Why are Old Believers such successful entrepreneurs? Old Believers: Could the economy survive in Russia on parole? How do we know the numbers

Last week, the series of lectures Homo religiosus, organized by the Yegor Gaidar Foundation, the Russian economic school and the Dynasty Foundation. As part of the lecture "Economics and Orthodoxy" Danila Raskov, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Economic Theory and the Department of Problems of Interdisciplinary Synthesis in the Field of Social and humanities Petersburg state university, spoke about how economic relations were formed among the Old Believers and why they turned out to be so effective as entrepreneurs. The full text of the lecture can be read on the website of the Yegor Gaidar Foundation, and we abbreviated the part of it that is directly devoted to the analysis of the economic activity of the Old Believers in Russia.

I don’t know how much detail is needed and whether it is necessary to explain who the Old Believers are. Initially, the split, as you know, arose as a result of the reform of 1654-1666, there was a long process, since ritual differences gave rise to a rather serious struggle, which resulted in one of the greatest tragedies in the history of our country. It is no coincidence that Solzhenitsyn is credited with saying that if it were not for the 17th century, there would be no 1917. What we see here: well, let's say, two-fingered. Indeed, due to the promotion Russian Empire towards Little Russia, Ukraine, it became necessary to bring the ritual part to a single canon. There was an idea to call the Greeks and stabilize the rite. In history, it must be said, they were baptized with three fingers, and with two. TO XVII century on the very territory of Constantinople, they were baptized with three fingers, but later historians revealed that there is a Studian charter and a Jerusalem charter, they are just different, and there is a different sign of the cross. But because of this seemingly small difference, it all started: how to draw - “Jesus” or “Jesus”, pray on seven or five prosphora, the procession in the sun or against.

The Old Believers set themselves the task of preserving unchanged not only the ritual side - this was connected with the entire liturgical rite. Then, of course, what is interesting, the original conservatism brought to life serious innovations. For example, the radical innovation of the Bespopovites: to renounce five of the seven sacraments altogether, since the rejection of the priesthood led to this. In this sense, they are just compared, and partly rightly, with Protestants: there will be an instrumental similarity here. The second element of the picture of the world that can be identified among the Old Believers is the idea of "Moscow is the third Rome" and, in general, eschatologism. It is generally inherent in Christian thought and not only in Christian thought, both Babylonian and Egyptian. But when this becomes actual, it is difficult to understand why, at some point in time, eschatological feelings lead to self-immolation, and at some point, to hard work. This is one of the ambivalent elements that in different periods time are manifested in different ways, and it is inherent in the entire Christian culture.

Well, the last thing I would note in the picture of the world is the desire to develop a practice that would be more in line with the true, correct life. Because where is the Antichrist - he can be very close: maybe in the handset, maybe in the device; or maybe how I pick up the phone depends on whether he is there or not. Some today are convinced that you shouldn't keep your phone at home. Then such hooks appeared: you come to the house, to the sacred space, and hang up your mobile phone at the entrance. The TV is also taboo for the older generation, but if it is in the closet, it is already easier, sometimes it opens - to show cartoons, for example. In fact, these practices of salvation have interesting aspects in economic life too.

If we talk about economic ethics and practice, what do we see? Both the missionaries and those who traveled around the country, for example Aksakov, who was sent to Moldavia and Bessarabia, were surprised, left notes that the Old Believer villages were more prosperous, it was cleaner there, there were more horses, cows, and so on. And so it is almost everywhere. Thrift - yes, idleness - no, no one should be idle, community interaction, help, trust. The institutions of trust could also be transformed into the area of capital. When a community finds itself in a situation of persecution, these issues are quickly updated, any means of fighting for survival become important and significant. By the way, what happened in the Old Believers: the spiritual elite itself initially blessed both trade and entrepreneurship. Moreover, the experience of the Vygovskaya Pomorskaya Hermitage (this is still the beginning of the 18th century, that is, one of the very first experiments) showed that the kinoviarchs, that is, the leaders of such a secular monastery (secular - because there were no priests, there were no monks by definition, therefore correctly called - hostel or kinovia), they themselves led the trade and participated in it, took loans together. It's pretty much even described. Trading rules appeared: how to trade, how to keep records. According to some observations, even Soviet years the Old Believers were more trusted with accounting. This issue requires a separate study, but is partially confirmed.

At the same time, we have a certain paradox: the paradox of conservatism and innovative potential. He, of course, is not the only one - here you can recall, say, Orthodox Jews, recently a lot of research has appeared on this subject, in America - the Amish, for example. The examples are local, but they are interesting.

How many Old Believers-industrialists were in Moscow?

How successful were the Old Believers in Moscow, in particular in textiles, what determined success, what was the dynamics? Actually, what has been done in historical and economic terms. There are two sets of data: one is industrial, the other is confessional, that is, associated with belonging to the Old Believers. Their union gives an answer to the question of how successful the Old Believers were. Of course, a lot of doubts arise here: if the head of the enterprise is an Old Believer, can we consider that this is an Old Believer business? Ambiguous. The question is even if he acts like an Old Believer, but has already converted to a common faith or official Orthodoxy, does business cease to be an Old Believer or not? You have to answer somehow. I answer yes to the first question, and no to the second. If the head of the factory is an Old Believer, then yes, I believe that this is an Old Believer enterprise, although there are certain reservations. By the end of the 19th century, the situation became more complicated, joint-stock companies appeared - more impersonal forms of business management, which did not exist in the middle of the 19th century, or were extremely uncommon. But in textiles it still dominates private business. Even if a joint-stock company is being created, it is still known who the shareholder is: usually these are five families, five dynasties or someone outside, foreigners or from official Orthodoxy - in late XIX century, it's all changing.

In the 1850s, the question arose: how many schismatics do we really have? We began to look at what data they supply: every year - the same thing with a slight downward trend. But if you look - who supplies? Bishops. But the bishops report: the struggle is going well - there are fewer and fewer of them. They sent a commission to the places - but there are no criteria here either. It got to the point of absurdity. For example, there was such a Sinitsyn: he came to the Yaroslavl province and wherever he found copper icons in the houses, he believed that they were Old Believers. It turned out that there are 18 times more Old Believers than according to the data of the bishops, which is also wrong, because if a person has a copper icon, then it can simply be folk Orthodoxy, he is not necessarily an Old Believer. Then a criterion was introduced: is there a rosary and how is it baptized. But a person can also be baptized with two fingers, and in church several times with three fingers, while one of the priests is watching. That is, the criteria were very difficult.

In the 19th century, we really see a lot of biographies, when a person lived, and then once - and suddenly he suddenly became rich. Ryabushinsky - it is only for the sake of marriage that he converts to the old faith, the founder of the dynasty, then he rises. We see: a lot of neophytes. The founder of the Preobrazhensky cemetery, Ilya Alekseevich Kovylin, is also a neophyte, and there are a lot of such biographies. People from Guslitsa are known - such an ancient place where people never practiced agriculture, but where there were a lot of crafts, Gzhel also enters there. It was rumored that they were also good at forging banknotes, if necessary, passports.

Trumps of the Old Believers

What is the comparative context for this problem? On the one hand, ethics, on the other, the effect of the persecuted group. What interests economists in such topics? Economists are interested in the homogeneity of the group and the various characteristics of this homogeneity - it is clear that this has certain advantages for trade. The possibility of private settlement of conflicts: if the legal system is not developed, and the community itself, for example, can discount bills or conduct some other transactions or generally guarantee property rights, that is, exercise parallel control. The same goes for the origin of the mafia in Italy, one of the theories is: the aristocracy is gone - the lords are gone, and who are the masters of the land? And then people appear and say: we know how to act. With a strong legal and judicial system, this comparative advantage becomes irrelevant - institutions of trust, reciprocity, big debates on reputation mechanisms - how are they even measured and how do they affect trade and industry? And, of course, all this can be packaged into formulas such as human capital and social capital. For example, education or literacy: it is obvious that the Old Believers were generally more literate than the average peasantry, which is part of official Orthodoxy. Why? We had to conduct the service ourselves, copy the books ourselves. Literacy in this sense was expensive, not everyone could afford it. It took time, effort, and money to learn. Suppose the cow had to be given to the one who taught. Social capital is the relationships that are already formed in communities: an instrument of reputation, trust, and so on. All this can be packaged in different ways, as I said.

How do we know the numbers?

Now very briefly about the data - and move on to the results. In principle, revisions give a lot in terms of understanding belonging to the Old Believers in Moscow. The ninth and tenth revisions took into account religion. According to the results of the ninth audit, 624 families were registered as parishioners of either the non-priest community or the priest's community. Most of the priestly community, somewhere around 85% for this period. The difference between priests and bespopovtsy ranges from 70% to 90%. This is due, among other things, to the fact that the Bespopovtsy advertised their affiliation less, remained in the shadows, because they were officially recognized as more harmful, and feared reprisals.

Very interesting information is given by the synodics. We already know this for sure: since they pray in the church of the Rogozh community, it means that they are definitely Old Believers. There were observations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, a very interesting document of 1838, in fact, about all significant merchants with a description of their activities. As for industry, they managed to take seven points - it's not so many, but not so few - and get hold of all the data on doing business. For processing, information was used only for six years, the cut-off level was from 10 thousand rubles, because the same accounting was not carried out for all years. Of course, we still need to figure it out, but in general we can say that there is still no more reliable information. Textile factories have data on turnover, number of workers, occupation

This is how industrial information looks like: who, where is located, how many mills, workers, turnover, what produces - by year.

This map shows how important Moscow industry was: we see that with a huge excess, twice, in 1870 Moscow industry is in the lead. Then factories appear in the Vladimir region, in the Ryazan region, of course, in St. Petersburg, but this is somewhat later. By 1832, as a result of this processing, we see that 18% of the textile industry belongs to the Old Believers. The next question is: is it a lot or a little? In principle, given that this is thoroughly confirmed, a lot. In this case, we are talking about 60, if we take the city and counties, and 76 enterprises. They are, of course, different in size. There is no exact data on the number of Old Believers, but estimates fluctuate, starting at 4%. The most optimistic figure is 16% for one of the years. From this you can judge what is happening.

This is general data, it is pro-cyclical, and we can see that the upper blue border is total number firms, then a dotted pink stroke - this is exactly the share of Old Believer firms. There is some stability, and then a recession. Stability is about 20-25%, then, at the end of the 19th century, there is a decrease. Accordingly, the number of firms remains roughly the same.

If we take the overall data for the textile industry, we see (share is the red line, green dotted line is the labor force) that at some periods there is a comparative advantage in the labor force, that is, they are able to attract significantly more workers. And the share of firms in the total turnover is also subject to such a single cycle. In this case, it is more than 20%, and after 1870 there is a decline.

More specifically, in the wool industry. In the first column here is simply the share of enterprises, then the share in turnover, the share in the labor force. In this table, it is interesting that the share of the employed labor force almost always exceeds the share of firms, that is, there are relatively more workers working there, while the output is relatively higher than the labor force indicator, labor productivity is higher. And this delta is the difference in the median value for the totality of Old Believers and non-Old Believers, Old Believers minus non-Old Believers. In this sense, their average labor productivity per worker is higher. It is clear that this is the “average temperature in the hospital”, because there are some very large enterprises, and there are small ones, but this will still tell us a lot, especially since we are taking not the average here, but the median, and this gives closer to reality. We no longer have this in the cotton industry, and here it is clear that these are mainly small firms with low productivity, and the share will be just much higher than the share in terms of turnover. Well, not significantly - depending on the years, sometimes significantly, sometimes it coincides. But here we no longer see the general dynamics. Moreover, by the end of the 19th century, the cotton industry partially left Moscow and the Moscow district, so we see such data. In any case, the Old Believers no longer have any weight here: the Morozovs are already working in the Tver province or in other districts, for example, in Borovsky.

In principle, what we found is that the Old Believers were overrepresented, they had an increased propensity for entrepreneurship, they hired on average more labor in the wool industry, and the enterprises showed high productivity. In general, until 1870 we observe a very stable participation in economic life, then a relative decline.

Waves of repression and cycles of economic activity

How to interpret the fall and how important are empirical data to us in this aspect? It is very interesting to trace the cyclical waves of repression. Some historians write that it has great importance, because at first - tough repressions, almost suffocation, and then - weakening. And then moments of weakening, liberalization, respectively, form a special community, institutions appear, and this very moment of persecution leads to the fact that natural selection leaves these close-knit people, the strongest. I am joking about this: for a long time there was no persecution of the Old Believers, so now they are not so noticeable economically. But this is a joke, of course. In principle, already under Nicholas I, they set the task of solving the problem with the Old Believers, but they could not. At the same time, for example, they still awarded medals - there were persecutions and awards at the same time, because who will solve the problems? I came across a document: it is known that the sovereign will go there and there, and then they missed it, the road is broken, because military exercises or something like that took place along it. Who will restore? We turned to the Old Believer merchants. They have restored everything and say: we have only one thing - give us a state diploma that we are so good. Well, they did. Or in Petrozavodsk: the sovereign will arrive - but the embankment is not in order. Who will fix it? And a medal for that too. That is, the history of the appearance of the medal is clear here. There were different interpretations, I probably won't dwell on it.

For example, honesty: it is clear that honesty is important in trading. By the way, while researching the Old Believer entrepreneurship, I saw that not everything is simple there. Sometimes siblings give each other money by receipt. It would seem: why on receipt - these are brothers. And so that the devil does not get in the way! That is, they gave a receipt - and you can live in peace.

The role of Moscow In the second half of the 19th century, we see the development of joint-stock forms of ownership, that is, impersonal relations, the banking sector; growing number of foreigners. If you look at the St. Petersburg merchant guild, then 40 percent there will be Protestants and Jews, in some periods even more. This is a different picture in terms of the fact that the very nature of business is changing. The role of the state has changed: if in the first half of the 19th century it was not particularly active, then later it is more and more clearly indicated. Therefore, of course, the Old Believers in this sense consciously or unconsciously distance themselves. On the one hand, the state itself is not exactly eager to help them financially, on the other hand, they themselves are retreating. Other areas are developing: railway construction, metallurgy, mining. Well, in general, the role of St. Petersburg is important - as Ryabushinsky wrote, slow-moving Russian men who make decisions measuredly, crossing themselves, die in the atmosphere of St. Petersburg. Here already other personalities come to replace.

Pros and cons of the Old Believer model

Thrift – On the one hand, frugality has promoted self-financing. On the other hand, when it became possible to take bank loans at a low interest rate, thrift could slow down processes, because a habit was formed to live on one's own. When there was no capital market, it was very important.

Trust, but trust in whom - in the elect, in the same Old Believers. It is clear that there may be an interest-free loan, and the availability of labor, but the flip side is a weak integration into the impersonal market process and some even distrust of it. That also hinders development.

Finally, community. On the one hand, it ensures close economic ties, but they are self-contained, segregated. There is a well-known sociological work - "The Power of Weak Ties": the strength of weak ties among the Old Believers is no longer observed, because strong ties dominate. In this sense, one can show the ambivalence of economic ethics, which at different stages can either promote or hinder development.

On Thursday, June 19, the cycle of lectures Homo religiosus, organized by the Yegor Gaidar Foundation, the Russian Economic School and the Dynasty Foundation, ended. As part of the lecture "Economics and Orthodoxy" Danila Raskov, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Economic Theory and the Department of Problems of Interdisciplinary Synthesis in the Field of Social and Human Sciences of St. Petersburg State University, spoke about how economic relations were formed among the Old Believers and why they turned out to be so effective as entrepreneurs. The full text of the lecture can be read on the website of the Yegor Gaidar Foundation, and we abbreviated that part of it that is directly devoted to the analysis of the economic activity of the Old Believers in Russia.

I don’t know how much detail is needed and whether it is necessary to explain who the Old Believers are. Initially, the split, as you know, arose as a result of the reform of 1654-1666: there was a long process, since ritual differences gave rise to a rather serious struggle, which resulted in one of the greatest tragedies in the history of our country. It is no coincidence that Solzhenitsyn is credited with the words that "if it weren't for the 17th century, there would be no 1917." What we see here: well, let's say, two-fingered. Indeed, due to the advance of the Russian Empire towards Little Russia, Ukraine, it became necessary to bring the ritual part to a single canon. There was an idea to call the Greeks and stabilize the rite. In history, it must be said, they were baptized with three fingers, and with two. By the 17th century, on the very territory of Constantinople, they were baptized with three fingers, but then historians revealed that there is a Studian charter and a Jerusalem charter, they are just different, and there is a different sign of the cross. But because of this seemingly small difference, it all started: how to draw - “Jesus” or “Jesus”, to pray on seven or five prosphora, on the sun or against the sun.

The Old Believers set themselves the task of preserving unchanged not only the ritual side - this was connected with the entire liturgical rite. Then, of course, what is interesting, the original conservatism brought to life serious innovations. For example, the radical innovation of the Bespopovites: to renounce five of the seven sacraments altogether, since the rejection of the priesthood led to this. In this sense, they are just compared, and partly rightly, with Protestants: there will be an instrumental similarity here. The second element of the picture of the world that can be identified among the Old Believers is the idea of "Moscow is the third Rome" and, in general, eschatologism. It is generally inherent in Christian thought, and not only in Christian thought, both Babylonian and Egyptian. But when this becomes actual, it is difficult to understand why, at some point in time, eschatological feelings lead to self-immolation, and at some point, to hard work. This is one of the ambivalent elements that manifest themselves differently in different periods of time, and it is inherent in the entire Christian culture.

Well, the last thing I would note in the picture of the world is the desire to develop a practice that would be more in line with the true, correct life. Because where is the Antichrist, he can be very close: maybe in the handset, maybe in the device; or maybe how I pick up the phone depends on whether he is there or not. Some today are convinced that you shouldn't keep your phone at home. Then such hooks appeared: you come to the house, to the sacred space, and hang up your mobile phone at the entrance. The TV is also taboo for the older generation, but if it is in the closet, it is already easier, sometimes it opens - to show cartoons, for example. In fact, these practices of salvation have interesting aspects in economic life too.

If we talk about economic ethics and practice, what do we see? Both missionaries and those who traveled around the country, for example Aksakov, who was sent to Moldavia and Bessarabia, were surprised, left notes that the Old Believer villages were more prosperous: it was cleaner there, more horses, cows, and so on. And so it is almost everywhere. Thrift yes, idleness no. No one should be idle - community interaction, help, trust. The institutions of trust could also be transformed into the area of capital. When a community finds itself in a situation of persecution, these issues are quickly updated, any means of fighting for survival become important and significant.

By the way, what happened in the Old Believers: the spiritual elite itself initially blessed both trade and entrepreneurship. Moreover, the experience of the Vygovskaya Pomeranian Hermitage (this is still the beginning of the 18th century, that is, one of the very first experiments) showed that the kinoviarchs, that is, the leaders of such a secular monastery (secular, because there were no priests, there were no monks by definition, therefore correctly called - hostel or kinovia), they themselves led the trade and participated in it, took loans together. It's pretty much even described. Trading rules appeared: how to trade, how to keep records. According to some observations, even in the Soviet years, the Old Believers were more trusted with accounting. This issue requires a separate study, but is partially confirmed.

How many Old Believers-industrialists were in Moscow?

By the end of the 19th century, the situation becomes more complicated, joint-stock companies appear - more impersonal forms of business management, which did not exist in the middle of the 19th century, or were extremely uncommon. But textiles are still dominated by private business. Even if a joint-stock company is being created, it is still known who the shareholder is: usually it is five families, five dynasties or someone outside, foreigners or from official Orthodoxy - at the end of the 19th century, this all changes.

In the 1850s, the question arose: how many schismatics do we really have? We began to look at what data they supply: every year - the same thing, with a slight downward trend. But if you look - who supplies? Bishops. But the bishops report: the struggle is going well, there are fewer and fewer of them. They sent a commission to the places, but there are no criteria here either. It got to the point of absurdity. For example, there was such a Sinitsyn: he came to the Yaroslavl province and wherever he found copper icons in the houses, he believed that they were Old Believers. It turned out that there are 18 times more Old Believers than according to the data of the bishops, which is also wrong, because if a person has a copper icon, then it can simply be folk Orthodoxy, he is not necessarily an Old Believer. Then a criterion was introduced: is there a rosary and how is it baptized. But a person can also be baptized with two fingers, and in church several times with three fingers, while one of the priests is watching. That is, the criteria were very difficult.

In the 19th century, we really see a lot of biographies, when a person lived, and then once - and suddenly he suddenly became rich. Ryabushinsky - it's only for the sake of marriage that he converts to the old faith, the founder of the dynasty, then he rises. We see: a lot of neophytes. The founder of the Preobrazhensky cemetery, Ilya Alekseevich Kovylin, is also a neophyte, and there are a lot of such biographies. People from Guslitsa are known - such an ancient place where people have never been engaged in agriculture, but where there were a lot of crafts - Gzhel is also included there. It was rumored that they were also good at forging banknotes, if necessary, passports.

Trumps of the Old Believers

With a strong legal and judicial system, this comparative advantage becomes irrelevant - institutions of trust, reciprocity, big debates on reputation mechanisms - how are they even measured and how do they affect trade and industry? And, of course, all this can be packaged into formulas such as human capital and social capital. For example, education or literacy: it is obvious that the Old Believers were generally more literate than the average peasantry, which is part of official Orthodoxy. Why? We had to conduct the service ourselves, copy the books ourselves. Literacy in this sense was expensive, not everyone could afford it. It took time, effort, and money to learn. Suppose the cow had to be given to the one who taught. Social capital is the relationships that are already formed in communities: an instrument of reputation, trust, and so on. All this can be packaged in different ways, as I said.

How do we know the numbers?

Very interesting information is given by the synodics. We already know this for sure: since they pray in the church of the Rogozh community, it means that they are definitely Old Believers. There were observations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, a very interesting document of 1838, in fact, about all significant merchants with a description of their activities. As for industry, they managed to take seven points - this is not so many, but not so few - and get hold of all the data on doing business. For processing, information was used only for six years, the cut-off level was from 10 thousand rubles, because the same accounting was not carried out for all years. Of course, we still need to figure it out, but in general we can say that there is still no more reliable information. For textile factories, there is data on turnover, the number of workers, and what they did. For 1871 - detailed information about the technical condition, but this has yet to be provided additionally.

This is what industrial information looks like: who and where is located, how many mills, workers, turnover, what it produces - by year.

These are general data, they are pro-cyclical, and we see that the upper blue border is the total number of firms, then the dotted pink dash is just the proportion of Old Believer firms. There is some stability, and then a recession. Stability is about 20-25%, then, at the end of the 19th century, there is a decrease. Accordingly, the number of firms remains roughly the same.

If we take the data for the textile industry as a whole, we see (the share is the red line, the green dotted line is the labor force) that at some periods there is a comparative advantage in the labor force, that is, they are able to attract significantly more workers. And the share of firms in the total turnover is also subject to such a single cycle. In this case, it is more than 20%, and after 1870 there is a decline.

We no longer have this in the cotton industry, and here it is clear that these are mainly small firms with low productivity, and the share will be just much higher than the share in terms of turnover. Well, not significantly - depending on the years, sometimes significantly, sometimes the same. But here we no longer see the general dynamics. Moreover, by the end of the 19th century, the cotton industry partially left Moscow and the Moscow district, so we see such data. In any case, the Old Believers no longer have any weight here: the Morozovs are already working in the Tver province or in other districts, for example, in Borovsky.

In principle, what we found is that the Old Believers were overrepresented, they had an increased propensity for entrepreneurship, they hired on average more labor in the wool industry, and enterprises have high productivity. In general, until 1870 we observe a very stable participation in economic life, then a relative decline.

Waves of repression and cycles of economic activity

How to interpret the fall and how important are empirical data to us in this aspect? It is very interesting to trace the cyclical waves of repression. Some historians write that this is of great importance, because first there were harsh repressions, almost suffocation, and then weakening. And then moments of weakening, liberalization, respectively, form a special community, institutions appear, and this very moment of persecution leads to the fact that natural selection leaves these close-knit people, the strongest. I am joking about this: for a long time there was no persecution of the Old Believers, so now they are not so noticeable economically. But this is a joke, of course. In principle, already under Nicholas I, they set the task of solving the problem with the Old Believers, but they could not. At the same time, for example, they still awarded medals - there were persecutions and awards at the same time, because who will solve the problems? I came across a document: it is known that the sovereign will go there and there, and then they missed it, the road is broken, because military exercises or something like that took place along it. Who will restore? We turned to the Old Believer merchants. They restored everything and say: we have only one thing - give us a state diploma that we are so good. Well, they did. Or in Petrozavodsk: the sovereign will arrive - but the embankment is not in order. Who will fix it? And a medal for that too. That is, the history of the appearance of the medal is clear here. There were different interpretations, I probably won't dwell on it.

A more interesting question is how to explain the decline. At first, we see the underdevelopment of market institutions, and then the role of the Old Believers is significant. In general, when personal relationships dominate, Christian ethics are in demand; when legal institutions grow, its role in any case decreases, it becomes marginalized. For example, honesty: it is clear that honesty is important in trading. By the way, while researching the Old Believer entrepreneurship, I saw that not everything is simple there. Sometimes siblings give each other money by receipt. It would seem: why on receipt - these are brothers. And so that the devil does not get stuck! That is, they gave a receipt - and you can live in peace.

The role of Moscow

In the second half of the 19th century, we see the development of joint-stock forms of ownership, that is, impersonal relations, the banking sector; growing number of foreigners. If you look at the St. Petersburg merchant guild, then 40 percent there will be Protestants and Jews, in some periods even more. This is a different picture in terms of the fact that the very nature of business is changing. The role of the state has changed: if in the first half of the 19th century it was not particularly active, then later it is more and more clearly indicated. Therefore, of course, the Old Believers in this sense consciously or unconsciously distance themselves. On the one hand, the state itself is not exactly eager to help them financially, on the other hand, they themselves are retreating. Other areas are developing: railway construction, metallurgy, mining. Well, in general, the role of St. Petersburg is important - as Ryabushinsky wrote, slow Russian peasants who measuredly make decisions, crossing themselves, die in the atmosphere of St. Petersburg. Here already other personalities come to replace.

Pros and cons of the Old Believer model

The last aspect that I will dwell on is that economic ethics itself has an ambivalent character. It would seem that hard work is good. But to a certain extent. Everything depends on the historical moment, on the ability to adjust and adapt. If at some stage this can contribute to high productivity, then at another stage it preserves labor-intensive production. We work hard and work and work instead of replacing it with machine labor.
Thrift – On the one hand, frugality has promoted self-financing. On the other hand, when it became possible to take bank loans at a low interest rate, thrift could slow down processes, because a habit was formed to live on one's own. When there was no capital market, it was very important.

Trust, but trust in whom - in the elect, in the same Old Believers. It is clear that there may be an interest-free loan, and the availability of labor, but the flip side is weak integration into the impersonal market process and even some kind of distrust in it. That also hinders development.
Finally, community. On the one hand, it ensures close economic ties, but they are self-contained, segregated. There is a well-known sociological work - "The Power of Weak Ties": the strength of weak ties among the Old Believers is no longer observed, because strong ties dominate. In this sense, one can show the ambivalence of economic ethics, which at different stages can either promote or hinder development.

The beginning of persecution

On the days of great church holidays, a fair gathers near the walls of the Rogozhsky cemetery in Moscow. The stalls sell fabrics and honey, children's toys and wooden carvings, vegetables and pickles. You can also find amazing things - old theological books of three hundred years. Miraculously preserved rarities. Where are they from?

Our contemporaries do not care much about the one who sells at the fair. Meanwhile, the Rogozhskoye cemetery is the traditional center of the Moscow Old Believers. Today, no one persecutes them for their faith, and no one is particularly interested in it.

The Old Believer communities are slowly dying, modern Old Believers occupy a rather modest place both in the spiritual and economic life of Russia, and the fair near the cemetery wall is a distant echo of a powerful economic movement that once, without exaggeration, determined the fate of Russia.

Few people know, but at the beginning of the 20th century, the Old Believers owned about 40% of the economic capital of the entire Russian Empire. The followers of the old faith actually monopolized entire sectors of the economy, such as manufacturing and linen production.

What kind of old faith is this, who are the Old Believers, and how did it happen that a separate group of people found themselves in conditions that gave rise to an unprecedented surge in business activity?

The prerequisites for the greatest Russian tragedy were the intrigues of the Vatican and the ambitions of the Russian autocrats. The laurels of world rulers haunt many strong of the world this, they did not give in the past. The idea thrown to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich to become famous as the defender and unifier of the entire Orthodox world fell on fertile ground. To do this, it was necessary to defeat the Ottomans, clear Constantinople of them and reign in Constantinople.

For Russia, with its inexhaustible resources, the matter is not the most difficult. A trifle interfered, it was necessary to adjust Russian church rites to Greek standards and holy books. Patriarch Nikon, who carried out a church reform in the middle of the 17th century, took up the matter.

Reform split Russian society. A huge part of the population did not accept innovations. In 1666, the Great Council anathematized the discontented. Soon, unheard of repressions fell upon the adherents of the old rites, lasting for centuries.

Punitive detachments destroyed recalcitrant peasants and burned villages. Their bodies were floated down the rivers on floating gallows to intimidate the hesitant.

In search of shelter from persecution, thousands of Old Believers left their inhabited places. Many secluded places were found in Russia itself, even more on its outskirts and beyond. Human flows flowed in all directions, to the west - to the Baltic States and Poland, to the south - to the Caucasus and Turkey, to the east - to the Urals and Siberia, to the north - to the shores of the White Sea.

For eight years, the Solovetsky Monastery kept the siege of the tsarist army, where opponents of the reform flocked. Solovki was captured as a result of betrayal and brutally dealt with its defenders. The White Monastery, desecrated by vandals, has become a symbol of Old Believer resistance.

The fall of Solovki was followed by mass self-immolation of the Old Believers. Temples filled with people blazed across the north. Not wanting to accept and not seeing a way out, the Old Believers voluntarily passed away, practically depopulating vast territories.

Tsar Michael backtracked, sent a message to the Old Believers, in which he asked people not to burn themselves and moderated the persecution. Under Tsarevna Sophia, the persecutions that had subsided again intensified, and human rivers again flowed beyond the borders of Russia.

And yet they survived

IN early XVIII centuries, wealthy families of Old Believers, fleeing repression, settled on the island of Vetka, at the confluence of the river of the same name in Sozh. Then these were the lands of the Commonwealth, where the power of Moscow did not extend, now - the Belarusian city of Vetka, the center of the administrative district of the Gomel region.

The settlement grew rapidly, soon 40 thousand people lived in it, and the dimensions reached as much as 50 miles in circumference. In a matter of years, the colony turned into a powerful trading center. Schismatic merchants sold in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine the products of local handicraftsmen: coopers, cap makers, tailors, furriers, saddlers, dyers, mittens. With the proceeds, the merchants supplied fellow believers with raw materials and provided loans.

Handicraft production expanded rapidly. Peddlers from Vetka pushed out Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian and even Russian merchants. The Old Believers monopolized trade over vast territories.

Seduced by the wealth of the Old Believers, Empress Anna tried to return them to Russia. Without guilt, guilty people were forgiven by the highest command, and they were given the right to freely choose their place of residence on the territory of the empire. But the community, firmly established on Vetka, was in no hurry to break the established way of life.

Anna Ioannovna had to act in a tried and tested way. In 1735, a punitive expedition burned the settlement to the ground. But the recalcitrant colony rose from the ashes, quickly recovered and began to live its former life. Human losses were restored by another wave of refugees. Catherine II dealt a crushing blow to Vetka. From the next punitive measures in 1764, the Vetka Old Believers were no longer able to recover. Some of the emigrants went even further, someone managed to take refuge in their homeland.

A purposeful and consistent policy of repression led to unpredictable consequences. Among the Old Believers, the ideology of relying solely on their own strength was firmly formed. Nobody helped them, on the contrary, they had to live in a hostile environment. To survive and keep the faith, people had to work hard, while limiting themselves in everything.

Money in the Old Believer environment was not considered as evidence of wealth, but as essential tool survival. A considerable part of the community funds was spent on bribing officials and priests so that they would not mention schismatics in their reports and leave them alone.

By the time the conditions for the development of capitalism were ripe in Russia, the schismatic communities were closed and close-knit groups of like-minded people who had serious social capital at their disposal. The Old Believers were better prepared for the coming changes than the rest of Russia.

By the end of the 18th century, the Old Believers took over almost all trade in the Nizhny Novgorod Territory and the Lower Volga region. They owned grain marinas, shipyards and spinning mills. Competitors gave in to assertive and close-knit schismatics.

But for the Old Believers themselves, their trading successes turned out to be only a prelude; without exaggeration, great deeds awaited them ahead.

State within an empire

By the middle of the 19th century, the Old Believers, who actively and successfully earned money for the survival of persecuted communities, actually created their own separate state within a state, even if it did not have a separate territory. They had their own authoritative leaders and an informal system of government based on boundless trust in fellow believers.

Old Believer entrepreneurship was kept in full sense on parole. Business people always kept their promises and trusted partners from their midst, did not use the services of an intricate and hostile judicial system, and simplified documentary accounting to the maximum extent possible.

The solidarity of the schismatics became the key to their amazing success in the Urals. In 1736, a secret spy reported to Moscow: “Raskolnikov has multiplied in the Urals. At the factories of the Demidovs and Osokins, the clerks are schismatics, almost all of them! Yes, and some industrialists themselves are schismatics ... And if they are sent out, then of course they have no one to keep the factories. And in the factories of the Sovereigns it will not be without harm! For there, with many manufactories, like tin, wire, steel, iron, Olonyans, Tulyans and Kerzhentsy trade in all grubs and needs - all schismatics.

Huge capitals and impressive successes in the economy of the Old Believers forced the authorities to turn their anger to mercy. Catherine II issued a manifesto calling on the schismatics to return to Russia. All discriminatory measures taken earlier were cancelled. Repatriates began to return to their homeland and settled throughout the country, creating new business centers.

largest Old Believer community formed in Moscow. Of the current largest cemeteries in the capital, two - Preobrazhenskoye and Rogozhskoye - are Old Believers. About a third of the urban population of that time rests on them.

Formally, two Old Believer religious communities united around these cemeteries. Informally, within the framework of the communities, two large entrepreneurial centers were formed.

Moscow schismatic merchants, thanks to the ties established throughout the country with fellow believers, were always aware of all prices in Russia, skillfully maneuvered their capital, making large bulk purchases on time. In the 19th century, they reigned supreme at all major Russian fairs.

The last attempt to break the powerful movement of the Old Believers was made by Nicholas I. The Tsar ordered the expropriation of all the property of the schismatics. But it was not possible to fully fulfill the will of the autocrat. Huge community capitals were securely hidden. It was with this money that large Russian factories were subsequently built.

Community capital was formed by generations of Old Believers. But in view of the fact that the communities were not legally recognized, the capital was always recorded in the name of figureheads. Money was entrusted to the most respected and enterprising members of the community.

With communal money, Moscow Old Believer merchants built the first large capitalist enterprises, which used exclusively the labor of hired workers. These were exemplary productions for that time, constantly improving technically. The latest foreign machine tools were used in paper-spinning and weaving factories.

Loyalty was still considered the main thing in all matters among the Old Believers. given word. It was so strong that it was trusted not only by co-religionists, but also by Western capitalists. For the construction of a weaving factory in the village of Zuevo, the now famous Russian entrepreneur Savva Morozov received more than 100 machines from abroad on credit, such was the reputation of an illiterate merchant.

sunset of power

At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the largest Old Believer merchants gained unprecedented weight and influence in society. They were respected not only for their huge capital, but also for their amazing desire for innovation in industry.

With the money of the Old Believers, the first wind tunnel in Russia and the predecessor of the automobile ZIL, the AMO plant, were built. It is amazing how people who were ready to die for the ideals of the old faith, whose whole way of life was oriented towards the distant past, introduced the newest and most advanced technologies into the economy. A real paradox: fighting for the old, striving for everything new. For what and why?

Recall that since the church reform of the 17th century, the Old Believers had to survive, being in a hostile environment, under pressure from the authorities, to resist repression, relying solely on their own strength.

Money gave a guarantee of the independence of the isolated world of the Old Believers. To completely secure it, more and more money was needed, which means that it was necessary to work better and better, to introduce the most advanced methods of production, to increase capital in order to better protect their faith.

In the rebellious year of 1905, the famous manifesto on religious tolerance came out. The revolution drew a line under the confrontation between the Old Believers and the official government.

The decree was followed by a period called the golden age of the Old Believers. IN short term many Old Believer churches were erected throughout the country, the movement of priestlessness expanded, and the business activity of entrepreneurs increased even more. For example, in the Urals, all private industry was in the hands of the Old Believers, and all state factories were under their control.

But the golden age was short-lived. Having got rid of the pressure of the authorities, having crept to the very heights of economic power, the Old Believers lost their main unifying principle - a hostile environment, repressions that had to be fought. The Old Believers, who went through fire and water, gave in to copper pipes ...

At the beginning of the 20th century, most influential Old Believers looked and behaved like all the rest of the Russian rich. Long beards and merchant undershirts disappeared from everyday life, modern European clothes appeared. Religious restrictions were no longer enforced as carefully as before. Many felt the taste of dubious pleasures, and even began to smoke, which seemed unthinkable a couple of decades ago. Their world was no longer threatened, why then the empty chores and hardships?

Many of the rich "forgot" about the social origin of the capital they disposed of. Instead of directing them, as before, to things pleasing to God and beneficial to fellow believers, they built real palaces for themselves in Moscow, which aroused envy even among representatives of the reigning dynasty. And the breeder Guchkov, for example, simply embezzled the money of the Preobrazhensky community.

The history of the Russian Old Believer economic miracle, built on commitment and trust, ended in 1917. But even if they did not occur in Russian state the then tragic events, it is unlikely that the "economy on parole" could survive much longer.

School of Life.ru, Alexey Norkin

The world of the Old Believers. History and modernity. Issue 5. Publishing House of Moscow University, 1999., pp. 341-376.

List of merchant Old Believer surnames in Moscow (XIX - early XX century)

A.V. Stadnikov

Recently, the study of the Moscow Old Believers has noticeably intensified. This is largely due to the interest in charity of Moscow merchants and industrialists in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. (many of whom were Old Believers), as well as with increased attention in general to the history of anniversary Moscow. However, until recently, in popular publications and even in historical literature, only some Old Believer surnames (Morozovs, Guchkovs, Ryabushinskys) alternate with enviable constancy. In this regard, from our point of view, it is important to create a brief reference and information list that will allow not only to quickly attribute a particular industrialist or merchant belonging to the Old Believers, but also in the shortest form will give the most systematic overview of family ties, social status, merchant and industrial capital in the Moscow Old Believer environment in the 19th - early 20th centuries. This publication can serve as a starting point for such work.

The source basis of the List is several important complexes. Firstly, these are the results of the 10th merchant revision of 1857, published in the Materials for the History of the Moscow Merchants (M., 1889. Vol. 9). They detail the marital status of merchants and belonging to guilds. From our point of view, it is not advisable to use earlier revisions, since they did not indicate the religion of the merchants.

Other important source are Books about schismatics and Books about trading establishments of Moscow in parts of the city for the 1860-1870s. (1265th CIAM fund). These documents contain surname lists of Moscow "schismatics of the priestly persuasion", as well as information about their economic activity. The greatest number of coincidences when comparing the corresponding names of the Old Believers and the owners of trade establishments is observed in the books of the Rogozhsky part of Moscow. Information about the economic activities of the Old Believers can also be identified from the study by D.A. Timiryazev "Statistical Atlas of the Main Branches of the Factory Industry of European Russia" (St. Petersburg, 1870. Issue 1). Here, Old Believer surnames are maximally represented in the section of the textile industry. In Timiryazev's work, in addition to references to the names of the owners of enterprises, the main economic indicators (number of workers, annual turnover, etc.) are given, which makes it possible to judge the scale of the Old Believer textile production in the middle of the 19th century. The work of D.A. Timiryazev was largely based on the work of St. Tarasov "Statistical Review of the Industry of the Moscow Province" (M., 1856). It uses materials from the Vedomosti about factories and manufactories of the Moscow province of 1853, which greatly increases the value of Tarasov's work. When determining the status of a merchant in a community, the documents of the fund of the Rogozhsky Almshouse (246th fund of the OR RSL) are extremely important, where there are materials for elections to the Trustees of the RBD, to elected communities, information about membership in the School Council, etc.

An important aspect in the study of the Old Believer clans of the Rogozhsky cemetery community is the participation of almost all merchants in charitable activities. In the List, we used data from 246 funds of the OR RSL, funds of the Central Historical Archive of Moscow: No. 179 (Moscow City Council), No. 16 (Moscow Military Governor-General), as well as published works about the largest philanthropists. In addition to these sources, the List additionally used CIAM materials: fund 17 (Moscow civil governor), fund 450 (Moscow branch of the state commercial bank), fund 2 (Moscow city house), as well as the published Necropolis of the Rogozhsky cemetery (World of Old Believers Issue 2. M., 1995), Address-calendar of Moscow for 1873 and 1876, fragmentary data of VIII - IX merchant revisions (Materials for the history of the Moscow merchants. TT.7, 8. M., 1882).

Directory structure

All surnames are arranged in alphabetical order and with a single numbering. Under each number, the following information is given:

Surname, name, patronymic, dates of life(may be inaccurate, because registers of birth were not used).
Information about belonging to the merchant guild, the presence of the title of "personal honorary citizen", "honorary citizen", "hereditary honorary citizen", "commercial adviser" or others, indicating the date the person was mentioned in this title.
Information about the wife- 1 or 2 marriage, first name, patronymic, sometimes maiden name, dates of life, if possible - indications of kinship with other Old Believer surnames included in the List.
Information about children or other family members- name, dates of life. In the event that heirs further on the List are presented separately, their names are underlined and there is an indicator "see no." Surname, name, patronymic of brothers, social status, dates of life.
Information about economic activity- name of production or trade enterprises, branch of production or trade, location, if possible, data on the number of workers, annual turnover, information about loans, real estate value, etc.
Information about the situation in the community of the Rogozhsky cemetery- participation in elective office of the community, Guardianship of the RBD (indicating the dates and the second trustee).
Information about participation in public city elected offices- Job title with dates.
Information about charitable activities- the amount and purpose of the charitable donation, date, honorary position associated with charitable activities, awards.
additional information about persons with the same last name, family ties which are not established with this person - last name, first name, patronymic, information of a different nature, date.
Sources are given in square brackets at the end of the text. When using multiple sources, each source is placed directly after the information that is extracted from it.

Abbreviations:

beneficent- charity;

br.- brothers;

brk.- marriage;

in married.- in marriage;

G.- guild;

hospital- hospital;

lips.- province;

d.- children;

due- job title;

and.- wife;

factories- factories;

to-ha- merchant's wife;

To.- a merchant;

personal mail.gr.- personal honorary citizen;

Mr.- manufactory;

m. 1(2.3)- Moscow 1st (2.3) merchant guild;

MSWRC- Moscow Old Believer community of the Rogozhsky cemetery;

real estate- real estate;

total- Participation in elected office of the community;

opt.– wholesale;

victims.– donations;

sweat.po.gr.- hereditary honorary citizen;

soil gr.- honorable Sir;

R.- birth;

r.g.turnover- rubles of annual turnover;

r.seb.- silver rubles;

slave's- workers;

RBD– Rogozhsky almshouse;

cm.- Look;

standing.- price;

thousand- thousands;

y.- county;

mind.- died (la);

mention.- is mentioned

ur.- nee (th);

f-ka- factory;

household– economic activity;

h.- part (district of the city).

Sources

X merchant revision // Materials for the history of the Moscow merchants. T. 9. M., 1889. S. 10;

[ZhMiT] - Journal of Manufacture and Trade; Necropolis of the Rogozhsky cemetery // World of the Old Believers. Issue. 2. M., 1995. S. 5;

[M.St. - 5] - Necropolis of the Rogozhsky cemetery// World of the Old Believers. Issue 2. M., 1995.S.5;

[OR 246-3-9-11] - Department of Manuscripts of the Russian State Library. Fund 246. Cardboard 3. Unit. ridge 9. L. 11;

[Tarasov-10] - Ta race S. Statistical review of the industry of the Moscow province. M., 1856. S. 10;

[Timiryazev-20] - Timiryazev D.A. Statistical atlas of the main branches of the factory industry in European Russia. SPb., 1870. Issue. 1.C. 20;

[CIAM 16-110-853-3] Moscow Central Historical Archive. Fund 16. Op.110. Case 853. L. 3.

This List, of course, does not provide exhaustive information about all the Moscow merchant families that belonged to the concords of those accepting the priesthood. However this work is perhaps the first attempt to systematize the disparate archival information about the merchant Old Believer families of Moscow. In the future, it is planned to supplement this List with new data, as well as to include in it the information published and therefore available, taken into account in merchant certificates.

1. Agafonov Ivan Semyonovich(? - after 1910)

personal post. gr.

d. Vasily (see, No. 2)

total elected MSORK since 1896 [OR 246-9-1-28rev.]

2. Agafonov Vasily Ivanovich (?)

m. 2 g.k. (1905)

and. Lidia Karpovna (nee Rakhmanova) [CIAM 179-57-1016-114] general. founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-95-2-4]

3. Alekseev Semyon Mikhailovich (?)

beneficent 150 r. ser. on the wounded in Crimean War(1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-20rev.]

4. Ananiev Ivan (?)

m. (1864)

and. Natalya Ivanovna (b. 1840) [CIAM 1265-1-89-7rev.] cit. Ananiev Gerasim Ivanovich and Nikifor Ivanovich (1862)

(in a petition addressed to the Moscow military governor-general of the Old Believers of Bogorodsky district for permission to freely gather for prayer) [CIAM 16-110-1389-3ob.]

5. Andreev Ivan Ivanovich (?)

m. (1854)

beneficent 1854 victims. 15 p. ser. on the wounded in the Crimean War

[CIAM 16-110-853-3rev.]

6. Apetov Mikhail Mikhailovich (1836 -?)

m. (1875)

and. Natalya Ivanovna (1836-?) [CIAM 1265-1-354-7]

7. Apetov Fedor Mikhailovich (1823-?)

m. - S. 145]

8. Arzhenikov Ivan Ivanovich (1812-?)

m. (1857)

and. Pelageya Antonovna (1816-?)

e. Nikolai Ivanovich (1843-?), Agniya Ivanovna (1845-?) [X rev. - S. 46]

9. Arzhenikov Petr Ivanovich (1815 - ?)

m. (1857)

and. (1 brk.) no information

and. (2 brk.) Ekaterina Ivanovna (1832-?)

(1 brk.) Zinaida Petrovna (1840-?), Vladimir Petrovich (1844-?), Anna

Petrovna (1847-?), Yulia Petrovna (1848-?)

(2 brk.) Avgusta Petrovna (1852-?), Konstantin Petrovich (1853-?) [X rev. - S. 45]

benefic 1854 victims. 100 r. ser. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

mention. In his house (Lefortovskaya h., 5 quarter) there was one of the largest prayer rooms in Moscow [CIAM 17-13-581-64]

1.0. Afanasyeva Matrena (1804-?)

m. 3 years of k-ha (1864), widow of Akim Afanasiev (died before 1864)

Maksim Akimovich (1830-?) [f. - Elena Maksim. (1831-?) d. Tatyana Maksimovna (1853-?), Sergey Maksimovich (1854-?): Agrafena Maksimovna (1859-?)] [CIAM 1265-1-89-6rev.]

11. Babkin Mikhail Samoilovich (?)

m.? GK (1854)

benevolent 1854 victims. 3000 r. ser. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-1]

household paper-weaving factory in Moscow (Lefortovo h. 180 workers, 99 382 r.g. turnover) [Tarasov-32]

12. Balabanov Ivan Evdokimovich (?)

13. Balashov Sergey Vasilievich (1835-1889)

and. Pelageya Sidorovna (nee Kuznetsova) (1840-1898)

d. Alexander (?) pot.poch.gr., Sergey (1856-1900), Vasily (1862-

1891.) (see No. 14) Maksim - founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR

246.-95-2-9, M.St. - S. 134-135]

14. Balashov Vasily Sergeevich (1862-1891)

household Partnership "Vas. Balashov and Sons" textile production [OR 246-61-3-3]

15. Banquetov Grigory Grigorievich (?)

m. (1854)

and. Maria Onisimovna (?)

beneficent 1854 victims. 150 r. ser. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-3]

mention. in 1861 he bought a house with a priestly prayer house from the petty bourgeois P.A. Pavlova [CIAM 16-110-1369-1]

mention. Banketovs Vladimir Dmitrievich and Nikolai Dmitrievich (1913) - founding members of the MSORK [OR 246-95-2-47], also. mention. Banquetov Alexey Vasilievich - director of the Association "S.M. Shibaev's sons" (1909-1915) (see Shibaev SM.) [CIAM 450-8-544-28]

16. Baulin Ivan Fyodorovich (1821-?)

m. (1856)

and. Olga Ivanovna (?)

D. Ivan Ivanovich (1845-?) (see No. 17). Dmitry Ivanovich (1848-?) (see No.

18.) . Natalya Ivanovna (1843-?) [CIAM 2-3-1216-2]

household six grocery stores in Rogozhskaya h., two houses in Rogozhskaya h., a house in Lefortovskaya h.

due Ratman of the Moscow City Orphan's Court (1852- 1855)

beneficent victims. "for the state militia and other military needs" - 1800 rubles. ser. (1853,1855) [CIAM 2-3-1216-2], victims. 500 r. ser. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2v.]

17. Baulin Ivan Ivanovich (1846-1888)

m. (1877)

and. Vera Prokofievna (1849-?)

Maria Ivanovna (1861-1880, married Alyabyeva), Olga Ivanovna (1873-?), Anna Ivanovna (1875-?) [CIAM 1265-1-354-2rev.]

18. Baulin Dmitry Ivanovich (1848-1909)

m. 2 g.k., sweat. post. gr. (1909)

total 1897-1900 - elected MSORK

household "Trade in sheet, sectional and other iron by D. Baulin, Moscow" (1908) [CIAM 179-57-1016-147]

19. Baulin Pavel Afanasyevich (1798-1851)

m. 3 g.k. (1851)

and. (2 brk.) Avdotya Afinogenovna, m. 2, k-ha

d. (2 brk.) Elizaveta Pavlovna (b. 1839), Nikolai Pavlovich (b. 1840)

[d. Aleksey Nikolaevich - candidate for the elected MSORK (1897-1900) OR 2 246-9-1-28] [X rev. - S. 18]

household Baulina A.A. - brocade shops in the City H. of Moscow, 1860 [CIAM 14-4-375-240]

20. Belov Ivan Khrisanfovich (1793-1853)

and. Anfimya Terentyevna (1797 - died after 1870), m. 3

d. Yakov (b. 1824) + f. Olga Yegorovna (b. 1832); Vasily (b. 1825) [X rev. - S. 73]

household wool and paper spinning factory (80 workers, 67,430 r.g. turnover) [Tarasov-12]

21. Bogomazov Ivan Grigorievich(b. 1831-?)

m. 2 g.k. (1875)

and. Alexandra Alexandrovna (b. 1841)

d. Mikhail Ivanovich (?) [CIAM 1265-1-354-2]

22. Bogomazov Andrei Osipovich (?)

household weaving paper-wool factory in Moscow (1854) [CIAM 14-4-829-6rev.]

2.3. Borisov Nikolai ? (1803-?)

m. 3 GK (1857)

and. Matrena Ippolitovna (b. 1804)

d. Ivan Nikolaevich (b. 1827) + f. Avdotya Kirillovna (b. 1830) [Nikolai Ivanovich (b. 1850), Alexei Ivanovich (b. 1855), Boris Ivanovich (b. 1856)]

Fedor Nikolaevich (b. 1826) + f. Alexandra Vasilievna (b. 1826) [d. Lyubov Fedorovna (b. 1849), Maria Fedorovna (1854), Ivan Fedorovich (1856)], Alexei Nikolaevich (b. 1832), Yegor Nikolaevich (b. 1839), Mikhail Nikolaevich (b. 1840) [X rev. - S. 36]

household 11 seed and mosquito shops (Gorodskaya h.), vinegar cellars, pantries (Pyatnitskaya h.) [CIAM 14-4-375-320]

24. Borisov Prokhor Ivanovich (?)

m. (1854)

household seed shop, mosquito shop, vinegar cellar (Gorodskaya h.) [CIAM 14-4-375-340]

benevolent 1854 victims. 25 p. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

25. Borodin Mikhail Vasilievich (1833-?)

m. (1853) from the Buguruslan philistines, Samara province) [X rev. - S. 125]

26. Botnev Alexander Vladimirovich (1846 - ?)

m. (1875)

and. Olga Anfimovna (b. 1841) [CIAM 1265-1-354-6]

mention. Botnev A.M. - paper-spinning factory (Bogorodsky near Moscow province) [CIAM 810-1-75-11 Zob.]

27. Brusnikin Sofron Timofeevich (1774-1851)

the village of Peter (b. 1811), m. 3 GK, since 1858 - a tradesman

Anisim (1817- 1857), m. 3rd year + Agrafena Sergeevna (b. 1819), m. 3, k-ha.

[d. Nikolai Anisimovich (b. 1842), Vasily Anisimovich (b. 1844),

Alexander Anisimovich (b. 1851), Ivan Anisimovich (b. 1853),

Olga Anisimovna (b. 1840)] [X rev. - S. 84]

28. Brusnikin Alexander Timofeevich (1786-1853)

Prokofy Aleksandrovich (b. 1810), m. 3 c.c. + f. Maria Yakovlevna

[d. Mikhail Prokofievich (b. 1844), Anna (b. 1842), Maria (b. 1846), Nastasya (b. 1848), Fedosya (b. 1852), Ivan (b. 1851), Alexei (b. 1857)]

Fedor Alexandrovich (b. 1822), from 1855 - in the bourgeoisie, Vasily Alexandrovich (b. 1837), from 1855 - in the bourgeoisie [X rev. - S. 110]

29. Butikov Petr Ivanovich (1770-1846)

buried at the Rogozhsky cemetery [M. Art. P. 135] v. Butikov Ivan Petrovich (see No. 30)

30. Butikov Ivan Petrovich(?), in inch. Hilary

and. Ekaterina Afinogenovna (1814-1876), in the evening. Eulampia

d. Ivan Ivanovich (1830-1885) (see No. 31)

household two spinning factories in Moscow (Gorodskaya h.) [CIAM 14-4-375-345]; wool weaving factory (Moscow) - 653 workers, a year. turnover - 825,000 rubles. [Timiryazev - P.20]

Blessing 300 r. donation for the wounded in the Crimean War (1854)

[CIAM 16-110-853-2]

Awarded with a medal for a donation of 7000 rubles. "in favor of the poor inhabitants of Moscow" (1851) [CIAM 16-110-706-1]

31. Butikov Ivan Ivanovich (1830-1885)

household "Association of M. and Iv. Butikov" (wool weaving factory)

total Trustee of the RBD (1876-1879), together with P.E. Kulakov [OR 246-3-2-11]

32. Butin Timofey Fedorovich (1805-?)

and. Matrena Kuzminichna (b. 1809)

Ivan Timofeevich (b. 1840) (see No. 33) [CIAM 1265-1-89-2]

33. Butin Ivan Timofeevich(b. 1840-?)

and. Maria Egorovna (b. 1840)

d. Fedor Ivanovich (b. 1860), Ivan Ivanovich (b. 1862) [CIAM 1265-1-89-2]

household Butin I. fur shop, Ilyinka [CIAM 450-8-366-5ob.]

34. Bykov Ivan Ivanovich (?)

soil gr. (1854)

br. Bykov Mikhail Ivanovich (1812-1844), m. post. gr., buried at the Rogozhsky cemetery [M.St. - S. 135]

beneficent 200 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2ob.]

35. Bykov Nikolay Vasilievich (1808-?)

m. 3 g. to (1857)

d. Alexander Nikolaevich (b. 1826), Dmitry Nikolaevich (b. 1829) + f. Anna Ivanovna (b. 1837), d. Pavel Dm. (b. 1855) [X rev. - S. 79]

3.6. Varykhanov Terenty Ivanovich

m. gr.

d. Fedor (b. 1867) + f. Maria Vasilievna (b. 1851)

Alexey (b. 1846) [CIAM 1265-1-102-5]

household a glue factory in Moscow (Serpukhovskaya h., 10 workers, 9625 rubles per year turnover (1853) [Tarasov-92.89], a tannery (Moscow, Serpukhovskaya h., 31 workers, 16,844 rubles). g.turnover (1853)

3.7. Varykhanov Nikolay Petrovich(?)

sweat. post. gr.

br. Dmitry Petrovich, sweat. post. gr.

total Founding member of the MSEC (1913) [OR 246-9-1-2]

3.8. Vasiliev Yakov (?)

1850s - prayer room in the house (Rogozhskaya h., 3 quarter) [CIAM 17-13-581-64ob]

3.9. Vinogradov Savel Denisovich, guild (died after 1853)

household iron foundry in Moscow (Rogozhskaya h., 16 workers, 6000 regular turnover) (1853) [Tarasov-66]

Vinogradov Yakov Savelyevich (1831-?)

m. 2g.k. (1867) [CIAM 1265-1-102-4]

household iron foundry mechanical establishment, in own house since 1863 [CIAM 1265-1-95-13]

40. Vinokurov Fedot Gerasimovich (?)

m. 2 g. k. (1877)

and. Varvara Alexandrovna (?) [CIAM 1265-1-450-7]

41. Vinokurov Fedor Vasilievich (?)

beneficent 110 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-1]

42. Vinokurov Fedor Ivanovich (1797-1867)

and. Ksenia Fedorovna, buried at the Rogozhsky cemetery [M. St.-S. 136]

43. Vorobyov Egor Fyodorovich (1793-?)

m. 1 g. k. (1854)

and. Irina Klimentyevna (b. 1799) [X rev. - S. 83]

good. 1200 r. on the wounded of the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-1]

44. Glazov Moses Vikulovich (1792-1850)

m. 3 g. k. (1850)

d. (3 brk.) Anna (b. 1842), Olimpiada (b. 1845), Maria (b. 1849) [ X

br. Glazov Yakov Vikulovich (1854 - 25 p. on the wounded in the Crimean

war [CIAM 16-110-853-2])

45. Gornostaev Fedor Andreevich (?)

m. 2 g. k. (1875) [CIAM 1265-1-354-6]

household wood warehouses (Rogozhskaya h.) (1866) [CIAM 1265-1-98-51]

46. Gudkov Timofey Ivanovich (1831 - ?)

m. 3 g. k. (1854)

and. Ekaterina Korneevna (b. 1837) [X rev. - S. 141]

beneficent donation for the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

4.7. Danilov Petr ? (1808-?)

m. 3 g. k. (1857)

since 1858 from the freed peasants of Count Dmitriev-Mamonov,

and. Praskovya Artamonovna (b. 1804) [X rev. S. 74]

4.8. Dmitriev Vasily ? (1804-?)

and. (3 brk.) Natalya Petrovna (b. 1826)

Nikolay (b. 1833), Felicity (b. 1845) [X rev. P. 13]

mention. Dmitriev M.

household paper-weaving factory, Moscow - 130 workers 85.5 thousand rubles income [Timiryazev - S.4]

49. Dosuzhev Andrey Alexandrovich (1803-1876)

and. Anna Vasilievna (1807-1844)

d. Alexei (b. 1835), Alexandra (1828-1854) (see No. 50)

household cloth factory (Pyatnitskaya h., 3rd quarter) 1860s [CIAM 14-4-375-345rev.]

due ratman of the Moscow Deanery Council (1843-1846) deputy in the Committee for the supervision of factories and factories in Moscow (1850)

beneficent 2000 r. to the state militia (1853 and 1855)

awards: Golden medal on the Vladimir ribbon (1850) gold medal on the Annen ribbon (for donations 1851) [CIAM 2-3-1228]

50. Dosuzhev Alexander Andreevich (1828-1854)

and. Elizaveta Gerasimovna (1828-1882), buried at Rogozhsky

cemetery [M.St. - p. 136]

d. Anna (b. 1850), Alexei (b. 1853) [X rev. - S. 138]

household Trade house "A.A. Dosuzhev sons" cloth and wool-weaving factories in Moscow - the cost is 128,000 rubles (1906); Ustyinskaya - 117 910 rubles. (1906); Troitskaya - 22,000 rubles. (sold in 1907); annual turnover of "A.A. Dosuzhev and Sons" - 2 212 823 rubles (1906) [CIAM 920-1-1-1a]

51. Dubrovin Pavel Fedorovich (1800- ?)

and. Praskovya Ermilovna (b. 1817) [X rev. - p.7]

household fringe and hardware shops (Pyatnitskaya hour) [CIAM 14-4-390-284]

52. Dubrovin Fedor Grigorievich (1829-?)

and. Anna Alekseevna (b. 1832) [X rev. - S. 12]

household ten vegetable and grocery shops (Gorodskaya and Sushchevskaya h.) [CIAM 14-4-375-355ob.], tavern, tavern, restaurant (Gorodskaya, Sushchevskaya h.) [CIAM 14-4-390-275]

53. Dubrovin Vasily Gavrilovich(b. 1783-?)

from the townspeople in - m. 3 g.k. in 1852

d. Gavrila Vasilyevich (b. 1809) (see No. 54) [X rev. - S. 12]

household 1 vegetable shop, 1 grocery shop in Gorodskoy h. [CIAM 14-4-390-274]

54. Dubrovin Gavrila Vasilievich(1809 - before 1875)

and. Anna Nikolaevna (?) Voskresenskaya, 2nd year of college (1875).

Julia (b. 1847), Vladimir (b. 1849), Zinaida (b. 1855) [X rev.-S. 12]

household six grocery and vegetable shops (Gorodskaya h.) [CIAM 14-4-375-355rev.]

55. Egorov Yakov Vasilievich(b. 1812-?)

and. Ekaterina Grigorievna (b. 1822)

d. Vasily (b. 1840) [X rev. S. 97]

56. Efimov Alexey Petrovich (?)

br. Efimov Petr Petrovich, m. (1854)

household silk weaving factory in Moscow (Rogozhskaya h., 50 workers, 80,000 r.g. turnover) (1853) [Tarasov-19]

beneficent 100 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2ob.]

57. Zelenov Zakhar Arsenievich (?)

Trustee of the RBD (1876-1879)

mention. Zelenov Panfil Petrovich, m. - 100 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

5.8. Ivanov Xenophon ? (1809-?)

m. 3 g. k. (1864)

and. Aksinya Afanasievna (b. 1814) m.k-ha 3 years old

Mikhail (b. 1836), Gerasim (b. 1839), Peter (b. 1843), Fedor (b. 1846), Ivan (b. 1848), Anna (b. 1843) [CIAM 1265-1-89 -1]

household tavern (Rogozhskaya h., 3 quarter) [CIAM 1265-1-95-10]

59. Kabanov Makar Nikolaevich (?)

m. 2 g. k. (1854)

beneficent 500 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-3ob]

60. Kartylov Mikhail Leontievich (?)

m. (1854)

61. Katsepov Nikita Timofeevich(d. 1913)

Kolomna 1st city

household partnership "Timofey Katsepov's sons" (Baranovskaya textile factory, Moscow province)

total founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-95-2-10]

beneficent 100 r. and 300 arshins of canvas in the RBD (1905) [OR 246-61-3-4]

62. Kleymenov Grigory Ilyich (1820-1895)

m. (1857), from 1851 - from the middle class.

and. Elena Alekseevna (b. 1814) [X rev. S. 84]

total trustee of the RBD (1894-1895) [OR 246-9-1-36]

63. Kokushkin Petr Prokhorovich (1793-?)

m. [X rev. - S. 41]

household paper-spinning factory in Shuya (756 workers, 150,000 r.g. turnover) [Timiryazev - P. 1]

mention. Kokushkin A.V. and K.V. post. gr. - paper weaving f-ki with. Lezhnevo Kovrovsky st. Vladimir province. (935 slaves, 100,000 r.g. turnover.)

Kokushkin F.M. post. gr. - paper-weaving factory in Shuisky district. (115 slaves, 141,000 rubles turnover.) Kokushkin D.P. - chintz-printing factory in Shuisky district. (voznesensky village) - (12 slaves, 43,250 rubles. turnover) [Timiryazev - p.2, 3, 8]

64. Kuznetsov Ivan Fyodorovich (?)

m. 1 g. k. (1851)

beneficent 3000 r. co-religionists + 1000 r. (since 1851) annually to Moscow orphanages [CIAM 16-110-626-1]

1000. r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1856) [CIAM 16-110-853-1rev.]

65. Kuznetsov Vasily Fyodorovich (1803-?)

n. mail. gr., m. 3 g.k. (1875)

and. Anna Antonovna (b. 1823)

Konstantin (b. 1857), Fedor (b. 1832), Yulia (b. 1844), Antonina (b. 1852) [CIAM 1265-10354-5]

beneficent 500 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-1 rev.]

66. Kuznetsov Matvey Sidorovich (1846-1911)

m. 1 because, sweat. post. gr., commerce adviser

and. Nadezhda Vukolovna (nee Mityushina, sister of E.V. Shibaeva) (1846-1903)

d. Nikolai (b. 1868), sweat. post. gr., Chairman of the Council of the MSORK (1918)

Sergei (b. 1869) sweat. post. gr., Alexander (b. 1870), pot. post. gr., Georgy (b. 1875), pot.poch. gr., Pavel (1877-1902), Ivan (1880-1898), Mikhail (b. 1880-?), pot. post. c. Claudia (b. 1887-?)

household "Association for the production of porcelain and faience products M.S. Kuznetsov" (1887). Plants: Dulevsky (1,500 slaves, 500,000 rubles per year; turnover); Riga (1200 slaves, 700,000 rubles per year turnover); Tverskoy (900 slaves, 450,000 rubles per year); shops in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Riga, Kharkov, Kyiv, Rostov; by 1903 - 8 factories (total turnover - 7,249,000 rubles); since 1903 - "Supplier of the Court of His Imperial Majesty" [Pavlenko V. M. S. Kuznetsov // Graduate work RGGU, 1996]; co-founder of the partnership "Istomkinskie manufactory S.M. Shibaeva" [CIAM 450-8-544-1]

d. Nikolai, Alexander - founding members of the MSORK (1913)

beneficent member of the Society for the Care of the Wounded and Sick [OR 246-95-2-4]

67. Kulakov Egor Stepanovich (?)

post. gr. (1854)

D. Petr Egorovich (?)

total Trustee of the RBD (1876-1879), together with I.I. Butikov [OR 246-3-2-11]

beneficent 300 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-1v.]

6.8. Latrygin Efim (?)

mention. in the 1860s prayer room in the house (Rogozhskaya h., 3 quarter) [CIAM 17-13-581-64v.]

6.9. Lubkova A. I. (?)

m. 3 g.k-ha

Popovskaya prayer house in the house (Pyatnitskaya h., 3 quarter) - 1860s [CIAM 17-13-581-64], closed in 1930

70. Makarov Grigory Afanasyevich (1794-?)

m. (1857), from 1854 - from the middle class.

and. Avdotya Ivanovna (b. 1795)

v. Ivan (b. 1830) + f. Maria Fedorovna (b. 1831)

[d. Pelageya (b. 1852), Praskovya (b. 1855)] [X rev. - S. 113]

beneficent 100 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-3]

71. Malyzhev Egor Trifonovich(d. after 1913)

total Trustee of the RBD (1894-1897, together with G.I. Kleimenov and F.M. Musorin), since 1897 - elected MSORK. [OR 246-9-1-36]

72. Manuilov Petr Andreevich (?)

d. Nikolai (1830-1882)

beneficent 200 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2v.]

household wool weaving factory in Moscow (Khamovnicheskaya h., 140 workers, 57953 r.g. turnover) [Timiryazev - P.20]

total Trustee of the RBD (1870-1873, together with T.I. Nazarov) [OR 246-2-7-1]

74. Medvedev Fedot Eremeevich (1827-1891)

and. Stepanida Ignatievna (b. 1827-1892)

Mikhail Fedotovich (1854 - after 1913) + f. Anastasia Efimovna (b. 1857) [CIAM 1265-1-354-2]

Andrey Fedotovich (b. 1851) + f. Tatyana Mikhailovna (1850-1877), village Nikolai (b. 1875) [CIAM 1265-1-354-2]

Olimpiada Fedotovna (b. 1862), Anfisa Fedotovna (1863-1877), Alexandra Fedotovna (b. 1867) [ 1265-1-450-14]

household wool weaving factory in Moscow (63 workers, 48,250 rubles per year) [Timiryazev - P. 21]

total Elected MSORK since 1879 [OR 246-3-6-24rev.]

75. Medvedev Mikhail Kuzmich (?)

m. (1854)

and. Feodosia Ivanovna (1801-1834).

household paper-weaving factory in Moscow (Rogozhskaya part 65 workers, 20811 r.g. turnover) [Tarasov-34]

beneficent 200 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

76. Medvedev Fedot Kuzmich (?)

77. Melnikov Petr Kirillovich (1826-1890)

br. Pavel Kirillovich (1818-1890), Stepan Kirillovich (1812-1870), Fyodor Kirillovich (1831-1888)

household candle plant [OR 246-92-19]

78. Milovanov Dmitry Osipovich (1817-1890)

m. 1 g. k. (1854)

and. Ekaterina Alexandrovna (1819-1868)

and. (2 brk.) Pelageya Ivanovna (?)

e. Ivan (b. 1844), Grigory (b. 1846), Maria (b. 1843), Alexander (1848-1866) [X rev.-S. 24]

household brick factory (Moscow, Lefortovskaya h., 150 workers, 37,800 r.g. turnover. (1853) [Tarasov-120]

total trustee RBD (1882-1885) [OR 246-6-4-1]

beneficent 400 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

7.9. Mikhailov Antip ( 1819-?)

m. (1857), from 1854 from the middle class.

and. Nastasya Fedorovna (b. 1828) [X rev. - P. 37]

80. Mikhailov Vasily Mikhailovich(b. 1837-?)

m. (1885)

and. Felicita Karpovna (b. 1841)

Valentin (b. 1869), Mikhail (?) [CIAM 1265-1-354-2]

total From 1879 - elected MSORK, trustee of the RBD (1885-1888, together with F.M. Musorin) [OR 246-6-4-1]

81. Mikhailov Fedor Semenovich(b. 1843)

m. (1875)

and. Ekaterina Gavrilovna (b. 1851)

Sergei (b. 1870), Peter (b. 1870) [CIAM 1265-1-354-5]

household a wool-weaving factory in Moscow (236 workers, 123,600 rubles per year) [Timiryazev - P. 20]; silk-weaving factory in Moscow (Rogozhskaya part,

88. worker, 34 271 r.g. turnover.) [Tarasov - 20]

beneficent full member of the Society of Commercial Knowledge Lovers (at the Academy of Commercial Sciences) [Address-calendar of Moscow, 1873. P. 123]

82.-83. Morozov- Founding members of MSORK

elected, members of the School Council of the MSEC,

honorary trustees of the RBD.

household a branch of Abram Savvich - the partnership of the Tver m-ry of paper products;

branch of Timofey Savvich - partnership "Nikolskaya m-ry"

a branch of Zakhar Savvich - the company of the Bogorodsko-Glukhovskaya m-ry;

the family of Elisey Savvich belonged to the Beglopopovskaya branch of the Old Believers (the partnership of Mr. Vikula Morozov and Sons, the Partnership of Savvinskaya Mr.)

See, for example, about economic activity "Information about industrial establishments" of the Association of the Nikolskaya M-ry "Savva Morozov and Sons" M., 1882.

about charitable activities: Dumova N. Friends of the Art Theater: Savva //Znamya. 1990. No. 8. pp. 199-212; Buryshkin P. Those same Morozovs // Fatherland. 1991, No. 2. S.37-43; Semenova N. Morozov // Ogonyok. 1992. No. 7 and others.

84. Muraviev Mitrofan Artamonovich (1804-?)

m. 1 g.k. (1854)

and. Matrena Timofeevna (b. 1806)

the village of Stepan (b. 1824) + f. Maria Ivanovna (b. 1826)

[d. Anna (1852)]

Peter (b. 1838), Afinogen (b. 1843), Tatiana (b. 1841),

Dmitry Mitrofanovich (1835-?) + w. Olimpiada Abramovna (ur. Morozov) (1836-1870)

[d. Zinaida (b. 1854), Ekaterina (b. 1856), Kapitolina (b. 1857)]

Alexei (b. 1847) [X rev. - S. 28]

household wool-weaving factory in Moscow (252 workers, 236,721 rubles per year turnover); wool-weaving factory in Moscow (270 workers, 290,000 rubles turnover) [Timiryazev - P. 20]

due 1843-1849, 1855-1858 - sworn trustee of the Moscow Commercial Court; since 1858 - sworn competitor of the Moscow Art Society [CIAM 2-3-1259]

beneficent 1000 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-1rev.]

85. Muravyov Alexey Mitrofanovich(b. 1847)

household In 1884 - one of the founders of the partnership "S.M. Shibaev and Co. 0" - chemical plants in Baku, founding capital - 6.5 million rubles] [CIAM 450-8-544-2]

86. Musorin Timofey Mikhailovich (?)

and. Tatyana Vasilievna (1816-1883)

d. Peter (?) [M. St-141]

br. Fedor Mikhailovich (See No. 87), Sergei Mikhailovich (See No. 88)

household trading house "Timofey Musorin and sons" - textile shops, 1885 - balance - 425,000 rubles, deficit - 42,168 rubles); in 1885-1894 - administrative management of the trading house

real estate: two stone houses in Moscow, two wholesale shops [CIAM 450-8-117-5]

87. Musorin Fedor Mikhailovich (?)

and. Maria Sergeevna (1832-1894)

total trustee of the RBD (1885-1888, 1895-1897) [OR 246-6-4-1]

88. Musorin Sergey Mikhailovich (?)

d. Nikolai, Mikhail, Ivan.

total trustee of the RBD (1888-1891, together with V.A. Shibaev), elected by the community since 1896 [OR 246-9-1-2rev.]

89. Nazarov Ivan Nazarovich (1799-1869)

m. (1854)

d. Fedor Ivanovich (1823-1853), m. 2

Timofei Ivanovich (1824-1902). (See No. 90).

household paper-weaving factory in Moscow (1853) (Lefortovo part 85 workers, 38 375 rubles turnover) [Tarasov-39]

beneficent 300 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-1 rev.]

mention. Nazarovs R.E. and S.S. - paper-weaving factories in Suzdal (27,000 and 23,000 rubles per year, respectively), Nazarov A.S. - a linen factory in Suzdal (10,000 rubles. turnover), Nazarov I. F. linen factory in the village of Zhirokhovo, Vladimir province. (11,000 ruble turnover.) [Timiryazev - S. 3, 12]

90. Nazarov Timofey Ivanovich (1824-1902)

m. 1 g.k., sweat. post. gr.

and. Alexandra Ivanovna (died before 1903), aunt of A.G. Tsarskaya

D. Pavel. (1848-1871), Simeon (1856-1886).

household a wool-weaving factory in Moscow (200 workers, 154,000 rubles turnover) [Timiryazev - P. 20]; wholesale barns and shops in Moscow (Ilyinskaya line), Nizhny Novgorod, in all Ukrainian fairs [OR 246-9-1-4rev.]

total trustee of the RBD (1870-1873, together with R.D. Martynov); elected MSORK since 1896 [OR 246-9-1-2rev.]

91. Neokladnov Boris Matveevich (1788-?)

m. (1857)

and. Marfa Grigorievna (?)

d. Alexander (b. 1833)

should honorary member of the Council of the Moscow Commercial School, from 1826 - comrade of the city headman, 1831-1834 - deputy of sinks, trade deputation, 1843-1846 - assessor from the merchants in the 1st department of the Moscow Chamber of the Civil Court, 1852-1855 member of the Moscow Stock Exchange.

beneficent 1000 r. to the hospital; things (1853), 4100 rubles to the Militia hospital (1855) [CIAM 2-3-1261-2]

since 1854 - fellow believer

92. Nyrkov Fedor Fedorovich (1835-1891)

m. (1875)

and. Avdotya Abramovna (b. 1850)

Nadezhda (b. 1871), Margarita (b. 1872), Lyubov (b. 1873), Sergei (b. 1874), Alexander (b. 1868) (see No. 93) [CIAM 1265-1-354- 6]

93. Nyrkov Alexander Fedorovich (1868-?)

m. 3 g. k., sweat. post. gr.

total member construction commission MSORK (1913); founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-18-8-26rev.]

94. Ovsyannikov Stepan Tarasovich (1805 - ?)

st. petersburg 1 g.c. (1875)

and. Elizabeth (?), fugitive.

Gleb Stepanovich (1829-1902) (see No. 95). Vasily Stepanovich (d. 1908) (see No. 96), Fedor Stepanovich (St. Petersburg, 1st year of life?), Lyubov Stepanovna (married to A.I. Morozov), Alexandra Stepanovna (d. 1901) (married to P.M. Ryabushinsky)

household wholesale trade in bread.

real estate estates: 1) Voronezh province. (29,611 acres - worth 1,480,600 rubles), 2) Tambov province (5,834 acres - worth 641,740 rubles), 3) Oryol province. (11,862 acres - worth 177,945 rubles) [CIAM 450-8-138-66]

in 1875 convicted of setting fire to a competitor's steam mill, deprived of all rights of estate and exiled to Siberia [Spasovich Sobr. Op. T. 6. S. 40-48]

95. Ovsyannikov Gleb Stepanovich (1829-1902)

eisky 1 g.k. (1864)

and. Olga Alekseevna (ur. Rakhmanova) (d. 1901) (see No. 111).

household The value of property under a will - 1,040,000 rubles (1902) [CIAM 450-8-138-72]

96. Ovsyannikov Vasily Stepanovich (?-1908)

d. Leonid, Sergey (?), Alexandra (married Gubonina), Elizaveta, Julia (married Petrova)

household trading house "Brothers Ovsyannikovs and Ganshin", since 1887 - the partnership "Brothers Ovsyannikovs and A. Ganshin with sons" (weaving, dyeing and dressing factories in Yuryev-Polsky, fixed capital 750,000 rubles, 7.5 million rubles. turnover) [CIAM 450-8-546-51]

real estate - house in Moscow (Nikolo-Bolvanovskaya street); estate former prince Cherkassky (worth 320,000 rubles), land in hereditary estates (worth 328,612 rubles), the general condition by 1908 is 1,050,000 rubles. [CIAM 450-8-138-66]

97. Ovchinnikov Alexey Petrovich (?)

m. (1875)

d. Fedor (?) (see No. 98). [CIAM 1265-1-354-8]

98. Ovchinnikov Fedor Alekseevich (?)

household factory of church utensils in Moscow, Basmannaya street (1899) [CIAM 450-8-366-9rev.]

9.9. Osipov Nikolai (?) Osipovich

m. c (1854)

household wool weaving factory in Moscow (Pyatnitskaya h., 975 workers, 600,000 rubles per year) [Tarasov-6]

beneficence: 5000 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-1rev.]

10.0. Parfyonov Emelyan (?)

m. (1854)

beneficent 50 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-3]

101. Prasagov Artem Vasilievich (?)

m. (1854)

household 2 paper-weaving factories in Moscow (Rogozhskaya part, 80 workers, 18,370 yearly turnover, and 36 workers, 15,000 yearly turnover - 1853) [Tarasov-43]

beneficent 150 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-3]

102. Pugovkin Ivan Alekseevich (1790-1852)

m. (1852)

and. Irina Stepanovna (b. 1795), m. 3, k-ha (1857)

Alexey (b. 1823) (see No. 103), Nikolai (1829-1879) + f. Alexandra Semyonovna (1835-1866) [X rev. - p.71]

103. Pugovkin Alexey Ivanovich (1822-1878)

m. (1875)

and. Alexandra Vasilievna (1826-1897)

v. Ivan (b. 1854) (see No. 104), Lyubov (b. 1863) [CIAM 126M-ZM-2rev.]

104. Pugovkin Ivan Alekseevich(1854-after 1918)

household two hat shops in Moscow and a wholesale warehouse in Nizhny Novgorod (1904) [CIAM 450-10-39]

should member of the Audit Commission of the Society of Upper Trading Rows on Red Square (1898) [OR 246-9-1-46]

total chairman of the Council of the MSORC (1906-1909) [OR 246-12-10], foreman of the elected MSORC (1897) [OR 246-9-1-46], deputy chairman of the Council of the MSORC (1918) [OR 246-18-6- 4]

105. Rastorguev Ivan Ivanovich (1828-?)

m. (1864)

and. Filizata Vasilievna (b. 1831)

Nikolay (b. 1860), Elizaveta (b. 1861), Ivan (b. 1863) [CIAM 1265-1-89-5v.]

106. Rastorguev Mikhail Petrovich (1795-1862)

m. (1857)

and. (1 brk.) Olga Osipovna (1801-1848)

f (2 brk.) Pelageya Paramonovna (b. 1819)

d. no (as of 1857)

real estate house in Myasnitskaya h. (acquired)

should 1848 - member of the commission "for the adoption of rye flour for sale to the poor", 1855-1857 - vowel of the Moscow Six-voice Duma.

Blessing 100 r. for hospital things (1853), 50 rubles. to the state militia (1855) [CIAM 2-3-1267-2]

107. Rastorguev Petr Sidorovich(d. after 1913)

m. (1894), sweat. post. Gr

household fish trade shop on Solyanka, wholesale fish trade in Russia, from 1882 a loan was opened at the State Commercial Bank for 15,000 rubles, then increased to 150,000 rubles. (closed in 1912)

real estate: house in Myasnitskaya h. (Malozlatoust lane) [CIAM 450-8-91]

total deputy from Moscow Old Believers to congratulate the emperor on St. Easter (1894) [OR 246-2-6-15], 1896 - 1900 elected MSORK [OR 246-9-1-27]

10.8. Rakhmanov* Petr Markovich(1774-?) (About the Rakhmanovs, see: Stadnikov A.V. Forgotten patrons: the Moscow merchant family of the Rakhmanovs // Moscow archive. M., 1998. Issue 2.)

in 1828 - from the serfs, m. 3 g.k. (1833)

and. Avdotya Alekseevna (b. 1772)

Ivan (1801-1835), Abram Bolshoy (b. 1803), Abram Menshoy (b. 1813), Alexander (b. 1818) [VIII rev. - p.38]

household 6 butcher shops in Moscow (1850s) [CIAM 14-4-391-311v.]

109. Rakhmanov Andrey Leontievich (1747-1815)

m. (1815)

and. Fedosya Yegorovna (1755-1839), m.

d. Fedor (1776-1854) (see No. 110), Dmitry (b. 1774), Terenty (1787-1852), m. 3, Aleksey P792-1854. (see No. 111) [VII rev. - p.74]

household trade in bread. Status by 1815 - 20 thousand rubles. ser. [CIAM 2-3-345-1]

110. Rakhmanov Fedor Andreevich (1776-1854)

post. gr., m. 1 g.k. (1854)

total RBD trustee (1850s)

household wholesale trade in bread (trading company "Brothers F. and A. Rakhmanov" (purchase of bread along the Volga, in the Tula and Kaluga provinces); by 1854 - a fortune of over 1 million rubles. Ser.

111. Rakhmanov Alexey Andreevich (1792-1854)

m. gr.

female (1 brk.) Anna Alekseevna (ur. Kuznetsova) (1804-1821)

female (2 brk.) Evdokia Dionisovna (ur. Sychkov) (1806-1879), pot. post. gr-ka.

d. Olga (d.190P (married Ovsyannikova, (see No. 95), Anna (1836-1898) (married Dyachkova), Apollinaria (1838-?), Maria (?) [M. St - S .80]

household wholesale trade in bread, large creditor (up to 20,000 rubles. Ser.)

112. Rakhmanov Vasily Grigorievich (1782-?)

and. Agafya Filippovna

due director of sinks, offices of the State Commercial Bank (1843-1857), member of the Committee for finding ways to trade

was awarded a gold medal on the Annenskaya ribbon "For diligent service"

113. Rakhmanov Ivan Grigorievich (1774-1839)

until 1819 - m. 3 GK, from 1819 - Bogoroditsky 2 GK

and. Alexandra Karpovna (ur. Shaposhnikova) (1787-1841)

Semyon Ivanovich (1808-1854) (see No. 114), Egor (b. 1809), Pavel (b. 1811), Olga (b. 1810), Elizabeth (b. 1814), Nikolai (b. 1816, m.1 g.k), Karp (1824-1895. (see No. 116), Fedor (b. 1820), Ivan (b. 1822). [VII rev. - P. 74]

household wholesale trade in bread in the Moscow and Tula provinces. [OR 342-57-38-1]

114. Rakhmanov Semyon Ivanovich (1808-1854)

m. (1854)

and. Serafima Fedorovna (nee Kartasheva) (1818-1881)

Fedor (b. 1848) - p.79]

household trade in bread [OR 342-57-38-3]

115. Rakhmanov Fedor Semenovich (1848-?)

sweat. post. gr.

total trustee of the RBD (1897-1900), foreman of the elected MSORK (1893-1896, 1903-1906) [OR 246-9-1-40]

116. Rakhmanov Karp Ivanovich (1824-1895)

m. gr.

and. Xenia Egorovna (b. 1831)

d. Alexandra (1851 - 1903) (See No. 120), Georgy (?) (See No. 117), Ivan (?) (See No. 118), Emilia (1869-1907) . (see No. 119), Sergei (?), Agniya (?), Lydia (in the marriage of Agafonov, (see No. 2) [X rev. - P.79]

total foreman elected MSORK (1875-79), elected (1870s-1895) [OR 246-3-2-11]

117. Rakhmanov Georgy Karpovich (?)

assistant professor at Moscow University

total founding member of the MSEC (1913), member of the School Board of the MSEC, member of the Special Trustees of the Council of the MSEC (1916) [OR 246-95-2-8]

118. Rakhmanov Ivan Karpovich (?)

m. 1 g.k., sweat. post. gr. (1903)

household brick factory (station Kryukovo, Moscow province)

total Chairman of the Council of the MSORK (1903-1906)

beneficent 200 000 rubles to a tuberculosis sanatorium in Barybino (1903) [CIAM 179-57-117]

119. Rakhmanova Emilia Karpovna (1869-1907)

sweat. post. lady (1907)

beneficent 5000 r. Society for the Encouragement of Diligence, 10,000 rubles. - to the account of the RBD, the House of Free Apartments (for 100 people, cost 60,000 rubles) [CIAM 179-57-1016]

120. Rakhmanova Alexandra Karpovna (1851-1903)

sweat. post. gr-ka.

beneficent almshouse them. A.K. Rakhmanova (for 70 people, cost 133,000 rubles) [Izv. My. mountains Dumas, Common. Dep. 1909, No. 1, p. 60]

121. Rybakov Nikolay Petrovich (?)

br. Rybakov Alexey Petrovich (?), m. (1875) [CIAM 1265-1-354-6] general. founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-95-2-4]

122. Ryabushinsky Pavel Mikhailovich (1820-1899)

m. 1, commercial advisor

and. (2 brk.) Alexandra Stepanovna (ur. Ovsyannikova) (d. 1901)

D. Pavel (1871-1924) (see No. 123). Sergei (1874-1942) (see No. 124), Stepan (b. 1874-?) (see No. 125). Dmitry (b. 1882-?) (see No. 126), Vladimir, Fedor.

household since 1887 - the partnership "P.M. Ryabushinsky and sons" - textile factories with an authorized capital of 2 million rubles.

total elective MSORK (1860s-1890s) [OR 246-9-1-27]

123. Ryabushinsky Pavel Pavlovich (1871-1924)

m.1 g.c., banker

and. (1 br.) I.A. Butikova

and. (2 brothers) E.G. Mazurina

household Russian flax industry Joint-Stock Company, Middle Russian Joint Stock Company (timber holding), Okulovskaya stationery factory, Joint Stock Moscow Bank (fixed capital 25 million rubles - 1912), Kharkov Land Bank

due Chairman of the Moscow Exchange Committee, Chairman of the Moscow Military Industrial Committee, member of the State Council (1916)

total Chairman of the School Council of the MSORK, Chairman of the Old Believer Congress (1905), elected community (since 1896) [OR 246-9-1-2]

(About P. Ryabushinsky, see: Petrov Yu.A. Pavel Pavlovich Ryabushinsky // Historical silhouettes. M., 1991. P. 106-154)

124. Ryabushinsky Sergey Pavlovich (1874-1942)

and. A.A.Pribylova(?)

household co-founder of the automobile plant AMO (1916)

total chairman of the School Council of the MSORK (1909), elected by the community [OR 246-9-1-2]

125. Ryabushinsky Stepan Pavlovich (1874-?)

household co-founder of AMO (1916)

total chairman of the Council of the MSORK (1906-1909) [OP 246-9-11-2]

126. Ryabushinsky Dmitry Pavlovich(b. 1882)

corresponding member French Academy of Sciences; founded the 1st Aerodynamic Institute in the world (1904, Kuchino estate) (Petrov Yu. P.P. Ryabushinsky // Historical silhouettes. M., 1991. P. 106-154)

127. Savvin Vasily Savvich (?)

m. (1854)

beneficent 300 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2v.]

128. Sapelkin Vladimir Andreevich (1801-?)

m. (1857)

and. Praskovya Dmitrievna (b. 1803)

d. Fedor (1834), Alexander (b. 1837), Alexei (b. 1838) [X rev. - S. 130]

household wax-white factory (since 1820, village Vladimirovo, Moscow province, district 27, 15,000 regular years; turnover; candle factory (Moscow, Basmannaya h., 15

slave x, 65 750 rubles turnover.)

1849. - a small silver medal for the quality of candles at the St. Petersburg exhibition; 1852 - silver medal for wax at the Moscow Agricultural Exhibition. [Zhmit. SPb., 1853. Part 3. S. 65-70]

beneficent 150 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2v.]

129. Sapelov Ivan Matveevich (?)

beneficent 1000 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2v.]

130. Sveshnikov Artemy Yakovlevich (1801-1860)

eysk. 1st year (1854)

brothers: Sveshnikov Mikhail Yakovlevich (1814-1865) .(see No. 131), Sveshnikov Fedor Yakovlevich (1815-1884) .(see No. 132.)

beneficent 200 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 116-110-853-2rev.]

131. Sveshnikov Mikhail Yakovlevich (1814-1865)

m. (1854)

beneficent 25 p. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-3]

household mentioned: Sveshnikov A.I. - a paper-spinning factory in Moscow (83 workers, 23843 yr. turnover), Sveshnikov P.A. - a wool-spinning factory in Moscow (80 workers, 42025 rubles per year turnover) (Timiryazev - p.5, 21]

132. Sveshnikov Fedor Yakovlevich (1815-1884)

m. (1854)

Aleksey, m. 3, 1913 - founding member of the MSORK [OR 246-95-2-4]

household wool weaving factory in the Moscow province. (295 slaves, 105294 yr. turnover) [Timiryazev - p.21]

beneficent 300 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854)

mentioned: Sveshnikova I.P. - a gift of paintings and engravings to the Rumyantsev Museum (1911), Sveshnikova E.V. - construction of a doss house in Moscow (1910), Sveshnikova K.V. - the establishment of a bed in the almshouse. Geer (1909) [CIAM 179-57-117-21]

133. Sveshnikov Petr Petrovich (?)

br. Ivan Petrovich (?)

household TD "P. Sveshnikova Sons" (sawmills) 1897 - fixed capital - 1.2 million rubles, from 1899 - 1.8 million rubles. wholesale in Moscow and the Nizhny Novgorod Fair.

real estate land estates 42,355 dec. (worth 868,000 rubles), timber materials - 4 million rubles. (1899), sawmills in Uglich, Rostov, Pereyaslav counties (total cost 90,741 rubles) (1899) [CIAM 450-8-366]

13.4. Simonova (ur. Soldatenkova) Maria Konstantinovna (1803-1870)

m. group (1864) [CIAM 1265-1-89-2]

beneficent 100 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

135. Sidorov Fedor Semenovich (?)

Zvenigorodskaya 3rd city (1854)

beneficent 50 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2v.]

136. Smirnov Filimon Nikitovich (1790-1857)

m. (1857)

and. Irina Vasilievna (b. 1807)

d. Peter (b. 1843)

household paper-weaving factory in Moscow (Basmannaya h., 80 workers, 54,067 year turnover (1853) (Tarasov-46]

beneficent 100 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-3]

137. Soldatenkov Kuzma Terentievich (1818-1901)

Commerce Advisor, post. gr.

household Publishing house K.T. Soldatenkov

should vowel of the Moscow City Duma, member of the Moscow branch of the Manufactory Council, full member of the Society of Commercial Knowledge Lovers at the Academy of Commercial Sciences, honorary member of the Brotherly-loving Society for the Supply of Poor Apartments

total elective MSORK 1860-1901

beneficent "Soldatenkovskaya" hospital (Botkinskaya) worth 2 million rubles, a collection of paintings and icons in the Tretyakov Gallery, etc.

about him see: MertsalovIG. Russian publisher. Philanthropist Kuzma Terentyevich Soldatenkov and his merits for Russian education // Izvestia Volf. No. 9-10.

13.8. Sobolev Nikolai (?)

total elected community (1897) [OR 246-9-1-2ob]

139. Sokolov Alexander Nikolaevich (?)

sweat. post. gr. (1913)

founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-95-2-4]

brother Sokolov Nikolai Nikolaevich (?)

household founder of the "partnership for the production of Russian mineral oils and chemical products" S.M. Shibaev and K 0 "(1884) with a fixed capital of 6.5 million rubles [CIAM 450-8-552-3]

140. Solovyov Vasily Yakovlevich (1802-1855)

D. Andrey (b. 1835). (See No. 141). Taras (1827-1899) . (See No. 142). Makar (1842-1886), m. 1 year of colony, Dorotheus (b. 1829) from 1853 - in the middle class [X rev. - p.41]

141. Solovyov Andrey Vasilievich(b. 1835)

m. (1857)

and. Maria Kononovna (1842-1883), born Royal [X rev. - p.46]

142. Solovyov Taras Vasilievich (1827-1899)

m. (1857), sweat. post. gr.

and. Avdotya Ivanovna (1826-1905)

Anna (b. 1842), Maria (b. 1847), Praskovya (b. 1855), Sergei (b. 1856) (see No. 143) [X rev. - p.41]

143. Solovyov Sergey Tarasovich (?)

sweat. post. gr.

total elective MSORK (1897) [OR 246-9-1-2rev.]

144. Strakopytov Kozma Alexandrovich (1820-1887)

m.1 (1864)

and. Natalya Petrovna (b. 1826)

household wool-weaving factory in Moscow (16 workers, 18,670 rubles per year) [Timiryazev - P. 22]

total 1879-1881 - elected MSORK [OR 246-3-6-24rev.] charitable. 50 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2rev.]

14.5. Sushchov Fedor (?)

m. (1854)

beneficent 15 p. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2v.]

146. Tatarnikov Ivan Parfenovich (1800-?)

m. (1857)

and. (2 brk.) Praskovya Alekseevna (b. 1830)

(1 brk.) Ivan (1836), Dmitry (b. 1838)

d. (2 brk.) Elena (b. 1842) [X rev. - S. 144]

147. Tatarnikov Emelyan Parfenovich (1797-?)

m. (1857)

and. Praskovya Larionovna (d. 1857)

v. Ivan (b. 1816) + f. Anna Savelyevna (b. 1819),

[d. Ivan Ivanovich (b. 1843), Peter (1849), Avdotya (1847), Pelageya (R-1851)]

Mikhail Emelyanovich (b. 1834), Peter (b. 1837), Kozma (b. 1840), Maria (1843) [X rev.-S. 146]

148. Tatarnikov Fedor Vasilievich (1853-1912)

household trade in linen products, transport offices (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Volga region)

should member of the Merchant Council, elected Merchant Bank, member of the Moscow Exchange Society [f. Church. 1912]

149. Tarasov Yakov Alexandrovich (1814-?)

m. (1857)

and. Agrafena Yakovlevna (b. 1822)

Makar (1843-1855), Stepan (b. 1845), Elizaveta (b. 1855), Praskovya (b. 1857), Evdokia (b. 1852), Porfiry (b. 1853) (see No. 150) [ X rev. -138]

150. Tarasov Porfiry Yakovlevich (1853-?)

personal post. gr. (1913)

total founding member of the MSORK [OR 246-95-2-7]

151. Timashev Alexander Larionovich(b. 1821-?)

m. (1875), in 1856 from the Smolensk province., Sychevsky 3 merchant children.

and. Yefimiya Petrovna (b. 1931)

d. Elizabeth (b. 1864) [X rev. - p.114]

household wool-weaving factory in Moscow (167 workers, 77,600 rubles per year) [Timiryazev - P.21]

Mentioned by: Timashev M.L. - wool-weaving factory in Moscow (180 workers, 55,720 rubles per year turnover) [Timiryazev - P.21]

benefactor: Timasheva E.P. founded a chamber in the Rogozhsky almshouses (1908) [OR 246-61-4-Juob.]

152. Tolkachev Yakov Yakovlevich (?)

m. 3 g.k. (1854)

beneficent 100 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War (1854) [CIAM 16-110-853-2]

153. Tregubov Osip Egorovich (1798-1856)

m. (1856)

and. Daria Timofeevna (1807-1862), m. 3, k-ha

v. Ivan (b. 1820) + f. Marya Semyonovna (b. 1832) [d. Maria (b. 1854)]

Egor (b. 1827) + f. Marfa Petrovna [d. Pelageya (b. 1855)]

Alexey (1834) (see No. 154), Peter (b. 1836-1913) - d. Ivan (see No. 155) [X rev. - p.77]

154. Tregubov Alexey Osipovich (1834-1912)

sweat. post. gr.

and. Maria Ivanovna (b. 1838)

155. Tregubov Ivan Petrovich (?)

sweat. post. gr. (1913)

Sergey (b. 1898), Nikolai (b. 1903), Alexandra (1909)

total founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-95-2-4]

156. Tryndin Egor Stepanovich (1808-?)

from the Moscow bourgeois (1857), m. 3 g.c. (1861)

and. Elizaveta Kondratievna (b. 1817)

Olga (1844-1865), Maria (b.1848), Sergei (b.1847I see No. 157), Peter (1852-1909) [X rev. - p.57]

household optics and surgical instruments (Moscow, Myasnitskaya h., 15 slaves, 9000 year old turnover. (1853) [Tarasov-71]

should Ratman 1 of the Department of the Moscow Magistrate (1861-1864) [CIAM 2-3-1280-2]

157. Tryndin Sergey Egorovich(b. 1847)

Commerce Advisor (1913)

d. Anastasia (died after 1916), in the marriage of Shchepotiev

158. Filatov Yakov Mikhailovich (?)

total founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-95-2-7]

159. Fomin Trifon Grigorievich (1778-?)

m. (1857)

d. Ivan (b. 1808). (see No. 160), Andrei (b. 1814), Yermolai (b. 1825) [Chrev. - p.93]

beneficent 300 r. on the wounded in the Crimean War SHIAM 16-110-853-2]

160. Fomin Ivan Trifonovich (1808-?)

m. (1857)

d. Peter (b. 1831) (see No. 157), Vasily (b. 1841), Natalia (b. 1836), Maria (b. 1844) [X rev. - p.96]

161. Fomin Petr Ivanovich(1831- after 1870)

and. Serafima Ivanovna (b. 1835)

d. Konstantin (b. 1854), Alexei (b. 1856)

household wool-weaving factory in Moscow (250 workers, 70,000 r.g. turnover) - 1870 [Tarasov-21, 22]; wool weaving factory in Moscow (50 workers, 15,750 rubles, turnover - 1870) [X rev. - p.96]

162. Tsarsky Ivan Nikolaevich (?-1853)

m. gr.

household meat trade in Moscow (1845) [CIAM 16-13-1542-211]

due deputy from the merchants in the Board of the 4th District of Communications, deputy in the Board of Public Buildings.

post. titles: philanthropist of the Imperial Society of Russian History and Antiquities, member of the Imperial Archaeological Society and the Russian geographical society, honorary correspondent of the Imperial Public Library, correspondent of the Archaeological Commission, full member of the Odessa Society of Russian History and Antiquities, full member of the Moscow Commercial Academy and the Copenhagen Art Society of Northern Antiquarians.

awards: a gold medal on the Vladimir ribbon (for donations of manuscripts and coins in 1828) [Obituary// Northern Bee. 1853. No. 169]

163. Tsarsky Konon Anisimovich (1812-1884)

m. 1 because, the surname is allowed to be called from 1853

d. Maria (married Solovyova, 1842-1883) (see No. 141), Seliverst (1835-1897) + f. Praskovya Grigorievna (1840-1888) - niece of A.I. Nazarova (see No. 90), Egor (b. 1844) [X rev. - S. 129]

total trustee of the RBD (1876-1879) [OR 246-3-6-24rev.]

164. Tsarsky Nikolai Dmitrievich (?)

total trustee of the RBD (1850s)

(Melnikov PI. Och. Popovshchina // RV. 1866. T. 63. No. 5.S. 15)

165. Shaposhnikov Fedor Semenovich (1834-?)

m. (1857)

and. Alexandra Zakharovna (b. 1836) [X rev. -98]

d. Evtikhy Fedorovich m. 3 g.k. (1913), founding member of the MSORK [OR 246-95-2-10]

household wool-weaving factory (Moscow U. S. Nikolskoye, Moscow Province, 455 workers, 212500 R. yr. turnover) [Tarasov-10]

166. Shelaputin Antip Dmitrievich (?)

m. 1 because, post. gr. (1820)

br. Shelaputin Prokopiy Dmitrievich, m.1 g.k., commerce-adviser

household until 1821 - joint, total cost - 50,000 rubles + 2-storey stone house in Basmannaya Ch. [CIAM 2-3-412]

total trustee of the RBD (1850s).

167. Shelaputina Matrena Nikitichna (1813-?)

m. 3 g k-ha, widow (1857) [X rev. - p.118]

168. Shelaputin Maxim Fedorovich (1813-?)

m. 3 g.k., from 1867 - tradesman,

and. Anna Afanasievna (b. 1822)

Dmitriy (b. 1849) (see No. 165), Zinaida (b. 1851)

household silverware workshop (for 1865), silver bench [CIAM 1265-1-95-15,20]

169. Shelaputin Dmitry Maksimovich (?)

m. tradesman

total founding member of the MSORK (1913) [OR 246-95-2-13]

170. Shelaputin Pavel Grigorievich (1847-1914)

and. Anna (?)

d. Boris (? -1913), Grigory (? -1901), Anatoly (? -1908).

household Balashikha wool-spinning m-ra (1914 - 3000 workers, 8 million rubles per year turnover.)

beneficent Gynecological Institute for Doctors named after Anna Shelaputina (1893), gymnasium named after Grigory Shelaputin (1902), three vocational schools (1903), real school named after A. Shelaputin (1908), Pedagogical Institute(1908), women's teacher's seminary (1910) (Shchetinin B.A. Zealot of education // Historical Bulletin. 1914. No. 7. P. 230)

171. Shibaev Andrey Martynovich (1818-1873)

br. Shibaev Sidor Martynovich (see No. 172)

household Dyeing and finishing factory in Bogorodsky district. Moscow province. (60 slaves 20,000 rubles turnover) [Timiryazev - P. 27]

172. Shibaev Sidor Martynovich (?-1888)

bogorodsky 1st city

and. (1 brk.) Maria Ivanovna (1825-1858)

and. (2 brk.) Evdokia Vukolovna (? -1899) (nee Mityushina, sister of N.V. Kuznetsova).

Ivan, Nikolay, Sergey, Matvey, Peter, Alexey.(?)

household since 1857 - a textile shop in the village of Istomkino, Moscow province (1257 workers, 1,093,000 rubles turnover.) [Timiryazev - p. M. Shibaev Sons" - (3 factories in the village of Istomkino, 7 million rubles per year. Turnover. (1912) [CIAM 450-8-544], oil fields in Baku, since 1884 - Partnership "S .M.Shibaev and Co. (factory for the manufacture of mineral oils, fixed capital 6.5 million rubles), Shibaevskoe Oil Industrial Company in London (credit) [CIAM 450-8-552]

173. Shibaev Lev Fedorovich (1804-?)

m. (1857)

and. (2 brk.) Maria Denisovna (b. 1820)

d. (1 brk.) Nikolai (b. 1836) + f. Elizaveta Konstantinovna (b. 1839)

(2 brk.) Ivan (b. 1843) (see No. 174), Alexei (b. 1847) [X rev. - p.92]

174. Shibaev Ivan Lvovich(1843-after 1900)

beneficent almshouse for 180 people (1899) [CIAM 179-58-308]

175. Shibaev Ivan Ivanovich (1835-?)

m. (1857) [X rev. – P.106]

176. Shibaev Vasily Andreevich (?)

m. (1897)

d. Ivan (1860-1889)

total Trustee of the RBD (1897-1900) together with F.S. Rakhmanov [OR 246-9-1-40]

Famous Old Believer dynasties: Morozovs, Ryabushinskys, Guchkovs, Soldatenkovs, Khludovs, Konovalovs.
How is that? It did not fit in my head: a believer is a rich man.
And what about the wealth of the monasteries?
Did the leaders of the clergy with expensive watches and expensive cars cause you irritation or bewilderment?

Why: one everything, and the other nothing?
Didn't this question bother you?

I am not an envious person. But still, it was not clear to me how the business giants of pre-revolutionary Russia correlated with the fact of their deep religiosity? However, there is an understandable explanation.

Let's start with the parable of the talents.

The parable of the talents is one of the parables of Jesus Christ, contained in the Gospel of Matthew and talking about the second coming:

“For [He will act] as a man who, going to a foreign country, called his servants and entrusted his property to them: and to one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his strength; and immediately set off. The one who received the five talents went and put them to work and acquired another five talents; in the same way, he who received two talents acquired the other two; He who received the one talent went and dug it in the ground and hid his master's money.
(Matthew 25:14-30) »
Upon his return, the master called the slaves to him and demanded from them a report on how they disposed of the money entrusted to them. He praised the slaves who used money for business, saying “well, good and faithful slave! you have been faithful in a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master." The slave came last, buried the money in the ground and said: “Sir! I knew you that you are a cruel man, you reap where you did not sow, and gather where you did not scatter, and being afraid, you went and hid your talent in the ground; Here is what is yours” (Matthew 25:24-25).

In response, the master addressed him and those present with the following speech:
“Cunning slave and lazy! you knew that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I did not scatter; therefore you ought to have given my money to the merchants, and when I came, I would have received mine with a profit; Therefore, take the talent from him and give it to the one who has ten talents, for to everyone who has it will be given and it will be multiplied, but from the one who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. but cast the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 25:26-30) »

How do agnostics perceive wealth and power? Means for life, for realization of ideas, for comfort. An agnostic sees objects as either his or someone else's, which either gives him the right to dispose of property at his own discretion, or does not give such a right. Having received the right to dispose of wealth and power, an agnostic (and in his person I mean a person "not a believer") makes such orders, guided by his morality, his own rules for determining what is good and what is evil. And such a person can either start building hospitals and gardens, or start sponsoring wars and selling drugs - it's up to him.

And how does a believer perceive the material world? He sees his stay in this world as temporary, and sees the cleansing of the soul from sin as the most important thing, so that at the end of the mortal path he will gain eternal blessings (well, and not fall into the fiery hyena). The world was created by God, and everything here does not belong to people. The material world, these are the very "talents", who are five, who are two, who are one - are given by the Lord to his servants, in order to ask later. A person on earth, by the will of the Lord, receives this or that property at temporary disposal, and how will he dispose of these talents? The owner will ask. A believer manages according to the morality enshrined in the Gospel, and not personal preferences.
Here, of course, they can begin to philosophize - how to understand what is written, and how to understand this. Suffice it to recall that women were burned at the stake in the name of the Lord and wars were waged, also with his name. Wise people are much ...
To avoid this, it is enough to remember how you deal with moldy food? You throw it away and wash the dishes, don't you? In the same way, one sees the wisdom of a person that is poisoned by the mold of pride, vanity, greed. To avoid poisoning, it is enough to wash your soul from reasoning according to your own understanding, and to perceive the knowledge and logic from Evangelia, which cannot be the subject of human thought, and are a source of pure knowledge. But that's a completely different story.

Thus, disposing of temporarily entrusted material wealth or power, a believer does not seek personal gain, for he knows that these "wealth" will remain in this temporary world. But being a temporary manager, he shows his spiritual maturity, which is what is said in the above parable.

ps: from the book of St. Ignatius Brianchaninov "Ascetic Experiences"

How many Old Believers-industrialists were in Moscow?

Trumps of the Old Believers

How do we know the numbers?

Waves of repression and cycles of economic activity

Pros and cons of the Old Believer model

How many Old Believers-industrialists were in Moscow?

Trumps of the Old Believers

How do we know the numbers?

Waves of repression and cycles of economic activity

The role of Moscow

Pros and cons of the Old Believer model

List of merchant Old Believer surnames in Moscow (XIX - early XX century)

Directory structure

Abbreviations:

Sources

You may be interested