DEDICATED TO THE 70TH ANNIVERSARY OF VITALY NAUMKINThe article deals with the introduction of vassal monarchs in Russia in the XVII-XIX centuries. The central government constantly monitored the situation in the annexed lands and tried to prevent the dangerous strengthening of their rulers, deprived of full power. The figure of the vassal ruler was useful to the government as a symbol of the authorities ' tolerance for the ethnic traditions of peoples, demonstrative respect for their original life principles. The enthronement ceremony of a ruler dependent on the Russian tsar was an important part of Russian politics. It was designed to combine instilling the greatness and power of Russia in its subjects with demonstrating the emperor's favor for a new vassal appointee. When a ruler subject to Russia assumed office, the traditional ceremonial procedures adopted in dependent possessions were usually observed, and the highest authority only confirmed and approved (or did not approve) such an election or appointment. The origin of the ruler's powers both from the "election" of his people and from the will of the tsar turned the Moscow/St. Petersburg protégé into a conductor of the center's policy, into a tool for adapting his fellow tribesmen to Russian statehood.

Keywords: ethnic policy, empire, khanate, protectorate, vassals, investiture, enthronement.

Possessions with monarchical rule or with traditional sole leadership within Russia appeared, as a rule,during and as the territorial expansion of the state. These are the Junior and Middle Kazakh zhuzs, political formations of Siberia and the Caucasus headed by "princes" of various ranks and titles, the Little Russian Hetmanate (1654-1764), patronized by the Kartli Empire-the Kakheti Kingdom (1783-1801), the Bukhara Emirate (protectorate in 1873-1917), the Khiva Khanate (protectorate in 1868 Other quasi-state structures were the Kasimov Kingdom (mid-15th century - 1681), the Kalmyk Khanate (1664-1771), and the Bukeevskaya or Inner Horde (1812 - 1876). They were formed with the sanction of the Russian authorities, or their independent formation in the territories subject to Russia was approved by the government.

The strict principle of the existence and rule of vassal sovereigns was the recognition of the supremacy of the Russian tsar. He gave the final investiture and determined the limits of the powers of his proteges. On the hierarchical ladder of the Moscow state and the Russian Empire, such rulers were formally listed in the ranks of the highest elite of the state, regardless of their real political influence and authority among their subjects. As the khan of Khiva put it in a letter to the head of the Amu Darya department in the early 1890s, "...we are both servants of the White Tsar. You need it

page 5
he entrusted the management of the people of the right bank [of the Amu Darya], and I, according to his will, manage the people of the left bank" [Central Asia..., 2008, p. 302] 1.

The central government constantly monitored the situation in the annexed lands and tried to prevent the dangerous strengthening of their rulers, deprived of full power. The premature removal of their powers could have caused discontent among their subjects, who were brought up in a traditional political culture and perceived their semi-independent leader as a legitimate, "natural" leader of the people, even if they were subordinate to the Russians. The figure of the vassal ruler was also useful to the government as a symbol of the authorities ' tolerance for the ethnic traditions of peoples, demonstrative respect for their primordial life principles. The ideal scheme would be a purely formal presence on the paternal throne in submissive obedience to the provincial Russian managers, in fear of the intrigues of rivals and the disfavor of the tsar.

The principle of attitude to vassal sovereigns can be considered the recommendations of Catherine II in the message to Simbirsk and Ufa Governor-General O. A. Igelstrom dated November 12, 1786, which spoke about tactics in relation to the Kazakh khans: "...It is more useful to hold on... opinions about multiplying their number and that each of these khans should not be strong in the horde and depend on us, like other subordinates to you in the province and in the counties "[Suleymanov and Basin, 1981, p. 177]. Earlier, the Astrakhan governor A. P. Volynsky, having achieved the division of the Kalmyks into warring groups, referred to the testament of Peter I in relation to this people, "the khan's power should not be in the khan's hands alone" [Batmaev, 2002, p.81]. However, setting up a split in the ethnic elites can be considered a long-term strategic task. In everyday politics, diverse cooperation was practiced. One of its most important forms was the enthronement of vassal rulers.

When a ruler subject to Russia assumed office, the traditional ceremonial procedures adopted in dependent possessions were usually observed, and the highest authority only confirmed and approved (or did not approve) such an election or appointment.

The rulers of the Kalmyks at the end of the XVII-XVIII centuries (khans and for some time governors) were elected according to ancient Mongolian customs at meetings of the nobility. Often there were feuds and feuds about candidates, but the ritual side - the choice by the will of the aristocratic assembly-remained unchanged. "The entire Kalmyk horde has one chief, who is called a khan," wrote academician I. I. Lepekhin, who rode through the Kalmyk steppe at the turn of the 1760s and 1770s." Khans are chosen according to their own (Kalmykov - V. T.) will and with the consent of the leading nobility; however, this also requires the permission of the Russian court" [Complete Collection..., 1821, p. 333]. However, as the khanate lost its independence, the interference of the capital, and especially Astrakhan, authorities in its internal affairs increased, including the question of replacing and inheriting the position of khan. To force the people to accept the candidacy of the ruler, pleasing to the Russian authorities, sometimes it was necessary to introduce troops into the territory of the khanate and send Cossack patrols through the ulus. The last khan of Ubashi was proclaimed according to the scenario fully developed by the Russian side. This was one of the signs of the decline of Kalmyk statehood, which (among other factors) led to the migration of the majority of the people to Dzungaria in 1771.

Accession to the throne in the eyes of the Kalmyks was legitimate if it was not only approved by an imperial decree, but also had another important reason - an investiture from the Dalai Lama, the head of the Tibetan branch of Buddhism. Along with the certificate of conferring the title of khan and the throne name, a new seal was brought from the Tibetan capital of Lhasa to the Kalmyk Steppe. To announce the will of the Tibetan hierarch, the following task was set:

1 Here and further in the citations I have highlighted. - V. T.

page 6
"burkhannaya kibitka", and the gelyung priest solemnly, in the presence of a Russian official, presented the khan's insignia to the chosen one (see below). It is generally believed that this began with the enthronement of Ayuki in 1690, who received the title and seal from the VI Dalai Lama (although it is believed that in 1650 the V Dalai Lama awarded this title to his grandfather Daichin). The granting of the right to the throne from two sources did not bother Ayuka at all. On the contrary, his authority among the hitherto equal Taishas has doubled. "The Holy Dalai Lama granted Ayuka the khan's dignity (khan dolo) and the seal (tamga)... - says an anonymous Kalmyk chronicle of the XVIII century. - Although Ayuka was a tributary (albat) of the Russian tsar, but without notifying him, he accepted this high khan's title with his power" [Lunny Svet, 2003, p. 116 - 117].

In February 1737, the Russian government declared Donduk Ombo Khan, but he did not dare to call himself such a title, since he did not receive the will of the Buddhist high priest. The next khan, Donduk Dashi, found himself in the same situation. And their predecessor and uncle, Tseren Donduk, felt confident, since he received from the chief lama both the Khan's seal and the sacred throne name Daichin Shasa Sha-khan [Batmaev, 2002, p. 93; Bichurin, 1991, p. 103; Kurapov, 2007, p. 96, 156, 168, 169, 189 190; Palmov, 1927, p. 164]. The legitimation of the khan's title by Tibet was necessary to ensure loyalty to the Khan on the part of the Kalmyk nobility. The Noyons and Zaisangs agreed to obey only the ruler, whose status was confirmed by all three sources of legitimacy: the election of the Congress of princes, the Russian and Tibetan investitures.

The establishment of Kazakh khans by Russian monarchs began in the late 1740s, when his son Nurali ascended to the throne of the Younger zhuz after the death of Abulkhair Khan. Since then, the proclamation of the khans has been carried out through two sources of legitimacy: on the one hand, the decision of the Congress of the Kazakh aristocracy, the highest clergy and representatives of the clans, on the other - the approval of this decision by the imperial grant letter with a patent. The congress for electing khans of the Younger and Middle Zhuzs was held in revered areas (for example, in the city of Turkestan, where the mausoleum of a Sufi ascetic of the XII century is located). Khoja Ahmed Yasawi). The ancient ritual of raising the chosen one on koshme was performed there. Then the embassy was sent to St. Petersburg with a notification of the congress's decision and with a request to approve the candidacy of the khan proclaimed there. As Khans Nurali and Ablay wrote to Elizaveta Petrovna:

"And although this people have chosen me as khans, I, as a loyal subject of your I. V., am not able to enter this rank without your special I. V. Supreme decree";"...I most humbly ask you to confirm my title of Khan with a grant from Your Majesty's blessed hands, with the golden seal of the highest charter. And in addition, I recognize the obscenity and unworthiness of calling myself Khan by Your Highest Command" [Kazakh-Russian..., 1964, p.87, 409].

The Russian authorities considered it reasonable to rely on traditional institutions in this matter, since they gave legitimacy to a ruler loyal to Russia in the eyes of their subjects: "They have no previous experience... It was only on their rise that the Khans took place on the hills" [Kazakh-Russian..., 1964, p. 469]. With this in mind, Catherine II recommended that the Kazakhs in 1791 choose a successor to the deceased Nurali "according to the ancient Kirghiz-Kaisat custom" [Kazakh-Russian..., 1964, p.134]. As a rule, candidates were approved in advance by the government, and the highest approval was limited to a brief formal audience with the announcement of consent.

A similar procedure for electing/appointing Kazakh khans was preserved in the early 19th century in the Bukeev Horde and Zhuzs. Alexander I agreed with the decisions of the" coronation "steppe congresses," satisfying the general desire of the soltans, beys, foremen, tarkhans and the people "[Gramota imperora..., 1899, p. 2; Obvestitelnaya gramota..., 1899, p. 2, 3].

page 7
With regard to the enthronement of Kazakh rulers, there was also a semblance of parallel investiture. From time to time, the question of their appointment by the Chinese emperor was raised. Unlike the Dalai Lama's edicts to the Kalmyks, the Qing were more likely to compete with Russia in the struggle for influence in the Kazakh Steppe. However, there was no sharp and open confrontation between them in this region. There were conflicts with the occasional claims of the Sino-Manchu court to the right to grant Kazakh leaders the title of Khan. In 1771, the Qianlong Emperor proclaimed Ablai Khan of the Middle Zhuz, and ten years later-Khoja Khan, then Vali. St. Petersburg always ignored such appointments, was guided by its own considerations and supported its candidates for the Zhuz thrones. There was no danger to Russian hegemony in the contacts of the Kazakh elite with China.

In 1824, Sultan Gubaidulla, the son of Wali Khan, decided to enlist the support of the Qins in his claim to leadership in the Middle Zhuz. In response to his offer, a special embassy arrived at his headquarters from Beijing to announce the investiture granted by Bogdykhan. Nothing came of it. The Russian official and the Cossack chief explained to the ambassadors that the Kazakh people had long been accepted by the Russian emperors "as perfect citizenship", and Gubaidulla's petition was groundless and was made "ignorant of the force of Russian laws". Cossack detachments dispersed across the steppe to demonstrate their strength. The ambassadors did not insist. The sultan initially objected (his ancestors always received the khanate from the hands of the Chinese!), but, in the end, he had to meet with them-not to receive a Qing investment certificate, but to convey to them his written refusal from such an investment.

The capital did not experience any concern about these events. Foreign Minister K. V. Nesselrode explained:"...It has existed for a long time and has never in itself caused any particular disorder in the dependence of the Kirghiz hordes on the Russian power, despite the fact that the Chinese in the Middle Horde repeatedly raised elders to the level of sultans and even khans. The Russian government... they looked indifferently at such caresses of the Kirghiz, condescendingly accepted the requests of the khans erected by the Chinese to confirm them in this rank, and willingly satisfied these expectations, granting them with letters and decent investment marks, in the conviction that with the elevation of honors, the Kirghiz elders would acquire more weight and strength among the people, necessary for keeping them in obedience" [Sbornik gazeta..., 1878, p. 440, 443-145, 456; Temirgaliev, 2013, p. 229]. Later, the failed Khan Gubaidulla was arrested.

As for the Emir of Bukhara and the Khan of Khiva, they had some hierarchical relationships with the Ottoman Sultan as the caliph-the head of Sunni Muslims. But these relations cannot be considered as relations of domination and subordination. The Sultan gave the Central Asian padishahs not even royal titles, but only nominal court posts (Vamberi, 2003, p. 299). This included them in the Pax Osmanica, but did not impose any real responsibilities in relation to Istanbul.

The inauguration ceremony of a ruler dependent on the Russian tsar was an important part of Russian politics. It was designed to combine instilling the greatness and power of Russia in its subjects with demonstrating the favor of the supreme power to the new vassal appointee. Over time, the imperial entourage increased, exerting a vivid emotional impact on the participants of the enthronement. The use of traditional rituals at the first stage of the "accession" of the vassal contributed to the psychological reconciliation of the people with the power of the Russians. In addition, the dual legitimacy of electing a ruler, and the fact that he received authority both from the "election" of his people and from the will of the tsar, turned the Moscow/St. Petersburg protégé into a conductor of the Center's policy, a tool for adapting his fellow tribesmen to Russian statehood. As you know, the result of such adaptation was, in the end,

page 8
finally, the complete inclusion of" non-native " possessions in the administrative structure, without the former local differences.

In Kasimov, the Tatar tsars/khans were "made" by the sovereign's grant, apparently as a result of a conference with nearby boyars and duma clerks. The next day after the meeting, the successful applicant was given an audience [Dvortsovye..., 1850, p. 141]. Obviously, it was used to present a certificate of merit, and the new tsar gave an oath of allegiance. This was the investiture and the initial stage of the capital's accession.

Then the action moved to Kasimov. A local chronicler, Qadir Ali beg, described the ceremony of enthroning King Uraz Muhammad in 1600. Accompanied by a seconded boyar and a crowded retinue, the Khan entered the city, and on the holy day of Friday, the nobility gathered in the mosque. A high cleric, seyid, read the khutbah, after which four beks (leaders of Tatar tribes) raised Uraz-Muhammad "on the golden hill" (the chronicle shows a diagram of the throne place and the location of these beks). The audience showered Khan with money (literally) and congratulations. Then there was a feast and the traditional distribution of favors and alms by the khan. Everything happened in the presence of a Moscow boyar [Velyaminov-Zernov, 1864, p. 400-408; Usmanov, 1972, p. 90].

Among the Kazakhs in the XVIII century, the ceremony in a nomadic environment, on the contrary, often preceded the imperial investiture, which was performed in absentia, in border areas, by representatives of the Russian sovereign. The new khan of the Junior or Middle Zhuz had to appear at the point specified by the Governor-General or other high manager. This began after the death of Khan Abulkhair in 1748, when his son Nurali took over the rule, and was strictly observed until the abolition of khan's power. The challenge of the sultan, intended for the khanate, to the headquarters of the Russian chief (or in its immediate vicinity) served as a sign of non-independence, submission. It is no coincidence that Ablay later refused to go to the Siberian Line to receive signs of Khan's power, considering that this would increase his dependence [Erofeeva and Urashev, 1981, p. 92].

However, I must say that there was nothing humiliating in the rituals of the "accession" of the Kazakh khans. On the contrary, the Russian authorities tried to arrange the event with maximum pomp and solemnity, to show how much they value a nomadic ruler who was awarded high trust. The cost of receiving and treating participants turned out to be considerable. The treasury allocated 1,000 rubles for the appointment of Nurali, but this was not enough, and the government allowed the Orenburg governor I. I. Neplyuev to spend the funds at his discretion. As a result, more than 2,000 rubles were spent. [Basin, 1971, p. 86].

Expenses were also required for equipping the troops. Military personnel from units stationed in a remote province, on the outskirts of the state, often wore shabby uniforms, and had far from new weapons. And it was necessary to show the assembled Kazakhs the military strength of the empire, well-done, brilliantly armed soldiers, to inspire respect and fear before the power of the "white tsar". Money was needed to get the soldiers in good shape. As a result, deputations from the steppe were met in parade formation, with unfurled banners, and cannons were fired in honor of the new khan.

From earlier, pre-Petrine times, it was customary to oblige military and civil servants to leave their homes on such solemn days and create ostentatious crowds, festive mood on the streets. All the surrounding dragoon squadrons and Cossack teams, officers and civil officials gathered (see, for example: [Yudin, 1892, p. 498]).

The set of ritual actions was similar when approving the khans of the Younger Zhuz and the Bukeevskaya Horde (see: [Bronevsky, 1830, p. 414-416; Vitevsky, 1897, p. 770; History of Bukeevsky..., 2002, p. 242-244; Levshin, 1996, p. 348, 349; Rite..., 1896, p. 2 3; Rychkov, 2001, p. 217; Kharuzin, 1889, stb. 19; Yudin, 1892, p. 500, 506-509]). If you decided to

page 9
if this was not done in a fortress (Orenburg, Ufa, Uralsk, etc.), then an open steppe space was chosen in advance, suitable both for building troops and for accommodating numerous nomads who gathered for the holiday. In the morning, a staff officer accompanied by an honorary horse guard would drive up to the khan's yurt, and the khan (sometimes in a carriage sent for this purpose), followed by Kazakh dignitaries, would go to the place of the ceremony. Guns thundered, the military formation was given the command " on guard!". The most honored persons in a strict order (described in the instructions) stood on a carpet spread out in a specially pitched tent or on the ground under the open sky. In the presence of the local governor, the highest salary certificate was read out in Russian and "Tatar" (Turkic) languages. The Khan knelt down, applied himself to the letter and listened to the oath drawn up in the College of Foreign Affairs or in the Senate, which was read out by the akhun (senior mullah). The Khan swore allegiance to the Russian throne. On the text of the oath, he put his seal. An artillery salute followed. The newly appointed ruler was awarded a diploma and a patent, put on a brocade robe, a sable fur coat and a fur hat, and girded with a saber (here the items could vary). Then a message was read out to the sultans, biys and elders about the will of the sovereign / empress with a call to obey the newly appointed khan.

After the congratulations and ceremonial tearing of the old khan's clothes by the audience, the joyful dynast, the jubilant audience, and the officials and officers filled with the importance of the moment began to feast to music, fireworks, and cannon fire. A "very rich tract" was arranged for the audience: bulls and sheep were slaughtered, wine, beer and honey were displayed. Baiga (horse racing) - a favorite entertainment of Kazakhs-began.

At the end of the XVIII century. all procedures were brought together and approved by the Senate decree of November 9, 1792. The last leaders of the Kazakhs were introduced into the khan's dignity in accordance with this provision.

Approximately in the same way, with the reading of the decree and the oath, the application of the seal to it, the donation of fur clothes, the next ruler of the Kalmyk Khanate was proclaimed, but there the Muslim ritual was replaced by a Buddhist one. The priest presented ritual white hadaka scarves to the most distinguished participants as a sign of blessing.

Of the Georgian vassal lords, only Kartli-Kakheti King George XII passed through the act of accession. In December 1799, it took two days. First, the representative of the Russian government at the Tiflis court ("minister") solemnly handed over to George Iraklievich in the royal palace the signs of power sent by Paul I for the"co-Orthodox tsar" 2: the throne, saber, crown, scepter, porphyry and orders. The next day, a liturgy was served in the church. After it, George ordered "one of the venerable persons" of his court to read the imperial decree confirming him on the throne. Then he took the oath of allegiance to the Russian autocrat and all his successors and assumed the royal insignia. Everyone went to the palace, where the new tsar began to receive congratulations. Cannons thundered in the city, bells rang, and a general celebration began (Dubrovin, 1867, pp. 78-84). In early 1801, the monarchy in Eastern Georgia was abolished.

Nevertheless, in Georgia and neighboring territories, lords remained in the rank of princes. They also needed legitimation procedures within the empire. In 1806, the ten-year-old Levan Dadiani, who headed his mountainous country under the care of his mother and four most distinguished nobles, was introduced to the dignity of Prince of Mingrelia. In the church, in the presence of Mingrelian dignitaries, Prince Levan Grigorievich received the highest certificate of approval and took the oath, after which he acquired the symbols of his new state.

2 The expression of Senator E. E. Eristov in his speech on the occasion of the presentation of regalia to George [P. I., 1846, p. 4] (assigning the number XIII to George is sometimes a mistake found in the literature).

page 10
positions: sword, banner and order badges. Alexander I made this teenager a major general in absentia [Incidents, 1849, p. 84]. A similar ceremonial was observed when the North Caucasian leaders were confirmed to rule (see, for example: [A. K., 1869, p. 40, 41]). In general, the assignment of high military ranks in the XIX century became characteristic of the relations of the central government with ethnic elites.

The Emir of Bukhara was elevated to the throne by the highest dignitaries. They lifted him up on a koshma and sat him on the throne seat (takht) [Voskhodie..., 1886, p. 2]. No traces of Russian presence or influence are visible in this ceremony.

As for the Siberian lords-princes and toyons, such magnificent procedures were not arranged with them. Usually they were summoned to the local authorities (voivode or county manager of a lower level) and announced the sovereign's will to grant them the appropriate powers. Upon termination of the latter, the certificate was withdrawn [Acts..., 1842, p. 148; Perevalova, 1999, p. 156, 159].

The most important sign of monarchical power was the crown. She complained to the Russian-dependent rulers in exceptional cases. It is known about the sending of crowns to the Kartli-Kakheti tsars Heraclius II from Catherine II (although he did not have time to conduct the wedding ceremony for the kingdom) and his son George XII from Paul I. As described above, in 1799 George was crowned with this gold headdress with precious stones.

The Emir of Bukhara had a crown-taj, which he placed on a turban during his accession to the throne. However, under the Russian protectorate, the taj was almost never used, as it was considered a symbol of supreme power, and it now belonged to the"white tsar". For the same reason, the main hall of kurnishikhon, where the new Emir of bey was traditionally raised on a white koshma, was in disrepair, and all court ceremonies were held in the Salomkhon greeting hall, which was less honorable [Solovyova, 2002, p. 166, 167].

The Shamkhals, the rulers of Northern Dagestan, were in the sphere of hegemony of Persia for almost the entire period of the XVI - XVIII centuries and were considered Shah's vassals. At the end of the 18th century, the Persian empire was weakened by turmoil, and its power in the Caucasus weakened. Under these circumstances, Russia, under the Treaty of St. George in 1783, took under the protection of Eastern Georgia (a long-time vassal of Iran) and tried to extend its influence to Shamkhalismism. Catherine II in 1793 not only honored Shamkhal Muhammad with the rank of privy councilor and appointed an annual salary of 6 thousand rubles, but also sent him a feather to wear on his cap. Four years later, Paul I confirmed the deceased Muhammad's son Mehdi on the Shamkhal throne, and along with the same high rank of the third class and the same salary, he again granted the right to wear a feather on his cap. Strictly speaking, it was a geopolitical intrigue, because Dagestan still formally belonged to the Persians. But even after its entry into the Russian Empire, in 1836, shamkhal Abu Muslim received permission from Nicholas I regarding the pen [Butkov, 1869, p. 290; Shamkhaly..., 1868, p. 62, 65] 3.

Russian diplomats were acutely aware of the dependent lords ' close attention to all sorts of formal signs of respect. In this sense, granting the right to wear a feather was valued in the eyes of shamkhals no less than the degree of privy councilor, which put these Caucasian leaders on the same level as Russian ministers and governors-general. The feather on the cap in Persian political culture served as a sign of power over the people. The precious crown of the powerful shah-conqueror of Nadir (1736 - 1747) was decorated with four diamond feathers corresponding to the four countries under his control: Iran, Afghanistan, India and Central Asia - the Khanates of Bukhara and Khiva (Potto, 1867, p.276). The Caucasian possessions, therefore, belonged to the territories that the "Iranian"represented

3 Some shamkhals received Russian general titles.

page 11
stylus. Now St. Petersburg gave shamkhal a sign of liberation from the former long dependence on the shahs and the prerogative to have his own "Dagestan" feather on his headdress.

The most common attributes of investiture in Russian politics were weapons and expensive clothing. The precedent here most likely served as the practice of gifting Kalmyk leaders as sovereigns of the first domain with sole rule that joined Russia. In any case, Insignia Nurali - the first khan of the Younger Zhuz, who received an investiture from Elizabeth Petrovna in 1749, was appointed "following the example of ... Kalmyk khans and their deputies", i.e. exactly the same [Kazakh-Russian..., 1964, p. 445]. The weapons most often complained about were ceremonial sabers worth several thousand rubles, in scabbards covered with gold or silver, precious stones, sometimes with the recipient's name or the imperial monogram (Kazakh, Avar and Kurin khans, Georgian tsar). It was noted above that the Mingrelian prince was given a sword when he was inaugurated; Siberian toyons were given dirks. Together with the saber, they could give pistols( Abulkhair), iron armor-carapace, helmet-bump, bracers, shield (Abulkhair, Tseren Donduk, Donduk Dashi).

An equally significant procedure was the acceptance of robes from the Russian tsar. Here, two paradigms of rewarding merit and loyalty are visibly combined: Russian ("a fur coat from the tsar's shoulder") and Turkish-Muslim (a robe as a reward for a subject from the padishah). Sources have preserved numerous information about the delivery of sable fur coats (brocade lined with sable fur), brocade hats trimmed with sable or black fox, i.e. products of fabulous value (Kazakh and Kalmyk khans) to the complained rulers. Once there was a mention of granting the ruler of the Kazakhs the usual brocade robe along with a saber, fur coat and fox hat [Bronevsky, 1830, p. 415]. All of the above was not just put on by the khan, but "placed" on him as "signs of the khanate".

After all, these were not banal gifts. The instructions for the investiture procedure described the rank of a Russian officer who puts a fur coat on the ruler, which one wears a hat, which one gives a saber, etc. The Russian authorities sought to establish the symbolic meaning of the objects complained of: "so that the Kalmyks would honor this as a sign of the khanate, and maybe they would have this in their everyday life, which one (sabers, carapace and shield. - V. T.) will not be given, he will not be accepted as Pryamov Khan" [History of Kalmykia..., 2009, p. 386 (proposal of the Astrakhan governor A. P. Volynsky in 1724)] 4.

When approving the status of the Kalmyk Khanate, a phenomenon was observed that illustrated the understanding of the Russian ruling elite of the place of the new possession in the system of Russian statehood. The first khan of the Kalmyks was Munchak (Puntsuk), who in 1664 gave his orders to Tsar Alexey Mikhailovich and received from him consent to the khan's status along with insignia. These were a gilded silver mace decorated with jasper, and a white banner with a red border [Istoriya Kalmykiya..., 2009, p. 344]. As far as I know, the mace was not sent to subsequent khans. In giving it to Munchak, I see an analogy that the Kremlin politicians of the XVII century saw between the newly formed Kalmyk Khanate and the Hetmanate. Both autonomous formations were part of the Moscow State (i.e., they recognized the supreme authority of the tsar), but they had significant differences from the counties and voivodeships of European Russia and Siberia. Cossack kleinods (regalia of power) included the hetman's mace and naseka (staff), military banner, bunchuk, seal, judge's club and colonel's pernach (a kind of mace, but not decorative, like the hetman's, but a real military weapon). The presentation of the mace and banner to the Hetman began with the Pereyaslavl Rada on January 8, 1654.,

4 The investiture from the Dalai Lama was accompanied by a similar set of regalia: a seal, a cap, clothing, a saber, a banner, and a saddle that is absent in Russian practice [Kurapov, 2007, p. 96, 156].

page 12
when the Moscow ambassador gave Bohdan Khmelnitsky and the "elementary people" "a banner and a mace, and a ferezey, and a hat, and sables" [Reunited..., 1953, p.521].

Banners "with the coat of arms of the All-Russian Empire" also complained to the vassal rulers of Mingrelia, Avar, Kyurinsky and Kalmyk khanates [Bichurin, 1991, p. 103; Istoriya Dagestan..., 2004, p. 478; Kamer-fouriersky..., 1911, p. 874; Incidents..., 1849, p. 84; Russko-dagestanskiye..., 1988, p. 301]. The combination of the banner and saber in the awards 5 again allows us to turn to Eastern analogies. This particular set of regalia was passed down from the Ottoman Sultan to the rulers he considered his vassals. The symbolic saber of the Prophet served as a sign of readiness to fight the "infidels". It was part of the ritual of the sultan's coronation at the Abu Ayyub Mosque in Istanbul. It is characteristic that the combination of these two items was awarded in Russia to those vassals who were in the sphere of Eastern cultures. Probably, Russian politicians considered this a visible and familiar image of dependence on the elder sovereign for that audience.

Removing the ruler from office, i.e. overthrowing him, would run counter to the principles of ethnic policy aimed at building consensus with the elites of the subject peoples. Therefore, when a situation arose that required the replacement of a vassal (and such situations inevitably arose), they tried to find ways to do this without too much noise and in the least humiliating way for the ruler and his people. As far as I know, no instructions have been drawn up for the removal of a position or title. Each time, the Government and regional administrations acted on the basis of a specific state of affairs. Actually, the main reasons for removal from the government could be two: disloyalty to the Russian tsar and inability to manage. In 1785, it was recognized that the khan of the Younger zhuz Nurali could not cope with his subjects. Indeed, while Western Kazakhstan was in turmoil, most of the nobles were dissatisfied with the khan's rule. "Because of his inability", he was placed in Ufa and was not allowed to drive. The Russian authorities resolved all issues with the biys and foremen, over Nurali Khan's head.

Nurali's contemporary, Middle Zhuz Khan Ablay, was suspected of being pro-Chinese. Therefore, despite his election as khan at the congress of nobles, it was decided not to send him signs of khan's dignity and stop issuing the appointed salary. A special decree of Catherine the Great set the task of finding a replacement for this "stubborn and famous barbarian" [Kraft, 1897, p. 53; Kraft, 1898, p.50]. So here, too, the Russian authorities avoided open scandal and preferred to act through finance and diplomacy. Moreover, Ablay occupied the throne not only by the choice of the congress, but also by investiture from the Qins.

The reign of the Kalmyk Khan Tseren Donduk was considered unsuccessful in St. Petersburg. A secret instruction was sent to the Astrakhan governor: "Khan Cheren Donduk is weak and powerless, and because of drunkenness he is very unworthy of the rule of the Kalmyks, and he could not keep that people in good harmony and loyalty to the E. I. V.-vu." It was necessary "to send him, Khan Cheren Donduk, decently from the ulus here to the court, only to order him to lead with all pleasure." His replacement was found in the person of his nephew Donduk Ombo, who was devoted to Russia. Tseren Donduk himself was delivered the decree of Anna Ioannovna of March 20, 1735 with the command "you, our subject, should come here to St. Petersburg immediately for some business" [Kurapov, 2007, pp. 157-158]. This change of power in the khanate illustrated its weakening after the death of the powerful Khan Ayuki (1724) and the gradual decline in the degree of autonomy.

5 To the Kalmyk khans Munchak in 1664 and Donduk Ombo in 1737, to the Avar khans Surkhai and Abu-Sultan-Nusal in 1829. A similar symbolism can be seen in the award of a saber and standard with a double-headed eagle and the imperial coat of arms of Kartli to Kakheti Tsar George XII in 1799, and a banner and sword to Mingrelian Prince Levan in 1806.

page 13
In the history of Russia, relations with the annexed possessions developed in such a way that the change of their rulers took place mostly peacefully. If it was possible to replace the deceased with his rightful heir, then the government, with the guarantee of his loyalty, always went for it. If the struggle of several heirs began or was planned, then it was necessary to choose from them the most convenient and loyal. It was on him that the bet was made, and he was supported by all the means at the disposal of the empire.

The throne, as a rule, was inherited by the will and testament of the ruler. Sometimes this will was announced orally, in the presence of authoritative and high-ranking witnesses (as in the case of the Kazakhs [Zimanov, 1960, p. 92, 93]), and sometimes it was recorded on paper. The guarantee of compliance with the will was the oath of relatives, courtiers and nobles not to deviate from the orders made in it. In the context of dependence on the Russian government, candidates for successors had to be discussed and approved in the central departments as well.

It was reasonable to present the future vassal to the "white tsar" in advance and enlist the highest support. Khans, shamkhals, princes brought their sons to the capital or sent them at the head of embassies "for viewing". This wasn't just a show of goodwill towards the overlord. This was a prerequisite for the transfer of power. Officially, it was expressed in letters of salary. The emperors issued them, " commanding the successors of this dignity to ask for this Highness. (so in the text. - V. T.) approval by our imperial charters, which... according to our special mercy, they will be rewarded" [Russko-dagestanskiye..., 1988, p. 301 (letter of Alexander I to the Kyurinsky Aslan Khan)]. The autocrat's approval instilled confidence in the strength of the government. Usually, such preliminary support was expressed in a gracious agreement with the candidacy of the heir (or, if he was too young, the regent) .6 It was believed that in the subject domain there was a possibility of internecine strife between the descendants of the ruler. Then the Russian authorities had to interfere in the local internal affairs. Sometimes a congratulatory telegram from the emperor was enough to stop the claims of other pretenders to the throne, as happened in Bukhara after the death of Emir Sayyid Muzaffar in 1885.The brothers of the new Emir, Sayyid Abdul-Ahad, having learned about the dispatch, did not dare to resist and cause trouble. Passions were also cooled by the embassy with a convoy of 29 Cossacks, sent with congratulations from the military governor of the Syrdarya region, N. I. Grodekov. And when the embassy of gratitude from Seyid-Abdul-Ahad was kindly received in St. Petersburg, the "tsarevichs" completely abandoned their warlike plans. There was no need to march on Bukhara with four battalions and six Cossack hundreds with twelve guns, already equipped by Grodekov [Dingelstedt, 1896, p. 46; Terentyev, 1906, p. 58].

A similar situation developed in Khiva in August 1910. The head of the Amu Darya department, Major General N. G. Glushanovsky, knowing about the fading of the sick Khan Muhammad-Rahim, arrived in the city in advance accompanied by Cossacks. After the death of the khan, the general announced in the royal name to his son and long-appointed heir, Seyid-Asfandiar-tyura, that he was being entrusted with the administration of the khanate. Immediately, messengers were sent to the khanate's provinces and sapam was appointed - an official reception to announce the change of ruler, where all members of the ruling house of Kungrat, nobles and clergy were to arrive [Pogorelsky, 1968, p.72].

Under the head of the Kalmyk Khanate, Donduk Dashi, there was a Russian guard headed by stolnik D. Bakkhmetev. In addition to taking care of the safety of the governor and his family, he was entrusted with intelligence and supervision of the situation, intervening if necessary: "to bring the khan by means of advice to ensure that he was to the E. C. V-vu.

6 After the death of the ruler of autonomous Mingrelia, Prince David Dadiani, Nicholas I appointed his widow temporary ruler until her eldest son, seven-year-old Nicholas, matured [Borozdin, 1885, p. 22].

page 14
all loyalty." The headquarters of the Bukeevsky Khan Dzhangir were guarded by Ural Cossacks. In case of unrest, a two-hundred-strong Russian detachment headed by officers, seconded by the Orenburg and Astrakhan governors, was constantly stationed there. The same Cossack guard was assigned to the chief Kazakh elders and sultans, who headed the divisions of the former Junior zhuz after the Khan's power was eliminated in it [Zimanov, 1982, p. 100; Kazantsev, 1867, p. 62; Maksimov, 2000, p. 39; Sabanshchikov, 1832, p.677].

The abolition of vassalage took place without ceremony. In line with the persistent tendency to unify the standards of governance and citizenship, they gradually approached the status of Russian provinces in the main territory of the empire. In the end, khanates and principalities came to a logical conclusion: in the course of administrative reorganizations, they were included in the provinces or regions, and the rudiments of independent monarchical rule were eliminated. Former rulers, if they did not commit any wrongdoing, were left with the ranks and titles granted to them and sent to lead a private life befitting wealthy and well-born nobles.

list of literature

A. K. Kazikumukhsky and Kyurinsky Khans // Collection of information about the Caucasian mountaineers. Issue II. Tiflis, 1869.

Historical Acts Collected and published by the Archeographic Commission, vol. 4. St. Petersburg: Tip. II Branches of the Own E. I. V. Chancellery, 1842.

Russia and the Kazakh Khanates in the XVI-XVIII centuries. (Kazakhstan in the system of foreign policy of the Russian Empire). Alma-Ata: Nauka Publ., 1971.

Batmaev M. M. Socio-political system and economy of the Kalmyks in the XVII-XVIII centuries. Elista: Dzhangar Publ., 2002.

Bichurin N. Ya. (Iakinf). Historical review of the Oirats or Kalmyks from the 15th century to the present. Elista: Kalmyk Book Publishing House, 1991.

Borozdin K. A. [The abolition of two autonomies (excerpt from memories of Transcaucasia)]. Istoricheskiy vestnik, 1885, vol. 19, No. 1.

Bronevsky M. Zapiski o kirghizakh Srednoi Hordy [Notes on the Kyrgyz of the Middle Horde]. 1830. Part 21. Book 119.

Butkov P. G. Materials for the new history of the Caucasus from 1722 to 1803. Part 2. St. Petersburg: B. ed., 1869.

Vamberi A. Travel through Central Asia, Moscow: Vostochny lit., 2003.
Velyaminov-Zernov V. V. Issledovanie o kasimovskikh tsariy i tsarevichakh [Research on the Kasimov tsars and tsarevichs]. Ch. 2. SPb.: Tip. Imp. Academy of Sciences, 1864.

Vitevsky, V. N. and I. I. Neplyuev and the Orenburg Region in its former composition before 1758, Vol. 3. Kazan: V. M. Klyuchnikova, 1897.

Reunification of Ukraine with Russia, Vol. III, Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1953.

Ascension of the new Emir to the Bukhara throne / / Government Bulletin, April 24 (May 6), 1886. N 89.

Letter of the Emperor Alexander I on the appointment of the Khans of the Malaya and Bukeevskaya hordes / / Turgai regional Vedomosti. 1899. April 30.

Dvortsovye razryady [Palace Discharges], vol. 1. SPb.: Tip.II Otdeliya Svoimoi V. I. V. Kantsii, 1850 (in Russian).

Dingelstedt N. [Peaceful politics and bloodless conquests (Turkestan 1884-1889)]. 1896. N 6. Otd. 2.

Dubrovin N. F. George XII, the last Tsar of Georgia, and its annexation to Russia. Department of Shires, 1867.

Erofeeva I. V. Urashev S. A. Politika tsarizma v Srednego zhuze v osveshchenii russkikh uchenykh i travelnikov vtoroi poloviny XVIII - pervoi poloviny XIX vekov [The policy of Tsarism in the Middle Zhuz in the coverage of Russian scientists and travelers of the second half of the XVIII-first half of the XIX centuries]. Alma-Ata: Kazakh ped. institute of them. Abaya Publ., 1981.

Zimanov S. Z. Political structure of Kazakhstan in the late 18th and first half of the 19th centuries. Alma-Ata: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR, 1960.

History of the Bukeev Khanate. 1801-1852 Collection of documents and materials. Almaty: Daik-Press, 2002.

Istoriya Dagestana s drevneyshikh vremeni do nashim dni [History of Dagestan from ancient times to the present day]. Vol.1. Moscow: Nauka, 2004.

Istoriya Kalmykii s drevneyshikh vremeni do nashenii [History of Kalmykia from ancient Times to the present day]. Vol.1. Elista: Gerel, 2009.

Kazantsev I. Description of kirghiz-kaisak. SPb.: Type. Partnership "Public benefit", 1867.

page 15
Kazakh-Russian relations in the XVIII-XIX centuries (1771-1867). Collection of documents and materials. Alma-Ata: Nauka Publ., 1964.

Camera-Fourier Ceremonial Journal 1812, January-June. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the General Archive of the Ministry of Imperial Court, 1911.

Craft And. Acceptance of Russian citizenship by Kyrgyz // Izvestiya Orenburg department of Imp. Russian Geographical Society. Issue No. 12. Orenburg, 1897.

Kraft I. I. Sbornik uzakoneniy o kirghizakh stepnykh oblastov [Collection of laws on Kyrgyzs of steppe regions]. Orenburg: P. N. Zharikova Typol., 1898.

Kurapov A. A. Buddhism and Power in the Kalmyk Khanate of the XVII-XVIII centuries. Elista: Dzhangar Publ., 2007.

Levshin A. I. Description of the Kirghiz-Cossack, or Kirghiz-Kaysak, hordes and steppes. Almaty: Sanat Publ., 1996.

Moonlight. Kalmyk historical and literary monuments. Elista: Kalmyk Book Publishing House, 2003.

Maksimov K. N. Istoriya natsional'noi gosudarstvennosti Kalmykii (nachalo XVI v. - XX V.) [History of the National statehood of Kalmykia (the beginning of the XVI century-XX century)].
The proclamation letter of Emperor Alexander I on the division of the Malaya Horde into the Malaya and Buksevskaya Horde and on the approval of the Sultan of Shirgazi in the Khan's dignity / / Turgai Regional Vedomosti. 1899. May 7.

The rite of celebration at the announcement... Confirmations to the Kirghiz of the Middle Horde, Vali Sultan of Khan dignity / / Kirghiz Steppe newspaper. 1896. N 11, 12, 14.

Palmov N. N. Etudes on the history of the Volga Kalmyks. Part II. XVIII century. Astrakhan: Kalmyk region Executive Committee, 1927.

Perevalova E. V. O znachenie zhalovannykh gramot ostyatskikh knyaztsy [On the meaning of the awarded letters of Ostyak princes]. Proceedings of the II-th Siberian Symposium "Cultural Heritage of the peoples of Western Siberia". Tobolsk; Omsk: OmSPU Publ., 1999.

P. I. Rech, govorennaya gruzinskomu tsaru Georgiu XIII v 1798 godu po sluchu polucheniya im ot imperatora Pavla Petrovicha tsarist regalia [Speech spoken to the Georgian Tsar George XIII in 1798 on the occasion of receiving the royal regalia from the Emperor Pavel Petrovich]. Zakavkazskiy vestnik, January 7, 1846, No. 1.
Pogorelsky I. V. Ocherki ekonomicheskoi i politicheskoi istorii Khiva khanstva kontsa XIX i nachala XX vv. (1873-1917gg.) [Essays on the economic and political history of the Khiva Khanate in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (1873-1917)].

Complete collection of scientific travels in Russia, vol. 3. SPb.: Tip. Imp. Academy of Sciences,1821.

Potto V. A. Kavkazskaya voina v ocherkakh, episodakh, legendakh i biografiyakh [The Caucasian War in essays, episodes, legends and biographies].
Incidents that accompanied the annexation of Mingrelia to Russia / / Kavkaz. 1849. May 21.

Russko-dagestanskie otnosheniya v XVIII nachale XIX v. Sb. dokumentov [Russian-Dagestani relations in the 18th and early 19th centuries].

Rynkov P. I. History of Orenburg on the establishment of the Orenburg province. Ufa: B. ed., 2001.

Sabanshchikov. Ryn peski / / Zavolzhsky muravey. 1832. Ch. P. N 12. June.

Solov'eva O. A. Faces of the power of Noble Bukhara. SPb.: B. izd., 2002.

Suleimenov B. S., Basin V. Ya. Kazakhstan as part of Russia in the XVIII-early XX century. Alma-Ata: "Science" of the Kazakh SSR, 1981.

Temirgaliev R. D. Kazakhs and Russia, Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2013.
Terent'ev M. A. Istoriya obedianiya Srednoi Azii [History of the Conquest of Central Asia]. Vol. 3. SPb.: tipolit. V. V. Komarova, 1906.

Usmanov M. A. Tatar historical sources of the XVII-XVIII centuries. Kazan: Kazan University Publishing House, 1972.

Kharuzin A. N. Kirghizs of the Bukeev Horde (an anthropological and ethnological essay). Issue 1. Moscow: tip. A. Levensoni and Co., 1889.

Central Asia as Part of the Russian Empire, Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2008.
Shamkhals of Tarkovsky / / Collection of information about the Caucasian mountaineers. Issue I. Tiflis, 1868.

Yudin P. A. Ceremonials of Khan's elections among the Kirghiz people. Russian Archive, 1892, No. 4.
page 16

Постоянный адрес данной публикации: