behaved, his stiffness passed. “I was struck by the simplicity with which Their Highnesses behaved, from the very first evening I did not feel not only any fear, but also any embarrassment, everything was so simple, family-like, no one stood up when the Grand Duchess or the Grand Duke passed by, just like in a simple family home, even simpler than in other aristocratic houses. I was always amazed by the special simplicity that was characteristic of members of the imperial house outside of official receptions,” recalled Vladimir Fedorovich.

During his stay at Ilyinsky, Professor V.P. Bezobrazov, a former teacher of political economy with the Grand Duke, asked Dzhunkovsky how he would react to the offer to become the Grand Duke’s adjutant, “after all, in essence, this position is unpleasant, lackey.”

“I replied,” Dzhunkovsky wrote, “that I would consider it a great honor if the choice fell on me<…>that you can bring a lot of benefit by holding such a position, that everything depends on yourself, you just don’t have to lose your self and behave with dignity, then the position of adjutant will be far from being a lackey.” Bezobrazov’s words made a strong impression on him and made him think; his peace of mind was disturbed by these thoughts. “On the one hand, this kind of appointment flattered my pride, on the other hand, it was terribly painful for me to leave combat service in the regiment, which I more than liked, which I was passionate about and found satisfaction in regimental life,” he recalled.

Subsequently, it turned out that the Grand Duke really had such thoughts, and that is why Dzhunkovsky was invited to Ilyinskoye. However, at the same time, Countess Tizenhausen asked Count Sumarokov-Elston for her nephew, who was appointed to this position. “I think it saved me. If I had been appointed adjutant then, in such a young age,” Dzhunkovsky wrote, “then nothing decent would have come of me. I didn’t know life at all then, and court life would have completely captivated me.<…>She would have sucked me in. And I thank God that this didn’t happen then.”

On February 9, 1891, the Grand Duke was appointed Moscow Governor-General. On the day of the regiment’s surrender, he gave an order in which he said goodbye to the regiment and “surprisingly cordially, without a stereotype, thanked everyone for their service.” Dzhunkovsky expected to be appointed to the post of adjutant of the Governor-General, since he enjoyed great attention from the Grand Duke throughout his entire service.

However, the offer came only at the end of December. Moreover, before agreeing, Vladimir Fedorovich turned to the Grand Duke with a request to receive his mother’s blessing. “The Grand Duke treated me like family,” he recalled, “and touched me very much, saying that without my mother’s blessing I should not decide anything.<…>As a result, my mother blessed me to take this step." On December 14, 1891, the Highest order on the appointment of Dzhunkovsky was issued. The lower ranks of the company in which Vladimir Fedorovich served blessed him with the image of St. Vladimir. Dzhunkovsky received a reception from Emperor Alexander III, who asked him to bow to his brother. Empress Maria Feodorovna also expressed her pleasure at his appointment. But Vladimir Fedorovich himself was uneasy in his soul, it seemed to him that he had changed his regiment, his new life was confusing with complete uncertainty.

On December 26, 1891, Dzhunkovsky arrived in Moscow. Straight from the station he went to venerate the Iveron Icon of the Mother of God on Red Square. Then he went to Neskuchnoye, the residence of the Grand Duke, who, according to Vladimir Fedorovich, “moved him to tears,” accepting him as his own. “He hugged me, kissed me, saying that he was very happy to see me at his place, sat me down and talked with me for half an hour, asking me with the most heartfelt sympathy about everything: how I parted with the regiment, how I left my loved ones, how my mother’s health and etc.,” recalled Dzhunkovsky. At about one o'clock in the afternoon there followed an invitation to the Grand Duchess, who also accepted him as her own.

“She was amazingly sweet and attractive,” Vladimir Fedorovich wrote in his memoirs, “it seemed to me that she had become even prettier. At breakfast she sat me down next to her.”

At that time, the nephews of Sergei Alexandrovich lived in Neskuchny - Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna and Grand Duke Dmitry Pavlovich. The Grand Duke treated them “like the most tender, loving father, and he and the Grand Duchess surrounded the children with the most touching care.”

Dzhunkovsky made a detailed plan of his new apartment for his elder sister Evdokia Feodorovna, for which she thanked him in a letter dated February 18, 1892, and added: “I’m sorry that I have not yet fulfilled your instructions regarding the photo of V. Kn. Ate. Fed. “I’ll do it today.”

In Ilyinsky. Interior of Evdokia Fedorovna's room.
Portrait of V.F. Dzhunkovsky, written by Grand Duchess Elizaveta Fedorovna. (GA RF. F. 826. Op. 1. D. 1009. L. 29.)

On January 5, coming to dinner at 8 o'clock in the evening, Dzhunkovsky was very embarrassed when he saw only three devices; it turned out that Stenbock, Gadon and Stepanov had gone to the English Club, and Princess Trubetskoy had gone to see her sister. “I wondered if I had made a tactlessness by not also leaving somewhere and, when Their Majesties went out to the dining room, I apologized that I didn’t know that everyone had left,” recalled Vladimir Fedorovich. - The Grand Duke, noticing my embarrassment, very affectionately said: “On the contrary, it is very good that you stayed, at least we are not alone.” But still, while the three of us were having lunch, I felt somehow awkward<…>" After lunch, the Grand Duke went to study in his office. Dzhunkovsky was left alone with the Grand Duchess. “I was extremely shy, it seemed to me that maybe she wanted to either read a book or write a letter, but because of me she was sitting and working,” he wrote in his memoirs. - Thanks to my embarrassment, I did not know where to start the conversation, and we were silent for some time. But then she started talking, began to remember England and told me a lot that was completely new and extremely interesting to me about life in England, about her grandmother Queen Victoria, etc. The two hours that I sat with the Grand Duchess passed doubly unnoticed. Then the Grand Duke came, they served tea and soon dispersed.”

Court social life and the routine duties of an adjutant never attracted Vladimir Fedorovich. “Such a monotonous, idle life did not satisfy me and was very burdensome to me, which did not escape the Grand Duchess and the sensitive Grand Duke, who was always looking for some kind of assignment for me so that I would not be so sad.<…>they often wondered why I was dissatisfied.<…>Then they got used to the idea that I would never become a real courtier, that I would always be looking into the forest, and they no longer fought against this, but on the contrary, they tried to make my life easier in this regard,” he recalled.

From the very beginning of his service, the Grand Duke gave Dzhunkovsky special assignments in which he could prove himself as an administrator and organizer, and when describing each such assignment, Vladimir Fedorovich noted how happy he was to escape from the court environment. The first task was directly related to helping others and the national disaster - the famine relief campaign of 1891-1892.

Already in February 1892, Dzhunkovsky was sent to the Saratov province as an authorized representative of the Committee of Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna for the distribution of aid among the famine-stricken.

Dzhunkovsky was supposed to visit the districts affected by the crop failure, check the needs locally, and distribute the aid sent from the Committee.

Evdokia Fedorovna wrote to him on February 23, 1892: “My friend, Vadyusha, we beg you, take care of your health, always think about your dear mother, who, of course, will mentally accompany you everywhere and worry about your health. “Of course, Vadyusha, each of us should be happy to help our neighbor and you, undoubtedly, can bring a lot of benefit, but it’s hard for us to let you leave the house without equipping you for the journey.” May the blessing of the Lord be upon you; pray to the Lord and we will pray for you every minute<…>Take a warm sweatshirt and warm clothes with you, it’s necessary. Take your mattress with you."

Dzhunkovsky successfully completed the assignment given to him. His elder brother Nikolai expressed his approval for this trip: “I think that you fulfilled the instructions given to you in the best possible way to distribute money, bread and hay.”<…>, because I know your attitude towards every task entrusted to you, and since your actions are animated by love for the work, then it will be good.”

December 14, 1892 marked exactly one year since Dzhunkovsky was appointed adjutant to the Grand Duke, and this was the day of his duty. "<…>when I entered the office to report on Prince Shcherbatov’s arrival,” he wrote in his memoirs, “the Grand Duke told me that he was congratulating himself on the anniversary of my appointment to him. These words confused me and moved me to tears, I was completely at a loss.”

The Grand Duke's trust was manifested in the fact that he entrusted Dzhunkovsky to look after his nephews Maria and Dmitry in Ilyinskoye when he himself was away. “Of course, I couldn’t even think of refusing,” he recalled, “knowing that children were the most precious thing in life for the Grand Duke, he always trembled over them.” In a letter dated July 22, 1893, Dzhunkovsky wrote: “I was very happy that I could personally congratulate her (Maria Pavlovna - A.D.) and hand over your doll and watering can. If you saw her delight at the sight of a doll with a lot of clothes, she immediately wanted to take everything off, change her clothes and kept saying very pretty<…>I’m extremely happy that I stayed with the children.”

E.F. Dzhunkovskaya and her pupil Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna. 1908 (GA RF. F. 826. Op. 1. D. 917. L. 19.)

Confidence was also given to Dzhunkovsky's sister Evdokia Fedorovna. In November 1895, she was invited to become the teacher of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna. And although Evdokia Feodorovna, who was also officially considered a maid of honor to Their Majesties the Empresses, was busy with her work in the Evgenievsky community of nurses of the Red Cross, she could not refuse. In a letter to her brother, she relayed a story to one of the court ladies: “Yesterday I was with the Empress and the Empress asked me what are the children of Pavel Alex.? - I answered that I had not been there yet and was afraid to go there, I heard a new person there in front of the children - a stranger. - To this the Emperor said: “Don’t be afraid, go and you will see what kind of gentleness this is, there won’t be a second one like her, she will positively be a mother - everyone loves her terribly.” Vadyusha, it just makes me scared – such reviews! Help me Lord!

In a letter to her brother dated August 20, 1896, Evdokia Feodorovna quoted from the Grand Duke’s letter sent to her from abroad: “Dear Evd. F., I have just received your dear letter. Alas! the last one from Ilyinsky, and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for everything that is so touchingly stated in it! I am infinitely glad that you fell in love with Baby (Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna - A.D.) and that she treats you so trustingly. – Your wife thanks you from the bottom of her heart for your letter.<…>Be kind enough to write to me sometimes - if only you knew how much you would please me with this. Heartfelt bow to your brother<…>» .

Brother and sister earned universal respect and love due to their conscientiousness, seriousness and deep religiosity.

General sympathy was especially clearly manifested during Vladimir Fedorovich’s unexpected illness - rheumatism of the knee joint, due to which in the spring of 1894 he was forced to spend more than one week sitting in a chair or lying down. On May 29, Dzhunkovsky received a “huge bouquet of lilies of the valley” from the Grand Duchess. May 31 – 3 bouquets of lilies of the valley and one of the cornflowers. The Grand Duke hung funny pictures in Ilyinsky in Dzhunkovsky’s room so that he would not be bored lying there. “What an attentive Grand Duchess that she sent lilies of the valley,” wrote Evdokia Fedorovna on June 2, 1894, and in the next letter she added: “And how the Grand Duke and Grand Duchess are attentive to you, but it cannot be otherwise.” “The Queen of Greece asked about you, about your health, and was sorry that you were sick,” her sister reported on July 27. - And in response to my answer that Their Highnesses were so merciful to my brother and surrounded him with attention, the queen said: “Everyone loves and appreciates your brother so much that this cannot be otherwise.” Here, my dear, they give you your due." Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich also shared his opinion about her brother with Evdokia Fedorovna: “I love (like everyone) your brother dearly, he is so sweet<…>here is Vel. Book I visited him every day, I regret that I could not spend whole days with him, he is so good. Bow to him."

In 1894, Vladimir Fedorovich’s mother Maria Karlovna became seriously ill. Dzhunkovsky went to see her in St. Petersburg and even invited Fr. John of Kronstadt to pray at her bedside, after which Maria Karlovna felt much better. The Grand Duke and Grand Duchess showed active participation in his personal misfortune. “The Grand Duchess met me so joyfully, she said that she was so happy that my mother was getting better, that she kept thinking about her, and if she weren’t afraid of being annoying, she would send dispatches every day,” Dzhunkovsky wrote in his memoirs. “The Grand Duke was also touching, asking the most detailed details about the state of my mother’s health.”

In his memoirs, Vladimir Fedorovich cited two letters from the Grand Duke to him, “serving as proof of his unusually sensitive soul.” On May 16, 1895, the Grand Duke wrote to him:

“Dear Vladimir Fedorovich,
Today I received both your letters and I sincerely thank you for them.<…>I want you to know that there is a person who with all his soul sympathizes with your grief and who is praying for you, so that the Lord will help and calm you. The wife sends her heartfelt regards.<…>God bless you. Yours Sergei."

Nina Vasilievna Evreinova

Vladimir Fedorovich could fully feel the cordial support of the grand ducal couple in 1897, when he was experiencing a serious emotional drama related to his personal life. Dzhunkovsky fell in love with Nina Vasilyevna Evreinova, who came from the famous merchant family of the Sabashnikovs. The famous pianist N.G. Rubinstein spoke of her like this: “This young lady has three dowries - talent, beauty and wealth, as long as they do not interfere with each other.” However, her marriage to Alexei Vladimirovich Evreinov, which produced four children, was not happy. The meeting with Dzhunkovsky took place in 1893. The friendship that initially arose between them grew into a strong feeling, and raised the question of choice, which caused a strong internal struggle.

At the beginning of 1897, the lovers decided to separate for a year in order to cool down and calmly make a decision, which we can judge from Evdokia Fedorovna’s letter dated January 18, 1897: “May the Lord give you the strength to endure the test - it seems to me that such a decision is the best - the year will show you everything - and the Lord will arrange everything for the better.” The topic of Nina Vasilievna’s official divorce and remarriage to Vladimir Fedorovich is constantly present in his sister’s letters in 1897. Evdokia Fedorovna believed that a divorce would not bring them happiness. “Others may not have had the reproaches of divorced people,” she wrote to her brother on January 10, 1897, “but you are both such believers. Will you be completely happy - I’m telling this only to you, my Vadya - I’m telling you alone what I think.”

On January 13, 1897, Evdokia Fedorovna informed her brother that Nina Vasilievna was praying for him, and added: “You write that Vel. Book As a brother, that means you told him;<…>Vadya, don’t lose heart. You haven’t done anything criminal, and the Lord will arrange everything for the better.”

In a letter dated February 19, 1897, she wrote to the Grand Duke: “Thank you for the information about my brother - I am very, very sad about his moral suffering.<…>It’s terribly difficult for both of them not to write to each other now, but it seems to me that it’s better this way. “It is a great consolation for me to know that Your Highness understood my brother and treats him cordially.” The letter dated April 28 is also filled with gratitude: “Your Highness, I cannot find words to express to you how deeply I feel everything you have done for my brother. I know what prompted you to appoint him on this business trip - I thank you and the Grand Duchess for your kind and cordial relationship with him. God grant that the work entrusted to him will force him to take it seriously - work and activity are the best means for his moral state.”

Indeed, the new business trip was completely unexpected for Dzhunkovsky - he was to lead the medical detachment of the Iveron community of nurses, equipped by the Grand Duchess from the Russian Red Cross Society. A detachment of 19 people was supposed to organize a hospital to help the Turkish wounded at the theater of the Greco-Turkish War. The new assignment was fully consistent with the Dzhunkovsky family motto “To God and neighbor.”

Evdokia Feodorovna wrote to her brother on April 24, 1897: “It’s your destiny to work in my dear Red Cross<…>, I bless you for your journey, for a good deed - in good time - happy journey! Write everything to your friend and sister." And the next day - the day of departure - the sister served a prayer service for the travelers in the Znamenskaya Church of Tsarskoe Selo and admonished her brother: “The Lord is sending you to such activity in which you can bring many, many benefits to your neighbor - and I am sure that you will fulfill your duty ".

The farewell to the Grand Duke and Grand Duchess was very cordial. "<…>I went to Their Highnesses, first to the Grand Duchess, and then to the Grand Duke, received a pattern from them, and the Grand Duke gave me 2 dozen wonderful silk shirts, which he made for himself while going to war in 1877 and which he only once I put on or two, completely new,” Dzhunkovsky recalled. -<…>I wore them even during the last world war and now, when I am writing these lines, I still have one of them, I keep it as a dear memory.” This farewell excited Vladimir Fedorovich very much; all the way to the station he could not utter a word. “The way they said goodbye to me, it was possible to say goodbye only to those closest to me,” he wrote in his memoirs.

In Turkey, Vladimir Fedorovich continued to receive letters from his sister. On May 23, 1897, Evdokia Feodorovna wrote to him: “I read and reread your lines<…>. Take care of yourself, I’m afraid that in caring for others, you completely forget yourself.” “You can’t imagine how V. Prince. Eliz. F. praised you in front of the Empress. It was so gratifying to listen to this, because... these were not empty words!” she continued further.

At the conclusion of his official report, Vladimir Fedorovich wrote that thanks to the united efforts of the entire detachment, he had to not only fulfill his direct task, but also bring awareness of the height of Christian help among the Muslim population.

The meeting with their Highnesses was joyful and touching. The Grand Duke, without waiting for him in Ilyinsky, went to meet Dzhunkovsky’s crew along the road. “He hugged me,” recalled Vladimir Fedorovich, “he was terribly sweet, said that he was so afraid for me, that he was so glad that I returned healthy.” On January 1, 1898, Vladimir Fedorovich once again specially thanked the Grand Duke in a letter. “The past year began so painfully for me,” he wrote, “and all of it was very difficult for me morally, and only thanks to Your Highnesses I could live it so relatively easily.<…>Your participation in me, in everything that I experienced last spring, will remain until the end of my life the most precious memories and proof of your infinitely cordial attitude towards me. May the Lord reward you and help me prove my devotion to you. My assignment to the theater of war with the Red Cross detachment saved me from melancholy and despair, made me perk up, and forget for a while my personal suffering.”

However, he was never able to resolve the problem that tormented him in the way he desired. Dzhunkovsky mentions in his memoirs that he received news in Turkey from Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, who met Nina Vasilievna in Paris, which was a great joy for him. We can only judge how events unfolded in Paris during the business trip and after it from Evdokia Fedorovna’s letters. The sister mentioned the conversation between Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna and Nina Vasilievna in a letter to her brother dated September 7, 1897 from the resort town of Saint-Jean de Luz in France, where Evreinova was also vacationing at that time: “... about the arrival of A.V. N.V. doesn’t know whether he’ll come here or to Paris. He writes to children. N.V., as I wrote to you, is much calmer, physically healthy, she talks about the future that she hopes to achieve freedom - but knowing about A.Vl.’s divorce, she believes that he will never give it to her. N.V. I was told that V. Kn. she told her that he would surely give if she demanded; but N.V. V. Kn. told me. she says this because she doesn’t have children, “I will never part with my children.” Now she is happy with the general structure at home, the children are healthy, cheerful, cheerful and everything is going well with their activities.”

Nina Vasilievna’s divorce from her husband never took place. In 1903, Alexey Vladimirovich died, but for some reason Nina Vasilievna no longer wanted to get married. However, the friendly relationship between Vladimir Fedorovich and Nina Vasilievna continued until her emigration to France in 1922. After her departure, they maintained correspondence. Moreover, Vladimir Fedorovich always took touching care of Nina Vasilievna and helped her children. Evreinova’s granddaughter Nina Rausch de Traubenberg recalled that he was a kind of guardian angel for her grandmother, which was happiness for her and for the whole family.

Since 1901, Vladimir Fedorovich was involved in the new activity of the Moscow Metropolitan Trusteeship for People's Sobriety.

Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich entrusted the position of Comrade Chairman to Dzhunkovsky, telling him: “I know how much you always crave work<…>all the work will be on you<…>this appointment is quite compatible with your position as adjutant under me and I will not lose you in this way.” People's houses, teahouses, Sunday schools and hospitals run by Dzhunkovsky provided the people with healthy and cheap food, educated the residents of Moscow, and provided assistance to the sick. The administrative and economic experience accumulated in this post (Dzhunkovsky oversaw the work of 13 people's houses) allowed him to confidently assume the post of governor.

Changes in his career followed the tragic death of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich. In his memoirs, Dzhunkovsky cited the Grand Duke’s last letter dated January 1, 1905, a month before his death: “Dear Vladimir Fedorovich, you deeply touched my wife and me, blessing us with the icon of the Guardian Angel, which, of course, will always be with us. Good relationships are always especially felt in difficult moments: such is the current one. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. Hugs. Yours Sergey. January 1, 1905."

Dzhunkovsky, as usual, was working in the office of the Guardianship when he was informed about the murder of the Grand Duke. Taking the first available cab, he rushed to the Kremlin. “It is difficult to describe the sad picture that presented itself to my eyes,” he wrote in his memoirs, “complete silence around, few people, soldiers and officers are carrying something covered with a soldier’s overcoat, to which the Grand Duchess with a calm face is holding. There are retinues and several strangers around the person. I ran up, took the Grand Duchess’s hand, kissed it and, holding onto the stretcher, walked after them.”

The Grand Duchess received many letters, which she entrusted to Dzhunkovsky to read. “All the mail came to me,” he recalled, “I put aside letters from relatives and friends, which I handed over immediately, and opened other letters and reported their contents; Then, on behalf of the Grand Duchess, I answered them, which is why not a single letter was left unanswered. But, unfortunately, there were also letters that I directly burned without reporting them; these letters, almost all anonymous, were full of curses addressed to the late Grand Duke, and some contained threats regarding the Grand Duchess. I did not leave the palace the entire time before the funeral, and throughout the day they brought me various items from the clothes of the Grand Duke, as well as particles of his body and bones.<…>I put all this together, the things were handed over to the Grand Duchess, and the particles of the remains were placed in a metal box and placed in a coffin.”

September 30, 2015 at the House of Russian Abroad. A. Solzhenitsyn held an evening in memory of Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky (1865-1938), lieutenant general, Moscow governor, comrade minister of internal affairs and commander of the Separate Corps of Gendarmes.

Rich in historical dates, 2015 is the year of the 150th anniversary of the birth of Lieutenant General, Moscow Governor (1905-1912), Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs (1913-1915), commander of one of the corps of the Russian army in the battles of the First World War Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky. Despite such a representative track record, most of us, unfortunately, are not familiar with the name of its owner. Why? The answer is not clear... However, thanks to the organizers of the evening, we have a unique opportunity to fill this significant gap, and, first of all, thanks to the author of the serious scientific work “Police reforms in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century and Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky” (M.: United Editorial Office of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 2012), based on extensive archival material and for the first time recreating the biography of V.F. Dzhunkovsky, to Candidate of Historical Sciences Anastasia Dunaeva.

The evening of remembrance began with the performance of the finale of the Solemn Overture “1812” by P.I. Tchaikovsky.

Opening the evening in memory of V.F. Dzhunkovsky, the director of the House of Russian Abroad, Viktor Aleksandrovich Moskvin, spoke about “historical unconsciousness,” alas, characteristic of our society. Gradually, Viktor Aleksandrovich expressed hope, thanks to such events, “something will change,” and we will finally begin to learn the “hard lessons of the past.” Dzhunkovsky, continued V.A. Moskvin, played a huge role in the history of Russia, in the history of Moscow, was a like-minded person of P.A. Stolypin, and if it were not for the murder of the organizer of large-scale state reform and the elimination of such associates as Vladimir Fedorovich, Russia would have developed in a completely different way... “History must warn and warn against repeating the terrible events of the early twentieth century,” V.A. Moskvin concluded his speech and thanked Anastasia Dunaeva for her contribution to the preservation of our common historical heritage.

A hundred years ago, according to A. Dunaeva, there was not a single person in Moscow and the Moscow province who did not know who Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky was!.. Heading the province in such a difficult time for the country and the capital, Dzhunkovsky managed to gain sincere respect and love of all social strata of society. The year 1912 - the year of the 100th anniversary of the Patriotic War of 1812 - became for the governor the most important year in his career and life in general, since it was he who was entrusted with organizing the celebrations that took place in Moscow and on the Borodino field in the Mozhaisk district of the Moscow province.

On the screen there are unique newsreels: the imperial train arrives at the Borodino station, Dzhunkovsky gives a report to Nicholas II, in the background are the empress, the grand duchesses and the heir. Vladimir Fedorovich, explains A. Dunaeva, personally accompanied the tsar to the sites of the legendary battle, having previously studied all the details of the disposition of the armies and the conduct of the battle. “Could the respected Governor-General have imagined then,” the host of the evening asked a rhetorical question, “that in a few years there would be neither the country that he served so faithfully, nor the emperor, and he himself would be shot at the Butovo training ground among the twenty thousand innocent people killed by him?” fellow countrymen - residents of Moscow and the Moscow province!

On the screen are footage of a film about the Butovo training ground - “Russian Golgotha”, where tens of thousands of Russian people were shot. Employees of the memorial complex cite terrifying statistics: in just a few months of the training ground’s existence, more than 200 officers of the tsarist army were shot!.. Researchers of the so-called execution lists were the first to discover the name of Dzhunkovsky in them - a seventy-year-old pensioner, who, on principle, did not leave his homeland in a time of severe trials, was killed on unproven charges of counter-revolutionary activities and was buried in a common grave in 1938...

An employee of the Butovo memorial center, Ksenia Fedorovna Lyubimova, who at one time compiled lists of executed priests and handed them over to Patriarch Alexy II, talks about the work with the cases of those executed in Butovo.

The highest post in Dzhunkovsky’s career, A. Dunaeva continued after watching fragments of the film, was the position of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs, which he received thanks to the brilliant conduct of the Borodino celebrations and his public authority. As Moscow governor, Vladimir Fedorovich “revived the people’s trust in the authorities,” helped those in need with concrete deeds, and was guided in his work by the principles of Christian charity. Without deviating from the letter of the law, without using his official position for his own benefit, Dzhunkovsky acquired colossal authority. The reforms of P.A. Stolypin, especially the agrarian reform carried out under the leadership of V.F. Dzhunkovsky, contributed to economic growth. Nicholas II praised the governorship of Vladimir Fedorovich as “brilliant and exemplary.” Dzhunkovsky’s farewell from the post of Governor-General, the author of the monograph adds, became a sincere, touching act of farewell to the population of their leader: Vladimir Fedorovich was presented with a large number of memorable addresses, gifts, and many warm words were said...

The post of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs, continued A. Dunaeva, “was not entirely to Dzhunkovsky’s liking” - he had to head both the general police and the political one. The murder of Stolypin “was not an accident” - it was the result of the negligent attitude of the Kyiv secret police officials to their duties, a direct violation of official instructions. V.F. Dzhunkovsky had to introduce the idea of law-abiding into the political investigation.

He called for remembering the honor of the gendarme uniform as a military uniform and even remembered the covenant given by Nicholas I to the chief of gendarmes A.H. Benckendorff “wipe away the tears of the unfortunate.” The idea of military honor was to become fundamental in the activities of both gendarmerie and especially security structures. In addition, V.F. Dzhunkovsky set himself the task of improving the legal culture of the search officials.

The new commander of the Gendarme Corps begins to “restore order”: he controls financial expenses, fights preventive arrests and unreasonable searches, prohibits the recruitment of high school students, soldiers and sailors (he believes that in the army a soldier should not report a soldier, and a sailor should not report a sailor). A. Dunaeva examined in detail the consequences of the abolition of internal agents in the army and navy and refuted the opinion that this innovation by V.F. Dzhunkovsky was fatal for the state security of the Russian Empire.

With his activities, the new comrade minister caused a lot of discontent among the heads of security departments, but since he enjoyed the patronage of Nicholas II, he “was inaccessible to intrigue.” When Dzhunkovsky was forced to report on Rasputin’s scandal in the Yar restaurant, the empress expressed dissatisfaction with his investigative activities, and soon Vladimir Fedorovich was removed from his post...

Remaining a faithful son of his fatherland, Dzhunkovsky headed into the active army. And there, Anastasia Dunaeva emphasized, this amazing man earned the well-deserved respect and love of his lower ranks, thereby proving that the combat effectiveness of a military unit directly depends on the attitude of the commander towards the soldiers, and not at all on the presence of internal agents from the lower ranks. Until the last, the presenter adds, Dzhunkovsky maintained the combat effectiveness of the corps entrusted to him, and at the beginning of 1918 he retired with the rank of lieutenant general.

V.F. Dzhunkovsky survived the revolutionary tribunal in Moscow in 1919, during which residents of the Moscow province came to defend their former governor, thanks to which his life was saved.

After imprisonment in the Taganskaya prison from November 1921, V.F. Dzhunkovsky lived in Moscow with his sister Evdokia Fedorovna. Several years before his last arrest, the author of the monograph continued, Vladimir Fedorovich managed to finish his “colossal work” - multi-volume memoirs. The Dzhunkovsky archive, explains A. Dunaeva, consists of more than a thousand storage units, 200 of which are photographic materials, including unique photographs depicting the preparation and holding of the Borodino celebrations of 1912.

What resulted in the formation of such a personality, who put the interests of the state above his own, who demonstrated the principles of Christian attitude towards people in positions that seemed incompatible with Christian morality? The answer to this question was A. Dunaeva’s story about the V.F. Dzhunkovsky family, about grandfather Stepan Semenovich - an outstanding scientist and economist, about the Dzhunkovsky family motto “To God and neighbor,” about friendship with Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich and Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna. Until his last days, the author of the study adds, Vladimir Fedorovich retained in his heart the bright image of this amazing married couple, the image of the beautiful Elizaveta Feodorovna, who played a huge role in his fate, in his Christian consciousness...

Many more interesting facts from the biography of V.F. Dzhunkovsky were heard at the evening in his memory.

The speech of L.A. Golovkova, a researcher at the Department of Contemporary Church History of the Orthodox St. Tikhon's Humanitarian University, compiler of the multi-volume book of memory “Butovo Test Site”, was dedicated to the materials of the investigative cases of V.F. Dzhunkovsky in 1921 and 1937. Lidiya Alekseevna especially emphasized that even in Soviet Russia, V.F. Dzhunkovsky remained a Christian who carried his cross with dignity to the end.

The memorial evening was attended by the head of the sector for the restoration of the rights of rehabilitated victims of political repression of the Moscow Public Relations Committee, M.N. Suslova, who supported the proposal of the organizing committee of the evening to name one of the streets of Moscow after V.F. Dzhunkovsky.

In the hall were members of the Society of Descendants of Participants in the Patriotic War of 1812, as well as descendants of V.F. Dzhunkovsky’s relatives O.V. Savchenko, T.A. Kulikova, M.M. Dzhunkovsky-Gorbatov.

The author and the audience were greeted by the performer of romances Yuri Fedorishchev and Marina Drozdova, who accompanied him, and the famous poetess and public figure Nina Vasilievna Kartasheva. At the end of the evening, “Vocalise” was performed by the Honored Artist of the Russian Federation, composer Yuri Dunaev, performed by the author - a performance dedicated to the memory of V.F. Dzhunkovsky.

Irina Tishina

Photo by Kotina Yu

Chapter 1. Stages of formation of a new type of statesman

1.1. Family traditions and family upbringing

1.2. Corps of Pages

1.3. Adjutant to the Moscow Governor General

1.4. Moscow Metropolitan Trusteeship of People's Sobriety

Chapter 2. Activities of V.F. Dzhunkovsky as Moscow governor

2.1. V.F. Dzhunkovsky and the Stolypin modernization program

2.2. Relations with members of the public

2.3. The motto “To God and neighbor” in gubernatorial practice 133 V.F. Dzhunkovsky

Chapter 3. The role of V.F. Dzhunkovsky in reforming bodies 145 of political investigation

3.1. Transformations in political investigation in the context of 146 police reform in Russia

3.2. Changes in the composition of internal and external agents

3.3. Reforming the structures of political investigation bodies

3.4. Relationships with security officials

3.5. V.F. Dzhunkovsky and R.V. Malinovsky

3.6. The case of Lieutenant Colonel S.N. Myasoedova

3.7. V.F. Dzhunkovsky and G.E. Rasputin

Chapter 4. Behavioral strategies of V.F. Dzhunkovsky in the years

World War I and Bolshevik dictatorship

4.1. On the Western Front in the situation of the revolutions of 1917

4.2. In Soviet Russia 356 Conclusion 369 List of sources and literature 376 Appendix Photos by V.F. Dzhunkovsky (1-4)

Recommended list of dissertations

Separate Corps of Gendarmes and the Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs: political investigation bodies on the eve and during the First World War, 1913-1917. 2012, candidate of historical sciences Khutarev-Garnishevsky, Vladimir Vladimirovich
Central (Moscow) district security department in the system of political police of the Russian Empire: 1907-1914. 2012, candidate of historical sciences Opilkin, Alexey Sergeevich
Organizational and legal foundations of the operational investigative activities of the political investigation agencies of the Russian Empire and its features in the Kuban. 1880-1917 2010, candidate of legal sciences Krutova, Yana Aleksandrovna
Local bodies of political investigation of the Russian Empire at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries: historical and legal research 2009, candidate of legal sciences Pluzhnikov, Sergey Yurievich
Operational investigative activities in Russia: organization, methods, legal regulation: historical and legal research 2010, Doctor of Law, Zharov, Sergey Nikolaevich

Introduction of the dissertation (part of the abstract) on the topic “V.F. Dzhunkovsky: political views and government activities: the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century."

The relevance of the dissertation is determined by the sustained scientific interest in the problems of the formation and functioning of the bureaucracy, which, in the conditions of post-reform Russia, sought to correspond to the trends of the modernization process. Among these representatives of the bureaucratic elite was Vladimir Fedorovich Dzhunkovsky (1865 - 1938), whose personality and activities deserve close research attention. The relevance of the topic is determined by the fact that V.F. Dzhunkovsky belonged to the Stolypin-type administrators who realized the need to implement comprehensive transformations of the country. This stable trend was reflected both in his administrative activities as Moscow governor (1905 - 1912) and as a fellow minister of internal affairs (1913 - 1915), when he personally took responsibility for reforming one of the key government structures.

The degree of knowledge of the problem. Dzhunkovsky is known to researchers primarily as the author of multi-volume memoirs, which, like the memoirs of other famous statesmen (S.Yu. Witte, V.N. Kokovtsev, V.I. Gurko), are the basic source on the history of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. and are used in famous works of domestic and foreign historians1.

1 Dyakin B.S. The Russian bourgeoisie and tsarism during the First World War (1914 - 1917). L, 1967; The crisis of autocracy in Russia, 1895-1917. L., 1984; Avrekh A.Ya. Tsarism on the eve of its overthrow. M., 1989; Wortman R.S. Scenarios of power. Myths and ceremonies of the Russian monarchy. T. 1-2., M., 2004; Robbins R. Famine in Russia 1891-1892, New York, 1975; Robbins R. The Tsar's Viceroys: Russian Provincial Governors in the Last Years of the Empire. Ithaca (N.Y.). 1987.

2 Avrekh A.Ya. Tsarism and the IV Duma. M., 1981. P. 263. opinion, represented a mixture of protective and guardianship ideas, government

J anti-bourgeois liberalism and “police socialism”.

Research interest in Dzhunkovsky as an independent personality arose relatively recently, in the 90s. XX century Thus, A. Semkin was one of the first to emphasize the high moral qualities of Dzhunkovsky4. A series of essays about his life and work belongs to I.S. Rosenthal5, who positively assessed the transformations of Dzhunkovsky, who “did not like provocateurs”6, covered in detail his activities to reform the search authorities on a “completely new basis”, in strict accordance with the law7 and posed an important question for researchers: “Did Dzhunkovsky’s innovations remain in force after about his resignation? . Specialists involved in the rehabilitation of victims of Stalin’s terror also showed interest in Dzhunkovsky’s biography, since he was shot at the Butovsky training ground near Moscow in 1938 on charges of counter-revolutionary activities, and in 1989 he was officially rehabilitated9.

In general monographs and dissertations on the history of the political police of Russia, published in the 90s. XX century and at the beginning of the new century10, we find coverage of individual transformations of Dzhunkovsky on the wanted list. Critical assessments of these transformations are also beginning to appear, which began in the memoirs of the heads of security departments, who accused Dzhunkovsky of weakening the search authorities due to the desire to please the public.

3 Crisis of autocracy in Russia, 1895-1917. L., 1984. P. 413.

4 Semkin A. Such an atypical gendarme // Soviet police. 1991. No. 10. P. 28.

5 Rosenthal I.S. Ill-fated portrait // Soviet Museum. 1992. No. 4. pp. 39-41.

6 Rosenthal I.S. Did he not like provocateurs?//Motherland. No. 2. 1994. pp. 38 -41.

7 Rosenthal I.S. Pages of the life of General Dzhunkovsky // Centaur. 1994. No. 1. P. 94.

8 Ibid. P.99.

9 Butovo training ground. 1937-1938 Book of memory of victims of political repression. Vol. 3. M., 1999.P. 82., Golovkova L.A. Lyubimova K.F. Executed generals. URJL: http://www.martyr.rU/content/view/8/18/

10 Ruud C.A., Stepanov S.A. Fontanka, 16: Political investigation under the Tsars. M., 1993; Peregudova Z.I. Political investigation of Russia (1880 - 1917). M., 2000; Lauchlan I. Russian Hide-and-Seek. Helsinki, 2002.

One should especially highlight the monograph of the American researcher J. Daly, in which a separate chapter is devoted to Dzhunkovsky, “The Moralist at the Head of the Police Apparatus”13. Daly believes that for the political police of the last years of the old regime, nothing was more important than the reform program launched by Dzhunkovsky in 1913. “A man with a deep sense of honor, or at least obsessed with the desire to appear as such, Dzhunkovsky directed his energies and attention to cleanse police institutions,” the author writes. - He wanted to protect and maintain public order, but hated the methods by which this was usually done. Perhaps the fact that Dzhunkovsky’s actions caused little resistance from the official authorities, the court and right-wing circles

11 Peregudova Z.I. Political investigation of Russia (1880 - 1917): Author's abstract. dis. Dr. History Sci. M., 2000. P. 67.

12 Peregudova Z.I. "Security" through the eyes of the guards // "Security". Memoirs of the leaders of political investigation in 2 vols. M., 2004. T.1. P. 11.

13 Daly J.W. A Moralist Running the Police Apparatus // The Watchful State: Security Police and Opposition in Russia, 1906 -1917. DeKalb (111.). 2004. P. 136 - 158. testified to the attitude of the elite towards the political police, especially in the wake of the “Azefov-Bogrovshchina”. The police apparatus won the war against revolutionaries and terrorists, but lost the battle with society. Probably, a decent Dzhunkovsky could win the trust of society.”14

Negatively assessing Dzhunkovsky's reforms as weakening the search and emphasizing that they were carried out solely on his own initiative, Daly makes a general conclusion that Dzhunkovsky certainly had the best intentions. The overall police budget decreased, he further writes, the network of semi-autonomous security departments created by Zubatov disappeared, most of the district security departments created by Trusevich were liquidated, officers of the provincial departments dressed in gendarmerie uniforms carried an increased workload, secret agents no longer penetrated gymnasiums and military units, key figures of the “security”, who, according to Dzhunkovsky, were not trustworthy, were dismissed from service. “And yet, it seems that Dzhunkovsky was unable to inspire respect for the gendarmerie uniform, win public confidence for his ministry, improve relations between the political police and the civil administration and eradicate unsavory practices in the secret hiding place of the Police Department, although this hiding place was now called “9 -th Office Work”, and not “Special Department,” Daly continues his thought and sums it up. “The most important question for this study, however, is whether or not Dzhunkovsky’s reforms undermined the government’s ability to defend itself against revolutionaries during the First World War?”15.

14 Ibid. R. 136.

15 Ibid. R. 158. revolutionary activists, but due to incompetence at the highest levels of government and the delegitimization of the monarchy, as well as due to the mutiny of the troops, the discontent of the elite, the fatigue of the population from the war, which was reinforced by constant revolutionary propaganda. There were two other flaws in the system. First, the political police lacked a think tank that would authorize the adoption of special measures. The special department collected a lot of information, analyzed it competently and realistically, and yet could only report on the mood of the people and the general situation, setting out dry facts. To change this situation in a state of crisis, the director of the Special Department had to have access to the emperor’s ears and his trust, but he did not have them. Secondly, when it really mattered, during the First World War, the police did not have informants in the army. This was a huge omission. Nicholas II was deeply confident in the loyalty of the troops and believed that they would be beyond the reach of propagandists. He and Dzhunkovsky both cherished outdated fantasies about the honor and dignity of the armed forces, whose leaders also insisted on their immunity to revolutionary contagion.”16

He also critically evaluates Dzhunkovsky’s reform actions

1 *7 and domestic researcher K.S. Romanov. The most negative impact on all subsequent activities of the political investigation, in his opinion, was the abolition of district security departments by Dzhunkovsky. The author believes that no one tried to recreate them again after Dzhunkovsky left. Romanov claims that the leaders of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Police Department understood perfectly well that “many of the transformations carried out on the eve of the war, in the new conditions, began to have a negative impact on the activities of the political police,” but they failed to eliminate them. “Thus, the reforms of V.F. Dzhunkovsky due to the sudden change

16 Ibid. R. 224.

17 Romanov K.S. Transformations by V.F. Dzhunkovsky // Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia on the eve and during the First World War (1913-1917): dis. Ph.D. ist. Sci. St. Petersburg, 2002. pp. 130 - 150. foreign and domestic political situation not only complicated the work of political investigation agencies, but also significantly weakened it”18.

18 Ibid. P. 148.

19Ibid. P. 150.

20 Ibid. P. 149. He exists for them only as a comrade of the Minister of the Interior, and his transformations are not associated with his previous experience.

In his monograph “Moscow at the crossroads. Power and society in 1905-1914.” I.S. Rosenthal concluded: “It would be wrong to say that after the shocks of the first revolution there was no desire in the bureaucratic environment to comprehend their causes and consequences. Apparently, it was impossible to continue a career without fitting into the partially reformed political system.”22 To those who considered changes in the government system irreversible,

1Ch belonged, in his opinion, to Dzhunkovsky.

We find a similar assessment in the work of the American scientist R. Robbins24, who expresses a constructive, in our opinion, idea about a new generation of Russian administrators - the “Stolypin generation”, born during the Great Reforms and reaching

21 Rosenthal I.S. Governor during the state service//Public service. 1999. No. 1. P. 41.

22 Rosenthal I.S. Moscow is at a crossroads. Power and society in 1905 - 1914. M., 2004. P. 45.

23 Ibid. P. 62.

24 Robbins R. Vladimir Dzhunkovskii: Witness for the Defense // Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, 2 (Summer, 2001). P. 635-54. greatest successes before the First World War, whose career was interrupted by the Revolution of 1917." They, Robbins believes, demonstrated respect for the law and legality, were experienced professionals, felt the importance of the ever-growing connection between government and public organizations. Dzhunkovsky, in his opinion, is

26 example of such an administrator.

Enemies in 1973." In the comments of American scientists T. Emmons and S.V. Utekhin to the diary of Yu.V. Gauthier, it is first indicated that Dzhunkovsky "according to some information, later (i.e. after June 15, 1921 - A .D.) collaborated with the GPU (in particular, he was a consultant on carrying out provocative

9R of Operation "Trust")".

The opinion about Dzhunkovsky's liberal bias in the works of some historians has grown into the assertion that he, being a Freemason, consciously worked to destroy Russian statehood. O.A. Platonov and A.N. Bokhanov reinterpreted Dzhunkovsky’s activities in monitoring Grigory Rasputin, believing that he was deliberately engaged in discrediting Rasputin, carrying out the Masonic program

1Q of a conspiracy against the empire." Dzhunkovsky's work in Soviet special agencies, in their opinion, once again confirms his treacherous nature.

25 V.A. was the first to write about the “new formation of bureaucrats” who appeared after the 1905 revolution and realized the need to work together with the Duma. Maklakov in his memoirs “Authority and public at the decline of old Russia.” Paris, 1936. P. 601.

26 Robbins R. Op.Cit. P. 636, 647-643.

28 See Gauthier Yu.V. My Notes // Questions of history. 1993. No. 3. P. 172. See also P. 358.

29 The version that Dzhunkovsky’s speech against Rasputin was connected with the offensive of parliamentarians and opposition leaders is given in his monograph by S.V. Kulikov. See Kulikov S.V.

A.N. is extremely categorical in this sense. Bokhanov. “A considerable number of the highest military officials of the empire in the last period of its existence shared a skeptical attitude towards power. Among them were liberals and even republicans who renounced the oath of allegiance to the Tsar and betrayed their oath long before the last monarch resigned his powers. And then they didn’t prove themselves to be the best. They served in command positions in the Red Army, and some even more: they began to work in the bodies of the workers’ and peasants’ government,” he writes and clarifies. - Among the latter was the former tsarist general V.F. Dzhunkovsky, who worked closely with the Cheka-GPU-NKVD for several years. Although this chapter of the general’s life is not replete with details, the fact itself is beyond doubt. Kneeling before the “people's power,” however, did not allow the former brilliant officer of the Preobrazhensky Regiment to die in peace and quiet. In 1938, by decision of the NKVD, he was shot.” Bokhanov, like other historians, does not provide any documents confirming that Dzhunkovsky was indeed a “Soviet employee,” as if considering this an already proven fact.

In the article “Was Vladimir Dzhunkovsky the father of the Trust?: in search

31 credibility” R. Robbins gives a number of arguments that make Dzhunkovsky’s participation in this operation possible, although in the end he says that this has not been proven.

The bureaucratic elite of the Russian Empire on the eve of the fall of the old order (1914 - 1917). Ryazan, 2004. pp. 50-51.

30 Bokhanov A.N. Rasputin. Anatomy of a myth. M., 2000. P. 231.

31 Robbins R. Was Vladimir Dzhunkcvskii the Father of the "Trust"? : A Quest for the Plausible//Journal of Modern Russian History and Historiography. 1 (2008). P.l 13 - 143. R. Robins' arguments are given on page 359.

At the moment, the transition to the next historiographical stage is natural - a systematic study of him as a statesman. This stage is embodied in this dissertation, as well as in the biography of Dzhunkovsky, which is currently being written by the American researcher R. Robbins.

The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the holistic image of V.F. Dzhunkovsky and the study of his political views and government activities as a representative of the bureaucratic elite, directly related to the modernization of the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century.

To achieve this goal, it seems necessary to solve the following research problems:

To trace the process of formation of Dzhunkovsky as a statesman, taking into account the traditions of his family, the education he received and his early administrative experience;

To study the state practice of Dzhunkovsky as Moscow governor in the context of Stolypin’s reforms, to draw conclusions about his political views that had formed by this time, and to trace their possible evolution in 1917.

Analyze the motives for which Dzhunkovsky began reforms in the political police, consider the entire complex of reforms as a single plan of the reformer, and also find out the actions of the heads of the search after his resignation;

Explore myths about Dzhunkovsky related to well-known historical stories (G. Rasputin, R. Malinovsky, “The Myasoedov Case”, Operation “Trust”), based on an analysis of available archival documents.

The object of the study was the political biography and government activities of Dzhunkovsky, captured in personal sources (memoirs, letters, notebooks, photographs) and in various official documents and materials (circulars, orders, reports, instructions, certificates, reports, interrogation protocols, formal lists , official correspondence, surveillance diaries, press materials), as well as the actions of political police officials after Dzhunkovsky’s resignation from the post of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs.

The subject of research in the dissertation is the value system, political views of Dzhunkovsky and the principles of his government activities, implemented by him during public service.

To solve the problems posed in the dissertation, the author used an extensive source base, consisting of unpublished and published documents. Unpublished documents for the study were identified in the collections of six archives - GA RF, RGVIA, OR RSL, RGIA, CIAM, OR GCTM named after. Bakhrushin. The basis for the dissertation was the materials of the State Archives of the Russian Federation (GA RF). Materials from Dzhunkovsky’s personal fund in the RF Civil Code (F. 826. On. 1, 1084 items) contain information about all periods of his life, except for the Soviet period, as well as information about his ancestors. The memoirs of Dzhunkovsky deserve the greatest attention (F. 826. Op. 1. D. 37-59), which are separate volumes in folio of handwritten and typewritten text. Handwritten volumes contain documentary inserts into the text - newspaper clippings, menus, theater programs, letters, telegrams, official documents, which Dzhunkovsky later retyped on a typewriter, so that the typewritten text looks uniform. The memoirs cover the period from 1865 - the time Dzhunkovsky was born - to the end of 1917, when he officially retired. Since Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs are one of the basic sources for this study and, in addition, have independent significance as a source on the history of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, it is necessary to dwell on the history of their creation. The history of the memoirs is, in fact, the history of the Dzhunkovsky Foundation at the Russian Civil Aviation.

We can't say exactly when he started working on the memoirs. So, according to Rosenthal, Dzhunkovsky began to write

32 his memoirs while still in prison. However, according to V.D. Bonch-Bruevich, who bought Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs at the beginning of 1934 for the Central Literary Museum, “the idea of writing memoirs was given to him by representatives of the Cheka when he was sitting in Taganskaya prison after the revolution and it was told to him so well that, upon leaving prison, he At first he began to remember everything, then he was drawn to paper and he began to write notes”33.

Already on February 1, 1934, assistant to the head of the Secret Political Department of the OGPU M.S. Gorb requested M. Kuzmin’s archive and diary, as well as Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs, “for study.” On April 28, 1934, a special commission of the Cultural and Propaganda Department of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks checked the work of the State Literary Museum. Particular attention was paid to the museum’s expenditure of funds on the acquisition of manuscripts34.

The commission reported the following to the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks about Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs: “Acquired materials of the former General Dzhunkovsky for 40,000 rubles. have nothing to do with literature and are of no value to the museum, because consist solely of a description of the general’s life.” Bonch-Bruevich was forced to defend his employees in a letter to the People's Commissar of Education A.S. Bubnov on May 20, 1934: “You yourself looked through these memoirs and know their value. It is unlikely that there will be more than 5 printed pages on the “personality” of the “general” himself in all these eight volumes. The great significance of Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs lies in the fact that he doesn’t turn on anyone, writes in his old manner, and

32 Rosenthal I.S. Pages of the life of General Dzhunkovsky // Centaur. 1994. No. 1. P. 101.

33 OR RSL. F. 369. K. 187. D. 17. L. 40.

34 Bogomolov N.A. Shumikhin S.V. Preface to the diaries of M. Kuzmin // Kuzmin M. Diary. 1905 - 1907 St. Petersburg, 2000. P. 13. Therefore, I most sincerely affirm and will always be able to prove that these

35 memoirs will be an era in the memoir literature of our Russia."

At first, Dzhunkovsky was going to publish his memoirs in the publishing house of his friends M. and S. Sabashnikov in the memoir series “Records of the Past,” published since 1925. We can guess how the work on the memoirs proceeded from the notes that the author himself left in the text . Thus, in a handwritten volume of memoirs for 1912, Dzhunkovsky notes in parentheses that he visited Metropolitan Macarius for the last time “in the past, i.e. in 1922”36. I really always walk everywhere with my stick, I still walk with it now, when I write these lines 7 years later,”37 Dzhunkovsky wrote in his memoirs for 1917. It is not difficult to calculate that these lines were written in 1924.

In the first volume of memoirs, describing his youth in the Corps of Pages and teachers, Dzhunkovsky says that history was taught to them by Menzhinsky, whose son “at the present time, when I am writing these lines,

38 is at the head of the GPU." That is, it is obvious that this was written in 1926.

The memoirs for 1892 were definitely written in 1926 (“Elizaveta Alekseevna Skvortsova has been the midwife from the very foundation of the orphanage to this day (1926)”39).

Finally, in the memoirs for 1904 we find the following paragraph: “At the present time, when I am writing these lines, the icebreaker invented by him (S.O. Makarov - A.D.) is used by the Soviet government and, until recently, one of these icebreakers, renamed “Krasin”, accomplished a feat in the ice, saving several people from the Nobile expedition”40. That is, we can assume that this part was written in 1928 - 1929.

35 Ibid. See Shumikhin S.V. Letters to People's Commissars//Knowledge is power. 1989. No. 6. P. 72.

36 GA RF. F. 826. On. 1. D. 50. L. 335 rev. - 336.

37 GA RF. F. 826. On. 1. D. 59. L. 158-158ob.

38 Ibid. D. 38. L. 26.

39 Ibid. D. 40. L. 71-rev.

40 Ibid. D. 45. L. 414.

In the printed version of the first volume, next to the words “a move to a new apartment took place - also a government apartment in the JI barracks. Guards Horse regiment against the Church of the Annunciation" Dzhunkovsky wrote by hand: "Now this church does not exist, it was destroyed in 1929"41.

Right there. D. 38. L. 8. OR RSL. F. 369. K. 265. D. 12. L. 1.

On the pages of the memoirs we meet many famous personalities - D.A. Milyutina, F.N. Plevako, V.O. Klyuchevsky, Fr. John of Kronstadt and others. The artists of the Maly Theater, with whom he was very friendly, received special attention from Vladimir Fedorovich. Dzhunkovsky usually attended celebrations of famous people and their funerals. But completely unknown residents of the province are also present on the pages of his memoirs - for example, the peasant Galdilkin, who died rushing after the robbers who carried out an armed attack on the house of the merchant Lomtev. Such documentary nature of Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs is not accidental. After all, he had the opportunity to use his archive when writing them, which was deposited in the Pushkin House, which he collected almost from childhood and which later became his personal fund. 4

When the “Academic Case” began in 1929, it was the storage of Dzhunkovsky’s archive in the Pushkin House that served as one of the reasons for accusing S.F. Platonov and his colleagues in anti-Soviet activities. Particularly emphasized was the fact that the former comrade of the Minister of the Interior could freely use his archive. In this regard, 2 searches were carried out at Dzhunkovsky’s place and he was summoned to the OGPU to testify about how his archive got into the Pushkin House. On November 9, 1929, Dzhunkovsky wrote a memo addressed to A.S. Enukidze, in which he outlined in detail the history of his archive. “From the very young years of my life, even from the Corps of Pages, in which I was brought up,” he wrote, “I collected memories of various events, newspapers, letters, and folded them very carefully, continuing this way until my retirement in 1918. Thus, I have accumulated piles of folders from various events. In 1913, at the very beginning, I left Moscow, where I served as governor for 8 years. Moscow saw me off absolutely exceptionally. I received a lot of addresses, bread and salt, gifts, albums, groups, images, I was given scholarships, etc., from literally all segments of the population and from all institutions, among which more than half were not directly related to me, like, for example, theaters. All this formed the basis of my archive.”43

Among those convicted in the “Academic Case” was S.V. Bakhrushin is one of the editors of “Records of the Past”, and in December 1930 M.V. himself. Sabashnikov was arrested on another case, also fabricated by the NKVD. And although the investigation was terminated after a month and a half and M.V. Sabashnikov was released, the publishing house was on the verge of liquidation, the publication of V.F.’s memoirs. Dzhunkovsky was out of the question.

The V.D. Bonch-Bruevich collection preserved his correspondence with Dzhunkovsky regarding the acquisition of his memoirs by the Central Museum of Fiction, Criticism and Journalism. In his letter dated August 2, 1933, Dzhunkovsky, ceding his manuscripts to the Museum along with the exclusive right to publish them, stipulated the following conditions for publication and royalties: the memoirs should

43 “Memorandum” by V.F. Dzhunkovsky November 9, 1929 A.S. Enukidze about his archive kept in the Pushkin House // Archaeographic Yearbook for 2001. M., 2002. P. 416. be published no earlier than 20 years from the time of the last event, i.e. not earlier than 1938, the royalties and assignment of copyright were estimated by Dzhunkovsky at 80,000 rubles. (400 rubles per printed sheet)44. Bonch-Bruevich wrote to him on January 10, 1934: “...we decided to buy your memories for 40,000 rubles. If you want the payment to be made as soon as possible, then deliver your notes to the working rooms of our museum (Rozhdestvenka, 5) and hand them over to N.P. Chulkov"45.

In 1948, the memoirs were received by the Central State Historical Archive, the current GA of the Russian Federation, and even earlier, in 1941, the materials that made up Dzhunkovsky’s fund were transferred to the Central State Historical Archive from the State Archives of the feudal-serf era. The materials of the fund and memoirs were combined in 1952.46 In 1997, Dzhunkovsky’s memoirs were partially published in 2 volumes, covering the period from 1905 to 1915. The publication was prepared by I.M. Pushkareva and Z.I. Peregudova, who wrote a detailed biographical sketch, as well as A.JI. Panina.

44 OR RSL. F. 369. room 265. d. 12. L. 1-2.

45 OR RSL. F. 369. K. 143. D. 51. L. l-1-rev.

46 See Case of the V.F. Foundation Dzhunkovsky in the Civil Aviation of the Russian Federation. (F. 826.) P. 3, 14. collected by Dzhunkovsky himself. In addition, the files of the office of the Moscow governor were used (CIAM. F. 17).

The following cases are of fundamental importance: “The case of the publication of the circular dated March 13, 1913 No. 111346 on the destruction of agents in the ground and naval forces” (F. 102. Op. 316. 1913. D. 210)47, “The case of the abolition of some security departments by circular on May 15, 1913 No. 99149 and 99691 and the renaming of the Don and Nikolaev security departments into search centers" (F. 102. Op. 316. 1913. D. 366), "The case of expanding and changing the staff gendarmerie departments and security departments. 1916" (F. 102. Op. 316. 1916. D. 100)49.

The work used circulars on various issues sent out by the Police Department, signed by N.A. Maklakova, V.F. Dzhunkovsky, S.P. Beletsky, V.A. Brune de Saint-Hippolyte, as well as orders signed by Dzhunkovsky as commander of the Separate Corps of Gendarmes.

The work also used a file from the G. Rasputin fund - reports to Dzhunkovsky from the head of the Tobolsk provincial gendarme department (GA RF. F. 612. D. 22).

47 This case is analyzed in full and in the context of Dzhunkovsky’s reforms in the literature for the first time.

48 Some fundamentally important data from this case are presented in the literature for the first time.

49 This case is analyzed in full and in the context of Dzhunkovsky’s reforms in the literature for the first time.

Documents related to Dzhunkovsky’s activities as Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs were also deposited in the RGVIA, in the files of the Fund of the Main Directorate of the General Staff: “Correspondence of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of a fundamental nature” (F. 2000. Op. 15. D. 452), “ About Lieutenant Colonel Myasoedov" (F. 2000.0p. 15. D. 568), "Manual on counterintelligence in wartime" (F. 2000. Op. 15. D. 828.). The collection of service records contains the most complete formal list of Dzhunkovsky, compiled upon his retirement (F. 409. D. 147-521).

In addition, we involved the Journals of the Council for Local Economic Affairs and various collections of documents50. The study also used the memoirs of Dzhunkovsky’s contemporaries - V.I. Gurko, D.N. Shilova, V.A. Maklakova, S.E. Kryzhanovsky, M.V. Rodzianko. Particular attention in the dissertation is paid to the memories of Dzhunkovsky’s colleagues in the political police - A.I. Spiridovich, A.P. Martynova, K.I. Globacheva, A.V. Gerasimova, P.P. Zavarzina, A.T. Vasilyev, as well as the published testimony that they and other former dignitaries gave to the Extraordinary Investigative Commission of the Provisional Government. In addition to periodicals (newspapers), the dissertation uses materials from the specialized magazine “Police Bulletin” for 1912 - 1915.

The methodological basis of the dissertation is determined by the characteristics of the tasks assigned. According to the principle of historicism, we consider Dzhunkovsky’s activities in the context of specific circumstances and characteristics of the historical era.

50 Stolypin P.A. Reform program. Documents and materials. In 2 vols., M., 2002; The case of the provocateur Malinovsky. M., 1992; Agent work of the political police of the Russian Empire: a collection of documents, 1880-1917. M. - St. Petersburg, 2006; Revolutionary movement in the army and navy during the First World War. M., 1966. Nikitinsky I.I. From the history of Russian counterintelligence. Collection of documents. M., 1946.

51 Gurevich A.Ya. Historical synthesis and the Annales School. M., 1993. P. 273.

The founder of this movement, M. Blok, defined the subject of history “in the exact and final sense as the consciousness of people”52. He claims that “the relationships that develop between people, the mutual influences and even the confusion that arises in their minds - these constitute true reality for the historian”53. Another prominent representative of the Annales school, JL Febvre, agrees with him, believing that “the task of the historian is to try to understand people who witnessed certain facts, which were later imprinted in their minds, in order to be able to interpret these facts”54.

Since this study is biographical in nature, it is important to take into account the latest methodological guidelines developed in the process of developing the genre of historical biography, where recently there has been a turn of interest from the “typical person” to a specific individual, and the extraordinary individual or, at least, comes to the fore least capable of making non-standard decisions in difficult circumstances55. At the same time, “the personal life and fate of individual historical individuals, the formation and development of their inner world, the “traces” of their activities act simultaneously as a strategic goal of research and as an adequate means of understanding the historical society that includes them and the historical society they create, and is thus used to clarify the social context ."56. This task requires the study of texts “from the point of view of the content and nature of the complexes of interpersonal relationships, behavioral strategies, and individual identities embodied in them”57.

52 Blok M. Apology of history, or the craft of a historian. M., 1986. P. 18.

53 Ibid. P. 86.

53 Repina L.P. Social history in the historiography of the 20th century: scientific traditions and new approaches. M., 1998. P. 58.

56 Ibid. P. 59.

The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that for the first time in domestic and foreign historiography, a comprehensive study of the personality and state practice of Dzhunkovsky was undertaken using materials from various funds, which allows not only to create a multifaceted image of one of the prominent representatives of the bureaucratic elite of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, but also to fruitfully solve problems associated with its activities.

For the first time, the attitude of Dzhunkovsky, the governor, to Stolypin’s laws, as well as his relationship with representatives of the liberal public, important for the reconstruction of his political views, is analyzed in detail.

Dzhunkovsky's transformations in the political investigation are considered in the study as a systemic plan of the reformer in the context of Stolypin modernization. For the first time, the problem field of Dzhunkovsky’s communication with representatives of the “security” and the actions taken by Dzhunkovsky’s successors after his resignation are analyzed, and Dzhunkovsky’s contribution to the reform of political investigation agencies is assessed. In preparing this work, new documents were introduced into scientific circulation that are important not only for the study of Dzhunkovsky’s official career, but also for the history of political investigation and counterintelligence agencies as separate institutions related to the history of Russian state institutions.

The dissertation examines little-studied aspects of stories known in historiography related to Grigory Rasputin (Scandal at the Yar Restaurant), S.N. Myasoedov (“The Case of Lieutenant Colonel Myasoedov”), R.V. Malinovsky (Malinovsky’s entry into the IV Duma and his exit from it), Operation Trust, and the myths about the role that Dzhunkovsky allegedly played in them are exposed. When considering these stories, the reliability of the memoirs of the head of the Moscow security department A.P. is analyzed. Martynov and the head of the Petrograd security department K.I. Globachev, recently introduced into scientific circulation.

The practical significance of the study lies in the fact that its results can be used in the preparation of various manuals and lecture courses on the history of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, in particular on the history of the political police and the bureaucratic elite of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century.

Approbation of the research results was carried out by the author in the form of reports at a special seminar for graduate students of the Department of History of Modern Russia of the Russian State University for the Humanities (headed by Prof., Doctor of Historical Sciences L.G. Berezovaya) and at four all-Russian conferences “Russian government institutions of the 20th - 21st centuries: traditions and innovations" (Russian State University for the Humanities, 2008) and "The World in New Times" (St. Petersburg State University, 2008, 2009, 2010).

The research results are also reflected in 10 publications (including three journals from the list approved by the Higher Attestation Commission). The scientific results presented in the publications influenced the opinion of the American scientists J. Daly and R. Robbins about Dzhunkovsky’s activities, with whom the author discussed problems related to the topic, and entered a certain academic context58. The dissertation was discussed at a meeting of the Department of Modern Russian History of the Russian State University for the Humanities and recommended for defense.

Similar dissertations in the specialty "Domestic History", 07.00.02 code VAK

The central apparatus and mechanisms for managing the political investigation of the Russian Empire in 1898-1917. 2008, Candidate of Historical Sciences Suchkov, Egor Nikolaevich
The struggle of factions in the court environment of Nicholas II 2005, candidate of historical sciences Novikov, Vladimir Vladimirovich
Moscow security department in the fight against revolutionary terrorism, 1905-1914. 2000, candidate of historical sciences Popov, Illarion Vladimirovich
Regulatory regulation of the activities of the political police of the Russian Empire 2000, candidate of legal sciences Zharov, Sergey Nikolaevich
Formation and development of the system of political investigation bodies in the Russian province in 1880-1914: Based on materials from the Kostroma province 2004, Candidate of Historical Sciences Ryabintsev, Roman Vladimirovich

Conclusion of the dissertation on the topic “National History”, Dunaeva, Anastasia Yurievna

CONCLUSION

Having studied all stages of state activity V.F. Dzhunkovsky, we can draw general conclusions about his personality, political views and government activities.

Of course, Dzhunkovsky proved himself to be an integral, independent and strong-willed person, whose administrative talent was combined with the desire for moral justification of his powers of power, the desire to turn the performance of official duties into service and help to people for the sake of the prosperity of the Russian state. The idea of preserving and strengthening statehood was fundamental in Dzhunkovsky’s activities. However, in the conditions of transformation of the political system of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. Dzhunkovsky, remaining faithful to the monarchical model of government, perceived the changes positively and was ready to work constructively with the Duma and public organizations.

As a result of the analysis of Dzhunkovsky’s political views, it seems impossible to unambiguously characterize him as a “liberal” or “conservative”, since Dzhunkovsky himself, unlike his opponents, did not identify himself with these concepts. Modern researchers generally prefer to refrain from strict definitions of the concepts of “conservatism” and “liberalism”, the boundaries of which often overlap. It is no coincidence that the authors of the monograph “Russian Conservatism of the 19th Century” came to the conclusion that “at certain stages of public life, the boundaries between conservatism and liberalism were blurred”932.

This idea is clarified by T.A. Filippova. “In practice, conservatism does not at all appear to be the antipode of liberalism,” writes the researcher. -While correctly opposing him in specific political situations, he still shares many doctrinal and moral values with him.

932 Russian conservatism of the 19th century. Ideology and practice. M., 2000. P. 255 -256.

The conservative will defend the significance of the ultimate goal - protecting the stability of society. The liberal will determine and justify the ways and means of moving towards this goal. The differences will appear at the verbal level. Where a liberal says “law,” a conservative says “commandment.” Where a liberal says “crime,” a conservative says “sin.”933

Analyzing the value and political guidelines of Dzhunkovsky, which guided him throughout his career, we can identify those dominants of his consciousness that characterize him as a conservative. It is safe to say that the basis of his worldview was the Orthodox faith. A strong religious principle was inherited by him from his priestly ancestors; it received concrete expression in the family motto “To God and neighbor,” which, in fact, repeated the two main gospel commandments.

From his father, Dzhunkovsky could adopt the tradition of military service to the monarchy, which was strengthened by education in the Corps of Pages, the most elite and most conservative military educational institution in the empire. The Corps of Pages contributed to the formation of another most important life guideline for Dzhunkovsky - the ideal of a Christian warrior.

Military duty as a defender of the Motherland, military brotherhood, military hierarchy and discipline, care and concern of the commander for the soldier, loyalty to the oath, paying the last debt to the dead - all these concepts associated with the Russian army also played a vital role for Dzhunkovsky at all stages of his service, and they also characterize him as a conservative. After all, “from the point of view of Russian conservatives, the army was not just a military organization or one of the pillars of the monarchical regime. The fate of the army was directly connected with the fate of Russia, its independence and power in the foreign policy arena. She was also

933 Filippova T.A. Wisdom without reflection (conservatism in the political life of Russia)//Centaur. 1993. No. 6, p. 53. bearer of the ideas of rank and discipline, and the army hierarchy, according to conservatives, was associated with the Orthodox spiritual hierarchy”934.

Of great importance for Dzhunkovsky, as can be seen from his memoirs, was the empire and the status of Russia as a great power. In this sense, it is no coincidence, of course, that he especially highlighted the foreign policy successes of Emperor Alexander III. It can be said that in his assessment of Alexander III, Dzhunkovsky was in agreement with the famous representative of Russian conservatism JI.A. Tikhomirov, who called this tsar “The Bearer of the Ideal,” presenting him as the embodiment of the qualities necessary for an ideal sovereign and believing that the personality of the late emperor could serve as a kind of standard for future autocrats935.

The dominant role in Dzhunkovsky’s consciousness was played by the ideal of a people’s monarchy and a patriarchal type of power in general. The key importance for him was trust between the authorities and the people - as the highest expression of the patriarchal ideal. If there was complete trust, there would be no need to protect power from the people, because The people, ideally, would themselves have to protect and preserve the power that takes care of them.

Naturally, the implementation of this ideal presupposed the consideration of public service as a service for the benefit of one’s neighbor, which echoed both the Dzhunkovsky family motto and the conservative doctrine of power as a service dedicated to God936. In this sense, the words of Pobedonostsev, whom Dzhunkovsky treated with great respect, are very characteristic. Pobedonostsev wrote that to be a statesman means “not to be consoled by your greatness, not to have fun with comforts, but to sacrifice yourself to the cause you serve, to devote yourself to work that burns a person, to give every hour of your life, from morning to night to be in live communication with real people, and not just with papers”937.

934 Repnikov A.V. Conservative concepts for the reconstruction of Russia. M., 2007. P. 156.

935 Ibid. P. 143.

936 Ibid. P. 129.

937 Ibid.

Dzhunkovsky fully corresponded to this statement. As Moscow governor, the most important thing for him was the moral connection between the population and the government and the accessibility of power to the people. Dzhunkovsky was the real master of the province - fair, responsive to the needs of the population and protecting the legal rights of every person, regardless of his class. Dzhunkovsky's authority among the population of the Moscow province was so great that even after the October Revolution, people did not forget him and paid him tribute, defended him in a revolutionary tribunal. Dzhunkovsky's farewell address to the residents of the province contained all the main components of the conservative's worldview - he called for strengthening the Orthodox faith, loving and being devoted to the autocratic tsar and the Motherland, obeying the law and the established authorities.

At the same time, at all stages of his activity, values characteristic of liberal ideology were present in Dzhunkovsky’s mind. Dzhunkovsky was fully aware that after the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, having become a Duma monarchy, the country had entered a completely new era. The State Duma has become an integral part of the state body. He was fully aware of the influence that public opinion acquired through the Duma tribune and the press, and was always interested in what was written about him or about various events not only in the Russian but also in the foreign press.

Apparently, it was the coverage of Grigory Rasputin’s behavior in the press, and not his real life, that forced Dzhunkovsky to make a report about him to the emperor in the same way as P.A. had previously done. Stolypin, despite the fact that he did not have all the information about what happened in the Yar restaurant and knew how such a report could end for his career.

The concept of “law” was of utmost importance at all stages of public service for Dzhunkovsky. The influence of ancestors - figures of the Enlightenment era, for which it was fundamental, was probably also reflected here. It can be assumed that “law” for him was not only a legal, but also a spiritual category “a necessary means to

938 achieving the religious goal of human life."

However, real bureaucratic practice and the main vector of further development of Russia, set by P.A. Stolypin “Our fatherland, transformed by the will of the Monarch, must turn into a legal state” - forced us to treat legal norms not only from the point of view of religious and moral obligation, but also purely rationally as a way of protecting the individual and private property. Although in order to defend the rights of the peasants who turned to him for help. Dzhunkovsky had to resort to informal mechanisms, for example, the personal intervention of the emperor.

Despite the fact that Dzhunkovsky earned the respect of representatives of the liberal public, had close contacts with Octobrist leaders Guchkov and Rodzianko, and his contemporaries predicted a career for him as a public figure, he always put the interests of the state first. Dzhunkovsky’s obvious support for the Provisional Government and its cadet representatives after the February Revolution does not indicate his betrayal of the autocracy, but his desire to maintain the combat effectiveness and discipline of his military units for the sake of Russia’s foreign policy interests.

Dzhunkovsky’s activities as head of the political investigation of the Russian Empire - the most problematic page of his biography - perfectly confirm the thesis of T. A. Filippova that “the apology of tradition and the propaganda of reform, as a rule, do not contradict each other.”

939 to a friend."

Indeed, Dzhunkovsky’s reforms in the political search are the most illustrative example of the synthesis of conservative and liberal ideas in T Timoshina E.V. Ontological justification of law in the legal theory of K.P. Pobedonostseva // News of universities. Jurisprudence. 1997. No. 2. P. 101.

939 Filippova T.A. Liberal-conservative synthesis (an attempt at chronopolitical analysis)//Russian liberalism: historical destinies and prospects). M., 1999. P. 202. his consciousness. Dzhunkovsky could not help but respond to the public's complaints against the investigative agencies, since both the Stolypin program and the created commission on police reform assumed a response to the public's request. His reforms in the political investigation became a logical link in Stolypin's modernization. However, they also carried an obvious imprint of the personality of the reformer himself. If on the one hand, Dzhunkovsky, as in the governor’s post, appealed to the authority of law and even wanted political investigations to be carried out exclusively by lawyers, intending to free the gendarmes from him, then on the other hand, he called for remembering the honor of the gendarmerie uniform as a military, officer's uniform. Dzhunkovsky put forward the motto “wipe away the tears of the unfortunate”, taken from the past and more likely dating back to knightly times. It was the idea of military honor that was to become fundamental in the activities of both the gendarmerie and (especially!) security structures.

An analysis of the entire complex of reforms carried out by Dzhunkovsky in the political investigation, as well as an analysis of his relationships with representatives of the “security” allows us to conclude that the moral and material damage he inflicted on the heads of security structures and investigation officers in general (accusing them of provocation, tightening control over the wearing of the gendarmerie uniform, subordination to the heads of the State Housing Department with a reduction in salary, dismissal of the heads of security departments) forced the latter to approach Dzhunkovsky’s reforms with great bias and present them in an exclusively negative light. Despite the fact that, as we have established, after Dzhunkovsky’s resignation, counter-reforms were planned and partially implemented, their implementation, in our opinion, should be associated not with Dzhunkovsky’s actions as such, but, first of all, with the internal political situation that changed due to the First World War.

The accusation of “liberalism” by Dzhunkovsky on the part of the “guards,” implying a desire to gain popularity by weakening the state security system, is as untenable as the desire of modern historians to present Dzhunkovsky as a freemason and destroyer of Russian statehood. The best refutation of this is the behavior of Dzhunkovsky during Soviet times, when he did not hide the fact that in his posts he sought to strengthen the tsarist power.

It is obvious that at all stages of Dzhunkovsky’s government activities, for him, as for his famous grandfather S.S. Dzhunkovsky, was characterized by a synthesis of conservative and liberal ideas and values.

The priority for Dzhunkovsky was the idea of a state, a powerful empire, but at the same time, the responsibility of the state to man, its obligations to man and the moral principle as the basis of the state structure were extremely important for him. Considering his religious worldview and monarchical ideal, it would probably be correct to call Dzhunkovsky a liberal conservative, whose conservatism was “not a fortress to which we retreat under the onslaught of change, but an open field of experience in which we meet these

940 changes".

However, the uniqueness of Dzhunkovsky did not lie in this, but in his moral qualities, in his attitude towards people and in his loyalty to duty. Therefore, based on his own value system, V.F. Dzhunkovsky can also be called a patriot who served Russia with dignity and embodied the Christian commandments of love for God and neighbor in his state activities.

940 Filippova T.A. Liberal-conservative synthesis (an attempt at chronopolitical analysis)//Russian liberalism: historical destinies and prospects). M., 1999. P. 203.

List of references for dissertation research Candidate of Historical Sciences Dunaeva, Anastasia Yurievna, 2010

2. General provincial institution // Code of laws of the Russian Empire. -SPb., 1892.- T. 2.2. Regulatory acts

3. Regulations on measures to protect the highest travel on railways. St. Petersburg, 1914.

4. Regulations on field control of troops in wartime. St. Petersburg, 1914.

5. Office materials

6. Journals of the Council for Local Economic Affairs. 1908 Autumn session. - St. Petersburg, 1909.

7. Orders for the Separate Corps of Gendarmes for 1915. Petrograd, 1916. 9. Collection in honor of the leaving of V.F. Dzhunkovsky positions of Moscow governor: Moscow 1891 - 1913. - Petrograd, 1915.

8. Transcripts of interrogations and testimony

9. The fall of the tsarist regime. Verbatim reports of interrogations and testimony given in 1917 by the Extraordinary Commission of the Provisional Government. M.; L., 1924-27. - 7t.5. Periodicals

10. Exchange statements. - Petrograd, 1915.

11. Police Bulletin. Weekly magazine, publication of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Petrograd, 1913-1915.

12. Moscow Gazette". Moscow, 1913.

13. Morning of Russia. Moscow, 1913.

15. Undercover work of the political police of the Russian Empire: collection of documents. 1880-1917/ Comp. Shcherbakova E.I. M.; St. Petersburg, 2006.

16. The case of the provocateur Malinovsky. Collection of documents / Comp. Kaptelov B.I., Rosenthal I.S., Shelokhaev V.V. M., 1992.

17. From the history of Russian counterintelligence. Collection of documents / Comp. Nikitinsky I.I. M., 1946.

18. The revolutionary movement in the army and navy during the First World War. Collection of documents/Ed. Sidorova A.L. M., 1966.

19. Stolypin P.A. We need a great Russia. Complete collection of speeches in the State Duma and State Council, 1906-1911/ Comp. Felyntinsky Yu.G. M., 1991.

20. Stolypin P.A. Reform program. Documents and materials / Under general. ed. Pozhigailo P.A. M., 2002. - 2 vol.7. Memories

21. Vasiliev A.T. Security: Russian secret police // “Okhranka”. Memoirs of leaders of political investigation. M., 2004. - T.2. - P. 345-515.

22. Voloshina-Sabashnikova M.V. Green snake. The story of one life. M., 1993.

23. Gerasimov A.V. On the cutting edge with terrorists // "Security". Memoirs of the leaders of political investigation in 2 vols. M., 2004. - T.2. - P. 141 - 342.

24. Globachev K.I. The truth about the Russian revolution. M., 2009.

25. Golitsyn S.M. Notes of a survivor. M., 1990.

26. Gurko V.I. Features and silhouettes of the past. Government and public during the reign of Nicholas II as depicted by a contemporary. M., 2000.

27. Dzhunkovsky V. F. Memoirs. M., 1997. - 2 vols.

28. Zavarzin P.P. Gendarmes and revolutionaries // "Security". Memoirs of the leaders of political investigation in 2 vols. M., 2004. - T.2. - P. 7 - 138.

29. Kryzhanovsky. S.E. Memories. Berlin, b.g.

30. Lockhart R. G. B. History from the inside. Memoirs of a British agent. M., 1991.

31. Maklakov V. A. Second State Duma. Memoirs of a contemporary. February 20 June 2, 1907 - M., 2006.

32. Martynov A.P. My service in the Separate Corps of Gendarmes // “Security”. Memoirs of the leaders of political investigation in 2 vols. M., 2004.- T.1.-S. 29-408.

33. Protopopov A.D. Suicide note // The voice of the past is on the wrong side. 1926. No. 2. pp. 167 - 171.

34. Rodzianko M.V. The collapse of the empire and the State Duma and the February 1917 revolution. New York, 1986.

35. Secret meetings of the Council of Ministers on July 16, September 2, 1915, compiled by A.N. Yakhontov // Archive of the Russian Revolution. - Berlin, 1926. -T. 18. - P. 10-88.

36. Spiridovich A.I. The Great War and the February Revolution. New York, 1960.-3 vols.

37. Tikhmenev N.P. General Dzhunkovsky, retired. Petrograd, 1915.

38. Trubetskoy S.E. The past. M., 1991

39. Shipov D.N. Memories and Thoughts about the experience. M., 2007.1. Unpublished

40. State Archive of the Russian Federation (GA RF)

41. F. 63 (Moscow security department).

42. Op. 44. D. 3794, 6281. Op. 47. - D. 484.

43. F. 102 (Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs).

44. OO. 1913.- D. 117, 119,291.4.58.

45. OO. 1914.- D. 117, 118, 130, 139,291.4.57,291.4. 58.L.B, 360, 362.

46. OO. 1915.- D. 116. T. 1,292.4.58.L.B.

47. OO. 1916.- D. 291.4.58.L.B.

48. OO. 1917.- D. 293.4.58.L.B.1. Op. 316. 1910.- D. 381.

49. Op. 316. 1913. D. 50. 4.1, 51. 4. 1, 210, 366.

50. Op. 316. 1914. D. 51.4.1, D. 366.4.1.

51. Op. 316. 1915.- D. 356.4.1-2.1. Op. 316. 1916.- D.100.1. Op. 316. 1917.- D.114.

52. Op. 260. D. 77,78,331,332.1. Op. 261. D. 240.

53. F. 110 (Headquarters of the Separate Corps of Gendarmes).

54. Op. 2. D. 17203, 17484, 18362. Op. 19.-D. 122, 123 4.2.

55. F. Ill (Petrograd security department). -

56.On. 1. D. 2973 -2981, 2981-a, 2981-6, 2981-v. Op. 5. - D. 548.

57. F. 270 (Office of Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs V.F. Dzhunkovsky). On. 1. - D. 2, 46, 48, 49, 132, 135.

58. F. 564 (A.F. Koni). Op.1. - D. 1756.

59. F. 601 (Nicholas II). On. 1. - D. 940, 1246.

60. F. 612 (G.E. Rasputin). On. 1. - D. 22, 36.

61. F. 810 (M.V. Chelnokov).-Op. 1.-D. 496, 631.

62. F. 826 (V.F. Dzhunkovsky). On. - 1. D. 11, 14, 37-59, 107, 118, 121, 139, 166, 431, 448, 512, 527, 529, 530, 541, 541-a, 659, 724, 732, 769, 731 , 803, 803-a, 834, 836, 838, 839, 848, 1048.

63. F. 1467 (Extraordinary Investigative Commission of the Provisional Government). Op.1. - D. 39, 401 L.A, 401 L.Zh., 401 L.E.

64. F. R-10 035 (State Security Fund). D. P-53985, P-74952.

65. Russian State Military Historical Archive (RGVIA)

66. F. 409 (Collection of service records). On. 1. - D. 147-521.

67. F. 2000 (Main Directorate of the General Staff).

68. Op. 15,- D. 452, 568, 828. Op. 16.-D. 176.

69. F. 2048 (Headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of the Western Front). Op. 1.- D. 218.

70. Russian State Historical Archive (RGIA)

71. F. 797 (Office of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod). Op. 35. 2nd department - D. 224.

72. F. 1284 (Department of General Affairs of the Ministry of Internal Affairs). Op. 194. 1913. - D. 75.

73. Russian State Library. Department of Manuscripts (OR RSL)

74. F. 231/II. (M.P. Pogodin). K. 53. - D. 11.

75. F. 233 (S.D. Poltoratsky). K. 25. - D. 10.

76. F. 253 (S.A. Romanov). K. 8. - D. 6, 12.

77. F. 369 (V.D. Bonch-Bruevich).

78. K. 187. D. 17. K. 265.- D. K. 143. - D. 51.

79. F. 440 (D.N. Shipov). K. 6. - D.55.

80. F. 456 (E.A. and A.M. Vereshchagin). K.1. - D.27.

81. State Central Theater Museum named after. Bakhrushina.1. Manuscript Department

82. F. 91 (V.F. Dzhunkovsky). D. 30-36.

83. Central Historical Archive of Moscow (CIAM) 61. F. 17 (Office of the Moscow Governor). -Op. 86. D. 67, 87. Op. 56. - D. 209. Op.96. - D. 7531. Literature

84. Avrekh A.Ya. Tsarism on the eve of its overthrow. M., 1989.

85. Avrekh A.Ya. Tsarism and the IV Duma. M., 1981.

86. Aleksushin G.V. Development of gubernatorial power in Russia (1708 - 1917): historical experience and lessons: author's abstract. dis. . Dr. History Sci. M., 2008.

87. Antonov V., Karpov V. Secret informants of the Kremlin. M., 2001.

88. Arkhipov I.L. Russian political elite in February 1917. -SPb., 2000.

89. Astashov A.B. Institutions to combat desertion during the First World War // State institutions of Russia in the XX-XXI centuries: traditions and innovations. M., 2008. pp. 130 - 138.

90. Berberova N.N. People and lodges. Russian Masons of the 20th century. M., 1997.

91. Blinov A. Governors. Historical and legal essay. St. Petersburg, 1905.

92. Blok M. Apology of history, or the craft of a historian. M., 1986.

93. Bogomolov N.A. Shumikhin S.V. Preface to the diaries of M. Kuzmin // Kuzmin M. Diary. 1905 1907 - St. Petersburg, 2000. P. 3 - 18.

94. Bokhanov A.N. Rasputin. Anatomy of a myth. M., 2000.

95. Bokhanov A.N. Rasputin. Fact and fiction. M., 2006.

96. Butovo training ground. 193 7-193 8y. Book of memory of victims of political repression. Vol. Z.-M., 1999.

97. Gladkov T.K. Reward for loyalty - execution. - M., 2000.

98. Gladkov T.K. Artuzov. M., 2008.

99. Gurevich A.Ya. Historical synthesis and the Annales School. M., 1993.

100. Gurkovsky V.A. Cadet corps of the Russian Empire. M., 2005. - 2 vols.

101. Dolgopolov N. From Savinkov to Ramsay // Moscow. 2004. - No. 3. - P.165 -174.

102. Dyakin B.C. The Russian bourgeoisie and tsarism during the First World War (1914-1917). - L., 1967.

103. Dyatlova N.P. Reports of governors as a historical source // Problems of archival and source studies. L., 1964. - P. 222 - 248.

104. Jacques-Dominique Rachet (1744 1809). State Russian Museum. -B.m. - B.g.

105. Zdanovich A.A. Domestic counterintelligence. 1914-1920. Organizational building. M., 2004.

106. Zyryanov P.N. Pyotr Stolypin: political portrait. - M., 1992.

107. Empress Maria Feodorovna. Life and destiny. Exhibition catalogue. -SPb., 2008.

108. Kabytov P.S. P.A. Stolypin: the last reformer of the Russian Empire. M., 2007.

109. Kamensky A.B. From Peter I to Paul I. M., 2001.

110. Kobeko D.F. Sculptor Zh.D. Rashet and his works//Bulletin of Fine Arts. 1883. - T.1. - Vol. 4. pp. 636 - 646.

111. Kozlovtseva E.N. Moscow communities of nurses in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries: dis. Ph.D. ist. Sci. - M., 2006.

112. Korelin P.A. Political program of P.A. Stolypin: liberal-conservative synthesis // Liberal conservatism: history and modernity. M., 2001. - P. 43 - 53.

113. Crisis of autocracy in Russia, 1895-1917. L., 1984.

114. Kuzmina I.V. Progressive bloc in the IV State Duma, 1915-1917: dis. Ph.D. ist. Sci. M., 2000.

115. Kulikov S.V. The bureaucratic elite of the Russian Empire on the eve of the fall of the old order (1914-1917). - Ryazan, 2004.

116. Leontovich V.V. History of liberalism in Russia. M., 1995.

117. Lysenko L.M. Governors and governors general of the Russian Empire (XVIII early XX). - M., 2001.

118. Makarevich E. East-West: Stars of Political Investigation. M., 2003.

119. Manko A.V. Guardians of the supreme power. Institute of governorship in Russia. M., 2004.

121. Minakov A.S. The most loyal reports of governors as a source for studying the relationship between central and local authorities in Russia in the 2nd half of the 19th and early 20th centuries // Domestic History. - 2005, - No. 3. - P. 170-175.

122. Minakov A.S. Formation of the gubernatorial corps in post-reform Russia/LZoprosy istorii. 2007. - No. 12. - P. 3 - 13.

123. Mirolyubov A.A. Political investigation of Russia in 1914-1917: dis. . Ph.D. ist. Sci. M., 1988.

124. Mogilevsky K.I. Soloviev K.A. P.A. Stolypip: personality and reforms. -Kaliningrad, 2007.

125. Mogilevsky K.I. Stolypin reforms and the local elite. Council for Local Economic Affairs (1908 1910). - M., 2008.

126. Models of social reconstruction in Russia. M., 2004.

127. Corps of Pages of His Imperial Majesty. M., 2004.

128. Peregudova Z.I. Political investigation of Russia (1880 1917). - M., 2000.

129. Peregudova Z.I. Political investigation of Russia (1880 1917): abstract. dis. . Dr. History Sci. M., 2000.

130. Peregudova Z.I. "Security" through the eyes of the guards // "Security". Memoirs of the leaders of political investigation in 2 vols. M., 2004. -T.1.- P. 5-26.

131. Peregudova Z.I., Pushkareva I.M. Dzhunkovsky and his memories//Dzhunkovsky V.F. Memoirs. In 2 volumes. M., 1997. -T 1.-P.5-27.

132. Pireev A.I. P.A. Stolypin, governor of Saratov (1903 - 1906): author's abstract. dis. . Ph.D. ist. Sci. - Saratov, 2000.

133. Platonov O.A. Life for the Tsar: the truth about Grigory Rasputin. St. Petersburg, 1996.

134. Platonov O.A. Russia's crown of thorns. Nicholas II in secret correspondence. M., 1996.

135. Plekhanov A.M. VChK-OGPU. 1921-1928 M., 2003.

136. Pozhigailo P.A. Stolypin program for the transformation of Russia (1906 -1911). - M., 2007.

137. Radzinsky E. Rasputin: Life and Death. M., 2000.

138. Rakhshmir P.Yu. The evolution of conservatism in modern and recent times // New and recent history. 1990. - No. 1. - P. 48 - 58.

139. Repina L.P. Social history in the historiography of the 20th century: scientific traditions and new approaches. M., 1998.

140. Repnikov A.V. Conservative concepts for the reconstruction of Russia. M., 2007.

141. Romanov K.S. Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia on the eve and during the First World War (1913-1917): dis. . Ph.D. ist. Sci. St. Petersburg, 2002.

142. Rosenthal I.S. Ill-fated portrait // Soviet Museum. 1992. - No. 4. -WITH. 39-41.

143. Rosenthal I.S. Pages of the life of General Dzhunkovsky // Centaur. -1994.- No. 1.- P. 90-103.

144. Rosenthal I.S. Did he not like provocateurs?//Motherland. No. 2. - 1994. - P. 38-41.

145. Rosenthal I.S. Provocateur. Roman Malinovsky: fate and time. M., 1996.

146. Rosenthal I.S. Governor during the state service//Public service. 1999. - No. 1. - P. 39 - 44.

147. Rosenthal I.S. Moscow is at a crossroads. Power and society in 1905 1914 - M., 2004.

148. Rosenthal I.S. About the Tsarist secret police and the “departmental” history // Russia XXI. 2006. No. 6. P. 146 179.

149. Roshet S.N. Rashets // Noble calendar. Notebook 9. - St. Petersburg, 2001. - pp. 94-107.

150. Russian conservatism of the 19th century. Ideology and practice. M., 2000.

151. Ruud C.A., Stepanov S.A. Fontanka, 16. Political investigation under the Tsars. -M., 1993

152. Semkin A. N. Such an atypical gendarme // Soviet police. 1991. -№10.-S. 28-31.

153. Senin A.S. Alexander Ivanovich Guchkov. M., 1996.

154. Sibireva G.A. A.A. Samborsky: on the history of the formation of the Russian intelligentsia and its connections with the West (late 18th - early 19th centuries) // Dialogue with time: an almanac of intellectual history. - Vol. 24. - M., 2004.- P. 210-234.

155. Soloviev K.A. Circle "Conversation": in search of a new political reality. M., 2009.

156. Timoshina E.V. Ontological justification of law in the legal theory of K.P. Pobedonostseva // News of universities. Jurisprudence. 1997.- No. 2.- P. 99-106.

157. Tumanova A.S. Public organizations and the Russian public at the beginning of the 20th century. M., 2008.

158. Wortman R.S. Scenarios of power. Myths and ceremonies of the Russian monarchy. M., 2004. 2 vols.

160. Filippova T.A. Wisdom without reflection (conservatism in the political life of Russia)//Centaur. 1993. - No. 6. - P. 49 - 60.

161. Filippova T. A. Liberal-conservative synthesis (an attempt at chronopolitical analysis) // Russian liberalism: historical destinies and prospects. M., 1999. - P. 201 -209.

162. Frenkin M. Russian army and revolution 1917-1918. Munich, 1978.

163. Shatsillo K. “The Case” of Colonel Myasoedov // Meetings with history. -Issue 2. M., 1988.- P. 142 148.

164. Shelokhaev V.V. P.A. Stolypin - synthesis of intellect and will // Domestic history. 2005. No. 4. - P. 77 - 85.

165. Shelokhaev S.V. Dmitry Nikolaevich Shipov // Shipov D.N. Memories and Thoughts about the experience. M., 2007. - P. 3 - 37.

166. Shumikhin S.V. Letters to People's Commissars//Knowledge is power. - 1989. - No. 6. - P. 71 - 74.

167. Shchegolev P.E. Security guards. Agents. Executioners. M., 1992.5J5 5jC >)s

168. Cross A.G. “By the Banks of the Thames”: Russians in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Newtonville, 1980.

169. Daly J.W. The Watchful State: Security Police and Opposition in Russia, 1906 -1917. DeKalb (111.), 2004.

170. Hasegawa T. The February Revolution: Petrograd, 1917. Seattle, 1981.

171. Lauchlan I. Russian Hide-and-Seek. Helsinki, 2002.

172. Litvin A.L. The Cheka.//Critical Companion to the Russian Revolution. 1914 -1921.- London, 1997.

173. Robbins R. Famine in Russia 1891-1892. New York, 1975.

174. Robbins R. The Tsar's Viceroys: Russian Provincial Governors in the Last Years of the Empire. Ithaca (N.Y.), 1987.

175. Robbins R. Vladimir Dzhunlcovskii: Witness for the Defense // Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History. 2 (Summer, 2001). - P. 635-54.

176. Robbins R. Was Vladimir Dzhunkovskii the Father of the "Trust"? : A Quest for the Plausible//Journal of Modern Russian History and Historiography. 1 (2008).- P.113-143.

177. Reference and information publications

178. Encyclopedic Dictionary: in 86 volumes. St. Petersburg. : Ed. F. Brockhaus - I.A. Efron, 1890-1907.- 2 vols.

179. Russian biographical dictionary: in 20 volumes. Rep. playback ed. 1905 - M., 1991 - 1999. - 2 volumes 1. Internet Resources

180. Russian noble assembly Electronic resource. Electron. Dan. - [M], sor 2004 - 2006. - Access mode: http://www.nobility.ru/upload/sherbach/rodoslov/djun.html

181. Institute of Russian Literature (Pushkin House) of the Russian Academy of Sciences Electronic resource. Electron. Dan. - [M], sor 2006 - 2009. - Access mode: http://www.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=765

182. Archives of Russia Electronic resource. Electron. Dan. - [M], sor 2001 - 2009. .- Access mode: http://www.rusarchives.ru/publication/diunk.shtml#

183. Library of Russian religious, philosophical and fiction literature “Vekhi” Electronic resource. Electron. Dan. - [M], sor 2000 - 2009. - Access mode: http://www.vehi.net/blok/dni/02.html.

184. Church of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in Butovo Electronic resource. Electron. Dan. - [M], sor 2006 - 2009. - Access mode: http://www.martyr.ru/content/view/8/18/.

Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for informational purposes only and were obtained through original dissertation text recognition (OCR). Therefore, they may contain errors associated with imperfect recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in the PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.

Candidate of Historical Sciences Anastasia Dunaeva. Book about V. f. Dzhunkovsky - Anastasia Dunaeva. Family traditions and family upbringing

Family traditions and family upbringing

V.F. Dzhunkovsky and the Stolypin modernization program

Transformations in political investigation in the context of police reform in Russia

Recommended list of dissertations

Separate Corps of Gendarmes and the Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs: political investigation bodies on the eve and during the First World War, 1913-1917. 2012, candidate of historical sciences Khutarev-Garnishevsky, Vladimir Vladimirovich

Central (Moscow) district security department in the system of political police of the Russian Empire: 1907-1914. 2012, candidate of historical sciences Opilkin, Alexey Sergeevich

Organizational and legal foundations of the operational investigative activities of the political investigation agencies of the Russian Empire and its features in the Kuban. 1880-1917 2010, candidate of legal sciences Krutova, Yana Aleksandrovna

Local bodies of political investigation of the Russian Empire at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries: historical and legal research 2009, candidate of legal sciences Pluzhnikov, Sergey Yurievich

Operational investigative activities in Russia: organization, methods, legal regulation: historical and legal research 2010, Doctor of Law, Zharov, Sergey Nikolaevich

Introduction of the dissertation (part of the abstract) on the topic “V.F. Dzhunkovsky: political views and government activities: the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century."

Similar dissertations in the specialty "Domestic History", 07.00.02 code VAK

The central apparatus and mechanisms for managing the political investigation of the Russian Empire in 1898-1917. 2008, Candidate of Historical Sciences Suchkov, Egor Nikolaevich

The struggle of factions in the court environment of Nicholas II 2005, candidate of historical sciences Novikov, Vladimir Vladimirovich

Moscow security department in the fight against revolutionary terrorism, 1905-1914. 2000, candidate of historical sciences Popov, Illarion Vladimirovich

Regulatory regulation of the activities of the political police of the Russian Empire 2000, candidate of legal sciences Zharov, Sergey Nikolaevich

Formation and development of the system of political investigation bodies in the Russian province in 1880-1914: Based on materials from the Kostroma province 2004, Candidate of Historical Sciences Ryabintsev, Roman Vladimirovich

Conclusion of the dissertation on the topic “National History”, Dunaeva, Anastasia Yurievna

List of references for dissertation research Candidate of Historical Sciences Dunaeva, Anastasia Yurievna, 2010