Reforms of Peter I

According to Vladimir-Budanov, a "Quick image..." "found its place after the full application of the notion of governmental d (inquisitorial) process..." [29]. Nevertheless, some elements of competition still remain: the possibility for the parties to manifest lyat some initiative in the progress of the case, the exchange of h e lobitnoy and answer scoping disputes and proof and governments and others, however, the "pure" investigative process, e Pts obviously not the case.

It may be noted in the document this trend: the initiative of the parties narrowed by expanding the rights of the court, at the same time, the activities of the court and score them tougher circumstances is regulated by law, for the manifestation of his own discretion and any initiative judges almost no room left. Will of the parties and the court will absorbed and replaced by the will of the legislator. That appears to strengthen absolutism with its bid concentrated on chit all areas of life in the hands of one person - the autocratic mona ha p.

"Quick image..." devoted almost entirely the judicial system and process. Occasionally there are articles (and even after d Applying chapter) containing rules of substantive criminal law. About t division procedural law of the material - a great e of achievement of Russian legislative technique beginning of the XVIII century, still unknown Ulozhenie.

However, still not demarcated criminal and civil process, although some features are already hinted at (eg in a publication of sentences). The general course of the process, the names of procedural documents and actions, in principle, the same for the criminal, and civil cases.

Unlike Ulozhenie "quick image..." built very clearly. At first two chapters are wearing as if administered d character. They are the basic layout of the judicial system and some general provisions on rye process. Then there is consistently described ting stroke process, originally divided into three main parts.

Statutory language much more clearly than in the Cathedral Ulozhenie. For the first time in Russian law often provides general o p tain important procedural institutions and concepts, though not always perfect. The legislator has not seldom resorted to a clear enumeration of the classification of individual phenomena and processes. Some articles of the law on rye contain not only the rule of law, but also its theor and cal justification, sometimes bringing different perspectives on this issue.

In its legislative technique of "quick image..." item on IT high enough. However, it should be noted one outside untill residue with the law. This - addiction to foreign term legislator of homology usually quite unnecessary and not always competent. VO Key in the sky noted that Peter I is not very strong in Russian grammar. We must assume that in foreign languages, it was not stronger. More SM Solovyov said that Peter unlike his older brothers, has not received serious education. He was mainly self-taught, although brilliant Samoa h Coy [30].

The law establishes a coherent system of the judiciary, not izves t ing to Peter I, quite clearly regulates the issues of jurisdiction. For the administration of justice are special organs. And to a one they are still not completely separated from the administration. Judges in courts of ennyh are combatant commanders, as the second insta n tion acts corresponding boss, court verdicts in some cases approved by superiors. Not yet division into bodies of preliminary investigation and judicial district of Ghana.

In accordance with this process there is no division into a Pre Trial Chamber and manufacture cases directly in court.

-Vladimir Budanov believed that "quick image..." b s lo borrowed from Western sources. It reflected the full application of the concept of the investigative (investigative) process. The process to become a secret and work (instead of the double exchange of pleadings installed securities between the parties). The plaintiff filed a written statement. The defendant was represented by an objection in writing as well. This form of process was used not only in the courts of ennyh, but also in all the courts in both criminal and by citizens n Skim cases. Representation is allowed only if no feasible ITY parties personally appear in court, and only for some d e lamas.

"The most important drawback of Peter process usually melt MF and he introduced the doctrine of the formal sense of evidence (ie, a predetermined assessment of their law, and not a judge). But exclusive domination began investigating the process, it is more dignity than not wealth: for arbitrariness, this judge was so great that without his theory of formal proof and strength ments, the concept was lost to the court: The verdict would be a simple decision of the judge at his discretion e NIJ " [31].

Own admission is still considered proof. It was "the best evidence of the whole world." Due to this erroneous view, the process is directed mainly to extortion own confession torture, the use of which has increased considerably and receptacle.

The second kind of evidence was the testimony. W and distinguished legislators force testimony according to the moral qualities of the witness, his or her sex, social status and their relationship to the parties. In the first case, the testimony is not admissible to repent "criminals explicit adulterers, people who do not have professed former e di" [32] and in the latter case, the force is more evidence if the witness is a man (not a woman), a notable person (not prostol th dyn), spiritual (not secular), and scientist. In the third case, witnesses s No. relatives were not allowed. Number of witnesses is determined by the minimum: one reading are not evidence.

In the course of Peter's survived "a type of God's judgment, namely Cleaning oath, which allowed the accused in the case against him when there was no other evidence of sufficiently strong, however legislation disapproving looks at the oath, preferring to leave the man suspected" [33] . Since taking the oath beneath s Reva was considered justified. In case of refusal to take the oath, he is straight and have been found guilty, punished but much weaker than at the mouth of his guilt and updating of other, more proofs.

Finally, among the best written evidence considered proof of d (eg, trade books).

Evaluation of the relative strength of the evidence is expressed in the law terms "perfect" evidence or "imperfect." Sun I accepted some evidence for the commission only when izves t tion circumstances: so own admission ("the best witness of the world s No.") must be checked; testimony and evaluation vayutsya Court of parties and witnesses circumstances, even the oath (the residue of previous unconditional means the process) is suspected of keeping out the possibility of d oaths of crime.

After reviewing the evidence, by a majority vote of judges (the trial was a collective) to impose sentences that are put into writing and signed by the judges and was held together by an audit of rum.

The legislator did not explain to what kind of courts and cases should be applied "quick image...". It can be assumed that his initial [34] thought, its application is limited to E s military courts.

Certain dissonance decree of February 21, 1697 and "Concise image or judicial processes of tyazheb" sounds IME n tion decree dated November 5, 1723 "On the form of the court." Decree repealed wanted and did the court only form of process. The question arises, what s in the title of such a sharp fluctuation in the legisla ve r.

KD Cavelin about it cautiously said: "The reasons... return to the previous form proceedings found unsatisfactory b Noah, up unknown " [35]. SV YUSHKOV considered cancellation tracing result of what he has not justified itself: "These procedural fo r we knit with a secret clerical work and production, not only eliminated the red tape in the courts, but even a significant step f or contributed to its development" [36].

However, search was not news for Russia, and Peter I, introducing him to l know his wife was still shortcomings in 1697 and even more so at the time of publication of the "Short image...". The historical situation in 1697 and 1723 respectively did not differ so fundamentally, to demand a radical change in procedural law. The opportunity to seek an answer to this question in some other way.

First, it should be noted insufficient certainty concepts themselves "court" and "search", whereby the legislator may not always so sharply contrasted them as we often think.

Second, the study of legislation (in particular, "Kra t whom image...") shows that wanted preserved some elements of competition on rye and, conversely, the court had elements of formalism inherent consequence of Mr. Nome process.

Third, life itself prevented the strict observance of the decree of 21 February 1697, the spread on all criminal investigation and especially to all civil cases. Anyway, in practice and on p after this decree has held out the division on the court and wanted. No wonder he Decree dated November 5, 1723 mentions it: "There should distinguish (as happened before) a court of another district zysk...".

Fourth, attention is drawn to the fact that the form of a decree on the court along with criticism of previous legislation ("... rather than on the old decree, because the courts give a lot of g lishnyago We say a lot of unnecessary and write that rather prohibited ") and underscore Vaeth and its continuity with him:" Inasmuch as many others on the form of court orders ergy were composed, of which are now collected, and how to judge on the d lies, to form clearly shows... ".

Thus, the changes introduced by the Ordinance on the form of the court, pre d seems not so fundamental as it seems at first glance. To a certain extent in the decree was issued not change, and the development of the previous legislation.

KD Cavelin believed that the form of a decree on the court means "restoration of our ancient Court, forms of civil sudoproizvo d properties, of course, modified according to the needs of the time no e" [37].

"Court in the form" had to have application in all nevoe n tion courts, including criminal, "and searches of all courts are still otpravlyattsa form." Some major court rulings in the form do not apply, however, to cases of high treason, "wickedness" insulting e SRI Majesty and rebellion (Article 5: "besides these cases: treason, villainy or nasty words on the Majesty and his family and rebellion"). "Even under the most Peter I (in 1724), the action processes and the" form of the court "has been distributed to all courts imp e theory as follows: the latter must act in dealing with civil cases (" particularistic "), first in criminal matters (" donositelnyh and fi with locally "). In 1725, May 3 Senate interpreted that titled "PLN of action" are understood crimes against faith, murder, robbery, tatba. Thus, the total value of the court in the form disappeared: this led to the practice and the subsequent legalization on the one hand, the military "processes" were retsepirovany for merchant ships, on the other - was found impossible to follow in the criminal courts, "the court in shape." However, this duality forms process (civil and criminal) could not resist: how legalization and practice strongly leaning towards inquisitorial proce with sa " [38]. Obviously, the overall trends of absolutism still mp f Bova domination investigation, although perhaps not so bezgrani h tion form as elk and envisages a decree dated February 21, 1697.

Separate line I would like to highlight the c adversary proceeding on behalf of the decree of November 5, 1723 "On the form of the court." Having studied a lot of literature on this topic I was able to identify many interesting features of the adversarial process under Peter I. The following discussion focuses on this nominal decree.

Decree dated November 5, 1723 "On the form of the court" s changes sudoproi duction of military regulations to restore the old order of the adversarial process, with some modifications, "sloping to wo b scheniyu judge a more active role in combating the parties" [39].

Ordinance on the form of the court was premised chapeau. It gives justification for the law, its relation to the previous legislation and the main directions of changes made by this act in the process right from Alno.

The main innovation here, as already mentioned, - the abolition of roses s SKNOU form process. However, the practice has not gone through a complete line of complete abolition of Investigation. Anyway, after three years AD Menshikov, giving directions to the Special Court in the case of AM D e Vieira, PA Tolstoy and others, wrote: "A search for them over the thread and do not h" [40] . Obviously, without this indication could be a search uch and nen. However, the way it happened: AM Demivera duly rozys tion process to have been tortured and even twice.

The process started with the filing of a written request by the claimant - petition. Decree focuses on connectivity presentation petition. Requirements of brevity and clarity of the petition put forward even in the "Quick Start image..." (Article 3 Sec. "On the petitioners"). Objectified e lennye requirements petition were presented and Cathedral stacked e tion (Article 102, etc. Ch. X), in particular the requirement to clearly indicate the price action. The decree "On the form of the court" petition was ordered to have Pun Tami, point by point, and so that is what is written in the same paragraph shall be repeated and do not mix with the other set (Article 1: "How chelobitnyya and write full-term points, so clean, so that it was written in one paragraph, in addition to the other was not. ")

The law distinguishes between two types of petitioners plaintiff - in civil proceedings and informer - a criminal. However, the opposite side of the sieve n former general for those and other cases the name - the defendant.

The law imposes certain formal requirements for direct Minutes of previously absent in the legislation (Article 2: "A time will come when the court, then make two notebooks tufted cord and seal thereof, and fix the Secretary on sheets from which to write about Dr. Noah defendants response to another or isttsovy donositelevy street and matches. ").

Regulates the procedure for trial. Unlike the "Short image..." (Article 2 Sec. "On the respondent") is now forbidden to give an answer to the petition in writing. Especially not on m may be a question of one exchange process in Alno papers.

It is forbidden to make a counterclaim or recrimination until the investigation is in the main case. Possible to transfer vstre h tion complaint to another court if it is not amenable to this court.

Judicial investigation conducted on individual items chelobi t tion, the plaintiff petition was read for the items for which the defendant was to l wives give consistent answers. He could not relate to the following points present th until not give an exhaustive answer to the previous question in about (Article 3: "And when the first point with everything... then cleanse spr Sit on the plaintiff, if he has more evidence, and then the defendant that he has any more to justify... enjoin hands attach to each communication item on him. ") The defendant now has the right at any time to apply for a judicial investigation to adduce new documents. To do this, given time - poverstny period (Article 3: "... about the same bude t respondent had become time to ask for references, then give, what if the email is from poverstnym term..."). Specific rules povers t tion period is not specified.

This article is quite clearly playing adversarial proce with sa. The parties argue, arguing their case, for each of the q su.

Adversarial principle and held up under judicial training, with some exceptions for serious offenses (and s exchange, rebellion, insulting the royal family). Respondent no later than one week is given a copy ("list") petition so that he could prepare to defend s smiling (Article 5: "... the court must first give the defendant a list with items filed by petitioners... calling the defendant before the court and himself to give a list thereof, which mark all judging by the number of which get to court, so that a copy of the full week in the hands of the Defendants and kovyh was "). Formal stationery are imposed on the STI to ensure the appearance of the defendant at the time on the court: mark the date of the trial, a receipt for the "list" - p e version (v. 5 "... and take it with reverse, that he received a copy of, and must be laid on the term of court be without excuse "). These Formal completely complemented s more important measures: the possibility of decomposition of n and seizure of property (not provided directly, but implied e veloping in-law), surety, arrest the defendant (Article 5 "And if the discretion is that of the defendant's Shreds number, Skolkov cheloibite isttsove shown in the suit, movable and immovable e of them will not, then raise bail for him, which is possible to believe the claim that he was up to completion of the case did not move out, and those Zborov bail more than a week does not give; bude bail and for whom is not, then keep evo under arrest ").

Decree returned to a fairly wide application ment charge and almost forgotten in the "Quick Start image...". Prosecution d the representative office is greatly extended. If earlier it allowed a moose mainly in disease hand, now do not put any limiting conditions. Introduced the institution of the power of attorney ("veryuschie letters"). At the same rights attorney assumed equal rights in terms of the principal (Article 7: "petitioner and the respondent is given the same will be sent to the court, who want only the letters veryuschimi that perpetrate thereof, he would not rebuke").

As for the arrest, by the decrees of December 12, 1720 and on April 6, 1722 [41] arrested the defendants held by the plaintiff. Therefore, for the plaintiff, this preventive measure was quite burdensome s tion.

The plaintiff and the defendant had come to the court no later than 8 h and owls in the morning. If one of them does not come before 11 o'clock, he ordered the next day come to 8 am, and if he does not come back on time, then hold it in court, so as not to drag the case (Article 5, "A plaintiff and defendant come to court in ukaznoy day later osmium o'clock in the morning, and if one of them comes at the eleventh hour, then to say that he (if not the triumph of Mr. tion holiday and Sunday, in which case do not send the ship t sample) was on the other day early, and who bude and another day will also come later osmago hour then drugova addition to the days in which the court has to be of the order not to release, so on in such dispensations d e Lakh not continue was ").

Petitioner himself obliged to collect all the necessary evidence (one of the characteristic principles of the adversarial process) prior to trial. Only if the defendant puts forward neozhida n ITATION objections, the plaintiff is given the opportunity to present new mat e rials. However, here is a question of the documents and not on any t dokazatels Islands (Article 5, "... he (the plaintiff) must be laid on the term of the court with all belonging to the lawsuit pismyannymi documents or significant proof...... if the defendant such excuses to justify themselves bring about which the plaintiff and chayat could not but be compelled to refute the testimony of pismyannym signified, then the plaintiff for the position when it is neobretayuschagosya document judge give poverstny term... ").

Face different cases could be under the jurisdiction of different organs. From this and the reflected in the second article of the Decree of conflict, obviously, often misused by people to the neck of Mr. Men process detours. This article is regarded as Presto n tion and rough case of obstruction of the court to appear. "If the plaintiff or defendant, in urgent pleadings for the day will be taken to another court, in another case, they must declare themselves that they scheduled that day in a certain court pleadings and show - t corre snip copy petition and plaintiff - a ticket given to him by the judges, after which the court itself must immediately let go, otherwise the judge detained thereof, be punished as criminals of law. " [42] In the same article states that if the plaintiff or corre t snip sick on the day of pleadings, they must notify the court, which should send for examination of three members, and after examination to defer the matter to the recovery of patients on first. If any of the litigants did not come to the deadline fixed for the analysis of the case, then solemnly, with drums beating, resounded decree ordering the absent appear within a week under Mr. Rose to be accused in absentia.

Decree lists the cases of absence of a valid court: "1) if the enemy of what madness had. 2) Without the mind has become. 3) from water and fire and thieves case people what misfortune had. 4) if a parent or a wife and children die. ".

Absence at the trial without good prospect and rank, as it was in the previous law, entails a loss of the battle of the case. Collection of the judgment refers to the property of the losing side and its guarantors.

Although Decree and proclaims orality as a procedural principle, but in the eighth article, we see again a rather complex system of written registration of the case ("And when it all izsledovano will then create one extract points w and read every sign and tell the points of petitioners and each respondent in its order whether all written down. ")

The law requires that the sentence was imposed on separate counts, and not common to the whole affair, as it was before.

First requires that the verdict was based on fIt sponding t ("decent") Articles substantive law. For improper use of the law (decision of the case "for indecent points") at a referee suffered punishment (article 8: "... then sighing s Vat sentences on each point for decisions on state law, direct and most decent points leading to the decision; and if by continuity h Settlements DONE decision will be, judging nizhepisannym penalty will be punished. ") However annulment in this case says nothing.

Decree "On the form of the court" s like the previous procedure and CONAM does not provide more of these stages ofthe process, as the debate on Article ron and closing remarks of the defendant.

The final form of the Decree primarily driven petition form, which "began the title of the sovereign" [43] - novovved ting, which did not exist in the procedural legislation.

Under the title, opening a petition placed an appeal to the judge. Contents of the case set out in accordance with the requirements of article first considered decree. Another decree of October 12, 1699 [44] was prescribed petitions, as well as some other procedural documents, writing on stamp paper.

In conclusion, the present decree emphasizes on all kinds of vessels and prohibited under penalty apply another form of process ("All courts and tracing have to this form of t pravlyattsa not interpreting that Sia form to the court serves, while the other is not. And if anyone will otherwise try and Rozyskivaetsya or receive petitions, the public rights violator Thou nak and will be occupied "). But it is clear that the decree could not completely replace the "quick image..." and even on the street Sobornoye tion of regulatory proceedings, because it is much poorer than the laws in terms of completeness lighting process. P of this Decree cancellation of previous legislation as beef on ritsya in the introductory part of the law, should not be understood as the abolition of direct tivorechaschih him certain norms, prisoners in these laws.

It should be noted a new achievement in the field of m regulations s nology - a special designation in the legislation at the time of e c tion it into action ("Courts may judge this form coming from th e 1724 from the beginning." "From the beginning" should be understood as 1 January.).

Conclusion

In my opinion, I was really Peter the Great, as it is popularly called. He lived and worked for the good of the people and cared about people. This was evident in many of his deeds. For example, after reading a lot of literature about this great king, I found such facts, such as that in Moscow when it was opened and closed pharmacies 8 "zeleynye shops", which sold herbs, "from whom people died soon death, "and prohibits the sale of wine in these pharmacies. Prohibits the carrying of knives, because during drunken fights people cut each other with knives, sometimes to death. At the request of the same people, to fight fire with private roofs are tiled instead of yew, and houses are built of stone, and build them along the streets, on the European custom, rather than within households, as before, on the Asian. As there are many other facts show that Peter I really cared about people, "sick" for him. And what to say, because so many innovations it happened under Peter I.

And to this day for four centuries in Russia celebrated the New Year holiday, introduced by Peter in 1699-1700 year. And many, in those days new and unusual, so rooted in the traditions of Russian culture that is inseparable, and it seems that they have always existed.

As a man, Peter I was perhaps not the most perfect, but as a statesman and reformer achieved a lot, if this legacy is preserved for centuries.

As acknowledged by all historians, and by his own admission, was King Peter-worker who constantly worked, learned something new and try to learn this new surrounding.

When Peter I reminded of this senseless violence against people whose guilt could hardly be proved by judicial order, he said: "With other European nations can achieve goals philanthropic ways, but with the Russian is not so: if I had not tried austerity, the would long ago have not owned by the Russian state, and would never have made it so, what it is now. I am not dealing with people and with animals that want to change in people " [45].

In general, the development of the law at the end of XVII - the first quarter of XVIII century. neg and zilo contradictions in the activity of Peter I: on the one hand, the influence of progressive views on punitive policy, on the other - the domination of barbarous forms and methods of fighting crime. Expansion and so e tightening repression fit into the representation of Peter I on the effectiveness of STI and universal applicability of this method of solving public affairs, gave a temporary effect, but also slowed the natural course of events, and drove straight to a distortion of the actual state of affairs, which ultimately led to an acute political crisis.

Development of the trial took place in this period as against vorechivo and, without a clear foundation and vision for the future. Proceedings differed red tape and arbitrary judicial officials. R rows of defendants awaiting their fate. In Peter's legislation was not precision and clarity in the legal regulation; turbulent and controversial e pravotvorch setting action did not contribute to the stabilization of law enforcement; guarantee compliance with the law in the absence of fixed human rights e ka were insignificant.

The legislation and enforcement of the Russian state to the n sample XVII - the first quarter of XVIII century. search was not entirely consistent and inconsistent, largely not completed, but laid the basis upon e subsequent regulation. This framework, as the absolutist form of government and the major transformation of the state mechanism was progressive. Russian legislation and s not only used the experience of foreign countries, but also enriched the world lawmaking and enforcement practice successor of e. State system and the right of Russia to 1725 were generally consistent with its international status and led Coy Powers

At the time, Peter I did a lot for his country. It was not his fault that things did not go smoothly: he has not even received a more or less decent education. Only personal enthusiasm, perseverance and the will allowed to make such a quantum leap forward. Points of view on this issue is different, but I think that despite the denial of human rights and the interests of the individual, Peter I brought the country to a new path, and for this he can only say thank you.

Many wonder: what would happen to the country if it were not for Peter? The answer is obvious: the situation of the country would be so much worse (and in all areas, not only in the social, as after the reforms of Peter) that the country into anarchy and vpalaby would okkupiravana one of the neighboring countries. Well, about the "peculiarities" of the colonial form of government we know firsthand the example of the same in England...

Another question - Was the correct orientation to the west - was solved purely in Russian: Why invent something new when you can take the example of a neighbor? Especially that time to think no choice, and the probability that an illiterate Peter could come up with something really is particularly original, has been steadily close to zero. Savvy and talent emperor has not received even a "primary" education, command respect and to this day. It seems to me that Peter was not a Westerner himself - he simply "took at some stage" achievements of Western civilization, to later, in a more favorable environment, the country has already gone their separate ways. Again, some argue that it was possible to adopt Western customs partially, but how do you know that in a foreign culture is important, and that - no? Especially when it affects the fate of the country!

I think the choice of orientation is obvious: if there is time, you'd choose your typical method of solving the nation's problems, but if no, you need to see how others deal with it - the fastest and often the most efeektivny method of solving the problem. Selecting a west-east was already depends on the specific situation: that the nation closer.

List of references

1. Gumilev "From Rus to Russia", Moscow, 1995.

2. Soloviev "Reading and stories on the history of Russia" ("Public reading of Peter the Great"), Moscow, 1994.

3. Kliuchevsky "Historical Portraits" ("Life of Peter Great to start the Northern War, "" Peter the Great, his appearance, habits, lifestyles and thoughts, character "," Peter Great among its employees "), Moscow, 1992.

4. IY Froyanov "History of Russia from ancient times to the beginning of the XX in. "history textbook for high schools (Russian empire. in Russia XVIII c.), Moscow, 1990.

5. World history in the faces (Butromeev VP), Moscow, 1989.

6. Russian legislation X - XX. T. 4. M., 1986.

7. NI Pavlenko Chicks Peter's nest. M., 1988.

8. Radin IM Textbook history of Russian law. Petrograd., 1915.

9. Vladimir Budanov-MF Review the history of Russian law. K and s-SPb., 1909.

10. SV Yushkov History of State and Law of the USSR. P.1. M., 1950.

11. Chel'tsov MA Criminal trial. Moscow, 1948.

12. Klyuchevskii VO Works in nine volumes. T. IV.

13. Cavelin KD Works. St. Petersburg., 1897-1898.

14. Kalinych FI Legal issues of military organization with Roux tion state of the second half of XVII century. M., 1954.

15. Solovyov works in eighteen books. Book. XVIII. M., 1995.

16. Belyaev I. Lectures on the history of Russian legislation. M., 1888.

17. History of State and Law. P.1. M., 1996. Edited by Professor O. Chistyakov.

18. History of State and Law of the USSR. P.1. M., 1967. Under EDITING tion Sofronenko KA.

19. "History of the USSR from ancient times to the end of the XVIII century." / Ed. BA Rybakov - Moscow: Higher School, 1983.

20. Vladimir Budanov-MF Review the history of Russian law. Kiev, St. Petersburg., 1909.

21. SV Yushkov History of State and Law of the USSR. Part 1. M., 1950.

22. Chel'tsov MA Criminal Procedure. M., 1948.

23. Radin IM Textbook history of Russian law. Petrograd. 1915.

24. Isaev IA History of State and Law, Russian. M. Yurist, 1996.

25. Development of Russian law the second half of XVII - XVIII centuries. / Ed. Ed. Creak and lion EA M., 1992.

26. S. Platonov. Lectures on Russian history. Ed. 9th, Petrograd. 1975.

27. Isaev IA History of State and Law in Russia: Textbook. - M.: Yurist, 1998.

28. Sizikov MI History of State and Law in Russia since the XVII to the beginning of the XIX century and la. M., 1998.

29. Pavlenko N.I.Petr Great. -M.: 1990.

30. Titov YP Readings on the history and law of Russia. - M.: "AVENUE", 1998.

31. "History of the USSR from ancient times to the end of the XVIII century." / Ed. BA Rybakov - Moscow: Higher School, 1983.

32. Moscow musketeers 1698 uprising.:/ Investigation materials. case. Sat documents / ANSSSR Inst East of the USSR theory [comp. auth. hist-arheogr. review and koment. Kazakevich, foreword. V.I.Buganov]-M.: Science 1980.

33. Zaichkin IA Pochkarev IN Russian history IX-XVIII. popular essay \ ed.: AA, Conversion and female-M.: Thought 1992..

34. C. From the warlords last Russian land. Time of Peter I.: Moscow: Planeta. 1991.

35. BB Kofengauz Russia under Peter I-M.: Uchpedgiz-1995.-176c. p.

36. Boris Bashilov "Robisper on the throne: Peter I and historical commission of a revolution".

37. S. Platonov. Peter the Great. Personality and activity. Publisher of "Time".

38. K. Klyuchevskii. The course of Russian history. IV, Moscow, 1990.

39. Radin IM, Works, Moscow, 1966.

40. NI Pavlenko, writings, Moscow, 1963.

41. Cavelin ID, Collected Works, Moscow, 1898.

42. Vladimir Budanov-MF, essays, Moscow, 1973.

43. YUSHKOV SV, Works, Moscow, 1972.

Размещено на Allbest.ru