Rus News Journal

It not an error

Books should read a name either for advantage, or for pleasure. To write - to give the chance to people to receive either the first, or the second. Books which should inform to the reader have got to an orbit of our today`s review, first of all, the information enrich its memory, help to generate a general view on native land history. The mission of these books obviously - to be of use first of all and if it will turn out - pleasure (such too happens, to us examples when people greedily read the Chelyabinsk encyclopaedias, page behind page, " are known; because it is interesting “) . But their not only rather laudable purpose, but also that authors, having taken the trouble on a writing of these books unites, have admitted such quantity of errors that have forced to doubt that, and a leah it was necessary to publish these books. From errors anybody is not insured: as they say, “ the one who does nothing " is not mistaken;. But an error to an error rozn. If the author arranges under itself a historical material, “ plays faktiki “ attributes to those or other researchers what they did not write, on two next, and even on one page about same places mutually exclusive statements, it is confused in dates, names, widely uses nothing the thought up terms given reason by it a name to it not an error, the name to it is diletantizm.

Such books can have any signature stamps whose it is necessary blessings and prefaces, they can have decent circulation and melovannuju a paper, but under the maintenance it is ordinary hack-work! Readers should know it, it should know and authors who in a pursuit of rouble or the share of glory have created so doubtful texts.

So, on pages of this site we open work “ the Round table of the annoyed readers “. Get acquainted with the materials placed more low, and if not pleasure advantage of it receive undoubtedly.

Orthodox temples of the Chelyabinsk area

History and architecture

Open Company “ the Car of Columns “

Chelyabinsk, 2008

the Book is published by circulation of 1500 copies. Thick, elegant, with beautiful illustrations … to Advertise the book have begun to an exit from printing house. On the channel “ East express train “ V.D.Olenkov long enough argued on what this wonderful, exclusive, scientific, necessary, not having the analogues, the first in the history and etc. the edition. After such interview it wanted to run directly run in shop. And here the book before us. But the first delight was replaced by fast disappointment: the quantity of possible mistakes and errors has exceeded all admissible limits. We exchange opinions with acquaintances, we consider that it is necessary to specify to authors in errors, but … There is any more a first time recently a familiar subject: “ How it is possible? The preface is written by a metropolitan, the book is published by church what you have the right? “. We with the big respect concern a metropolitan to the Job, we understand all its congestion direct duties, that is why are far from shifting on it fault of those who has made this substandard work and to whom the lord has believed. Besides the book does not mention canonical questions or questions of the organisation of church life, it is devoted history, and the history as a science has the methodology, the conceptual device, the ethics, and therefore, we as professional historians, we have the right to judge this book to measures shown to historical editions.

the First, on what you pay attention at once - the book has no officially specified authors, or authors - composers, only scientific editor (V.D.Olenkov) and editors (A.Lobashev, O.Novgorodtseva) are modestly registered in the target data. Only from the list of owners of copyrights it is possible to understand that texts in the book belong to A.Lobasheva and V.Olenkova`s feather, and V.D.Olenkovu posesses architectural descriptions, and other text, obviously, to A.Lobasheva (on what its copyrights in a copyright particularly extend why - that is not stipulated). All other surnames specified in the list of editorial advice or an editorial board, the direct relation to process of preparation of the text of the book have no. Only two materials are signed:

the Reference of a metropolitan of the Chelyabinsk and Zlatoustovsky Job (with. 5).

Article (close to a newspaper note) “ Orthodox architecture of Southern Ural Mountains “ V.D.Olenkovym signed by professor JUUrGu (with. 9-10).

And who the author of other text?

In “ the Word to readers “ (too unsigned), it is informed that authors of the book “ rightfully it is possible to name architects, builders, church-goers, ecclesiastics, benefactors, regional specialists of Southern Ural Mountains “ (with. 8). National, so to say, the book. Probably, to it editors wanted to tell that for errors and the discrepancies admitted by them, all people should respond.

we will difficultly catch a principle of selection and a material arrangement. If to be based on heading speech should go about orthodox temples in territory of modern Chelyabinsk area. About all existing, about nowadays existing or about chosen by any criteria? This secret is great is. In “ the Word to readers “ general phrases. If to judge under the maintenance not all existing orthodox temples are described (at least in a short format). Moreover, in “ the Word to readers “ it is declared that “ in this book readers will get acquainted not only with samples of orthodox architecture, but also history of temples of Southern Ural Mountains “. Forgive, but Territorially southern Ural Mountains and the Chelyabinsk area are not synonymic concepts. Anyway, Southern Ural Mountains wider concept, rather than the Chelyabinsk area. So about the same temples speech will go? Not clearly.

Surprises a arrangement of a material. If the chronological principle then why after Chelyabinsk and Troitsk there is a Layer, instead of the Chrysostom is put in a basis? If territorially too it is not clear, whence such jumps: Chelyabinsk - Troitsk - the Layer - the Chrysostom, or Satka - Tchebarkul - Asha. And connection in one chapter of temples of Miass and Coosa on a broader scale calls bewilderment. To search for a concrete material at such arhitektonike books extremely inconveniently.

In the target data it is specified that “ documents and old photos - from archives and personal meetings “. Permissibly to ask a question: from which archives and whose personal meetings? Where if necessary it is possible to specify those or other data? Why - that lists of the temples which have been taken out on half titles, are not correlated more often with the maintenance of corresponding heads (on half titles it is taken out less names of temples, than is mentioned in head and on the contrary). Bewilderment and the final chapter " calls; … new temples " Also are erected;. Really the information on again constructed temples could not be placed in corresponding heads? As it there and so is present. Still bolshee bewilderment calls that fact that in the book words is not told about the Most Chelyabinsk and Zlatoustovsky archdiocese. In the book about orthodox temples of the Chelyabinsk area it would be more than is pertinent.

At the first perusal of the book there is a sensation that its text has been written by the people, which concepts have no about the literature on a subject lifted by them. But after all there is N. M.Chernavsky`s two-volume work “ the Orenburg archdiocese in its past and the present “ published on a boundary of the XIX-XX-th centuries and containing lists of churches for different years, the information on in what settlement and when what church is constructed (it, at least, the Chelyabinsk, Troitsk and Verhneuralsky districts). There was I.E.Zlatoverhovnikov who has written a sketch about the Ufa archdiocese (1899) with information on temples of Zlatoustovsky district. There were books and publications of modern researchers about temples of Chelyabinsk, the Chrysostom, Troitsk. Predecessors are not named the list, in the review. The problem consists and that to founders of the book these works are known: that there then there are the plots cast by them. Most likely, it seems to anonymous authors that it not larceny, and any very modest form of loan, pardonable, considering edition noble purposes.

we Will pass to a reality. The most important: the book has no links to sources. Specifying in actual errors in the book text “ Orthodox temples of the Chelyabinsk area. History and architecture “ when the question does not concern to widely known, we will give a footnote on a source of our information, that is we will show, on what we are based. In view of abundant of errors in the book we not begin to give their developed analysis which could exceed the original on volume. We will be limited to text analysis across Chelyabinsk and we will specify most blunders on some tserkvam to area. Without being architects, we do not intend to concern architectural descriptions, except those cases when errors have scandalous character and are appreciable even to the nonspecialist
So, we will begin with the beginning. Opening the book, we see on the right fly-leaf, above, the first “ a pearl “ - drawing of dead Ju. P.Danilov is resulted (by the way, its authorship anywhere in the book is not specified!) Representing church in honour of a Holy Protection of the Holy Virgin Theotokos “ (so-called Pertsevsky) with an overprint: “ Chelyabinsk. An Odigitrievsky female monastery “ - any relation to a monastery not having.

“ Temples of Chelyabinsk “ (with. 13-45). On with. 12 the plan of Chelyabinsk pulled out from any edition with put on it tserkvami, but pulled out so unsuccessfully is resulted that it has appeared the map cut off the right part with church for the sake of Svt. Nikolay Chudotvortsa on near farm of a female monastery which, however, is present at the list under Ή 16. By the way, authors have not found any data on this church, and on with. 24, devoted to this temple, there is only its image from a pre-revolutionary card. And the temple has been consecrated in 1862.

“ the First Chelyabinsk churches “ (with. 14-15). On with. 15, in an extreme right column of the text, there is a small explanatory with digression to history where it is told that “ occurrence of a pioneer settlement (Russian) on a place of Chelyabinsk concerns 1658 under the name the Aleksandrovsky large village at bottom of the Semenovsky hill “. The easy mess connected with a complete ignorance of a material: in a directory “ the List of the occupied places of the Orenburg province “ it is said that Chelyabinsk is based in 1658, and in M.F.Starikova`s books it is written about the Aleksandrovsky large village based in 1696-1700 which in 1736 has been enclosed by a wall and it is named by the Chelyabinsk strong hold. Agree that it is a bit different things and to mix all in a heap not quite correctly, especially if to consider that neither in one, nor in other book, convincing acknowledgement of the specified dates are not present.

About the first Chelyabinsk temple in the book “ Orthodox temples of the Chelyabinsk area “ it is told: “ Put on blessing of a metropolitan of Tobolsk and Siberian Anthony on July, 9th, 1737 the church for the sake of prelate Nikolay is constructed in the end of 1739 and as writes I. G.Gmelin: “… the temple for the sake of prelate Nikolay Mirlikijsky is located a little away from a strong hold … opened for services in 1740” By this time the Chelyabinsk priest already had in the submission of ecclesiastics of three other temples about which we do not know “. Actually the first Chelyabinsk church for the sake of Svt. Gospodnja Nikolay it is put in August, 1739 on the basis of the blest reading and writing signed by a metropolitan by Anthony on July, 9th, 1737 (GAGSH, f. 224, op. 1, d. 193, ll. 19-20). In November, 1739 in Dalmatov the monastery has been directed priest Ivan Alekseev son Zadorin for a capture “ an antimensium and other “ for new church, t. e church by this time have actually constructed. A leah has started to operate it in the end of 1739 or the beginning of 1740 precisely it is not known. Authors result about it the citation from I. G.Gmelina who as if has written that the church has started to operate in 1740, but the led citation has no relation of Gmelinu and is a fruit of imagination of authors of reviewed work. Gmelin has written literally the following: “ Hardly below a strong hold on an empty seat there is Sacred Nikolay`s church where two years services " are conducted;. Considering that Gmelin has visited the Chelyabinsk strong hold in 1742, and that its data concern this time, arithmetic calculation and receive 1740.

the Subsequent data concerning the first Chelyabinsk temple, resulted in reviewed work, also call many questions. Here authors inform the reader: “ On the plan of 1768 it is visible that there was a Nikolsky church on crossing of present streets of Work and Tsvillinga “ and further puzzle with revelation: “ In 1766 the decision on carrying over of a wooden temple in Zareche, on the area " was accepted; Pottery numbers “ further: “ cathedral Building (Hristorozhdestvensky. - the Bus) It was developed at the full capacity as soon as to Cossacks have allowed to transfer Nikolay Chudotvortsa`s old wooden church on the Preobrazhenskiy area where it has been collected and consecrated in honour of the Blessed trinity “ and more: “ When building of the Hristorozhdestvensky cathedral has been finished, the Cossacks living on left river bank Miass, in 1766 wooden Piously - Nikolsky church have disassembled and have transferred in Zareche. The place of new placing of a temple is chosen on the area “ Pottery numbers “. All it throughout only three pages (14-16). A question: if church to 1766 have transferred in Zareche how it could be shown on the plan of 1768 for the right coast? Where have transferred church - on the Pottery area or on Preobrazhenskiy? Whence in 1766 or 1768 in Zareche undertook the whole two areas, and, the names of these areas which are absent in sources whence are taken. Still questions: If Nikolay Chudotvortsa`s church has been transferred in Zareche after the termination of building of a cathedral how cathedral building could “ to be developed at the full capacity “ after that carrying over? Rather interestingly and the statement that at carrying over of the centre of the Isetsky province to Chelyabinsk have started to build stone Nikolsky a temple near to the old wooden. We do not know any document telling about it; to build, as it is known, in 1748 have begun the Hristorozhdestvensky cathedral, but it is other subject.

“ Christmas Cathedral. 1766 “ (with. 16-17). “ the cathedral is constructed in 1766 “ tshchaniem church-goers “ on a central square (now on its place opera and ballet theatre) “. - Actually the cathedral settled down in east part of the modern area of E.Jaroslavsky where the square, approximately in 40 m on street Tsvillinga from a place of its crossing from Work street is now broken. The opera and ballet theatre is at least in 100 m to jugo - to the West. The cathedral location is shown on all city maps since 1768 on 1923 And further: “ the cathedral under the supervision of masons - builders of the Dalmatovsky Uspensky monastery of Akinfija Staheeva, Akinfija Denisov and Ivan Pogosheva " Was under construction;. Akinfy Stafeev the son (that is Stafeevich) Denisov - one person, instead of two (!) (Gos. Archive in the city of Shadrinsk, f. 224, op. 1, d. 193, ll. 24-25 about.) Also it worked on cathedral building hardly longer two years: at least, in 1752 it already built stone Nikolsky church in monastery village Nikolaevsk Dalmatova (Pashkov And. And. Dalmatovsky masters - builders of XVIII century// the Shadrinsk province. Materials of the third multi-region scientifically - practical conference. - Shadrinsk, 2000. - With. 48-50). A photo on with. 17 it is signed: “ Christmas Cathedral. A kind from an under construction building of hospital “. A question: what hospital at us in a city was under construction in the beginning of XX century around street Big (TSvillinga) or actually the Cathedral square? It is known enough picture: the finishing stage of building of the house of a merchant of Century is embodied, actually, And. Kuznetsova on street Big (today it is the house on street Tsvillinga, 2).

“ piously - the Troitsk temple. 1768 “ (with. 18-21).

the wooden building of former church Svt has been transferred To 1768 in Zareche. Gospodnja Nikolay Chudotvortsa. On a new place church have consecrated for the sake of Sacred Zhivonachalnoj of the Trinity. The book text (with. 18): “ the Wooden building of the Nikolaev temple stood in 1832 when nearby have already erected the stone church constructed in traditions of classicism (under the standard project of the architect of Tone). Building was conducted with 1796 for 1829, and the temple by diligence Chelyabinsk 2 - j guilds of a merchant of Maxim Ahmatova " is completed;. The first album of standard projects of churches of K.A.Tona was issued in 1838, therefore it was very difficult to construct in 1796-1829 a temple under its standard project (Town-planning of Russia of the middle XIX - the XX-th century beginnings. - M, 2001. T. 1. - With. 224-225). It, not including that standard projects To. And. Tone have been executed in “ Russian “ style, and at all in classical traditions. Still the citation (with. 18): “ In the beginning the temple had two holy tables - so-called cold in honour Zhivonachalnoj of the Trinity and heated, in honour of an icon of God`s Mother “ the Sign “. Later northern side-altar for the sake of Preobrazhenija Gospodnja … the Central input in a temple has been attached was from street Preobrazhenskiy (nowadays it is not present). From temple South side on the Preobrazhenskiy area the market " took place; Pottery numbers “. We will return to those mythical areas on which the first wooden Chelyabinsk church has been transferred to 1768, - Preobrazhenskiy and Pottery numbers. Anyway, to arise the name “ the Preobrazhenskiy area “ even theoretically, could only after sanctification of a side-altar for the sake of Transfiguration of Gospodnja, that is after 1832 How to 1768 could transfer a building of the Nikolaev church on the area which will arise years etak through 70? And Pottery numbers as it has appeared, it not the area, and a market on the Preobrazhenskiy area. The area near to church was generated after carrying over of a building of a temple and was called as Troitsk, or Piously - Troitsk. About existence of the Preobrazhenskiy area in Zareche it is not known, but from the beginning 1880 - h after the next renaming of streets of Chelyabinsk, there is a street Preobrazhenskiy, - modern street 1 - go May. The street on one of side-altars of Troitsk church has been named. As well as street Znamensky (street Kashirinyh to the east from street of Kirov). The Street 1 - go was, of course, saved May only on a small piece, nevertheless, to declare that today it does not exist, still early.

“ Temples of the Odigitrievsky female monastery. 1848 “ (with. 22-23). The date specified in heading, concerns creation of a female community (not a monastery - it has been created in 1861) Also does not concern one of two temples of a monastery. Besides, it is interesting, why actually the temple in honour of an icon of Bozhiej of Mother Odigitrii is named nadvratnym (with. 22)? Nadvratnymi as it also follows from the name, the temples constructed over collars were called - that is the ground floor occupies space of the gate, the second floor actually a temple. In a case with the Odigitrievsky monastery of a collar settled down near to the church which ground floor occupied as it and is specified in the book, two side-altars for the sake of St. Anthony and Feodosiya Pechersky and for the sake of St. Peter and Paul. Moreover, originally the church on a broader scale was one-storeyed! From what authors have decided to name church nadvratnoj? Probably, because many known nadvratnye churches come to the end with a campanile, as known churches Don and Danilov of monasteries in Moscow. Actually in Russia since the Middle Ages there was a tradition of building of temples “ under kolokoly “ When the campanile is not under construction separately, and is erected as end of the building of a temple. One more possible explanation of this error consists that nadvratnym the prototype - a temple in honour of an icon of Bozhiej of Mother Odigitrii in Smolensk which is constructed on a place former Frolovsky, or Dneprovsky, towers Smolensk kremlja is. On with. 23 authors, describing the Voznesensky temple, name drums under small domes “ deaf persons “ - initially high arch windows were available on each side of these drums, subsequently they have been put, but apertures are well read and in late photos. The signature to the top photo on with. 23: “ In the foreground - the Odigitrievsky temple, behind - the Voznesensky temple with a campanile “. Actually in the foreground in a photo the Pokrovsk (Pertsevsky) church, on a background - Voznesensky, and that in the signature is named " is visible; a campanile “ is an Odigitrievsky temple “ Under kolokoly “.

“ Church in honour of the Icon of Kazan of Bozhiej of Mother. 1755-1768 “ (with. 25). Date in heading already confuses - 1755-1768. The text: “ On city map of 1768 the cemetery is designated as existing, and on it the church constructed, probably, between 1755 and 1768 years “. On the plan of Chelyabinsk absolutely not the cemetery, and consequently, and church on this cemetery (OGACHO, F 1768 is not designated. And - 87, Op. 1, D. 346). The cemetery is designated as existing on city map of 1784, and the church of an icon of Kazan Bozhiej of Mother is shown, and in explanatories to the plan is written “ under construction “ (CHOKM, NV 621). Whence authors of the book took dates 1755-1768, remains a riddle. Actually data on this church are popular. Was to glance in the encyclopaedia " enough; Chelyabinsk “: “ the Church has been put on the basis of the reading and writing which have been given out in 1778 arhiep. Tobolsk and Sib. Varlaamom (Petrov). It is constructed in 1791-93 for mounts. Line, on vozvysh. A place in area sovr. A cinema it. Of A.S.Pushkin. Str - in there began the people a merchant E. M.Sapozhnikov, titular counsellor Shulepov finished. The church has been consecrated on July, 7th 1793 prot. P.Toporkovym. No prichta had, was considered attributed to the Hristorozhdestvensky cathedral, the clergy to - rogo and spent in it a burial-service rank. The church building was kam., oshtukatur., the sizes 5 × 7 m. of Osn. The temple volume - vosmerik on chetverike - came to the end with 1 head on tsilindrich. A drum. The small refectory connected a temple with pritvorom, over it 3 circles of a tent campanile, vypoln towered. As “vosmerik on chetverike”. The campanile came to the end shlemovidnym with a dome with a spike. In 1919 cemetery, at to - rum there was a church, has been closed, and it is passed in using of one of communities of believers. 23 avg. 1923 contract with a community has been terminated in connection with its charge in “to cabin of trees round church and on a cemetery”. The new contract with other community, however 26 avg has been concluded. 1929 building of a temple again have sealed up, since, according to employees district adm. Department, the church campanile could fail and posed threat for townspeople. Believers were converted with the complaint in VTSIK. Nevertheless in 1930 church has been taken down. At the moment of its closing the campanile totaled 6 bells, in church there were 35 icons. V.S.Bozhe, L.Ju.Voznjuk, E. V.Konysheva “ (Chelyabinsk: Entsikl./ Sost.: V.S.Bozhe, V.A.Chernozemtsev. - Izd. ispr. And dop. - Chelyabinsk: the Stone belt, 2001. - With. 965).

“ Piously - a Simeonovsky cathedral church. 1873-1883 “ (with. 26-29). The citation: “ On city map for 1784 the Simeonovsky cemetery is only planned outside of city building and a city protection, on the plan of 1838 The cemetery appears, and on it - the stone temple planned to building, near to existing wooden “ (with. 26). On the plan of Chelyabinsk 1784 (CHOKM, NV 621), presented to two variants, any cemetery to severo - to the West from a city, outside of a housing estate, it is not planned. As far as we know, on the plan of 1838 a cemetery, church also are not shown. There are no they and on the city map made by Agrovym in 1864 There is a cemetery and any cult building in its southern part on the plan of 1873 which is called “ the Copy from the plan of Vysochajshe utverzhdennago 8 - go November, 1838 on the city of Chelyabinsk of the Orenburg province, with the indication existing not planned: constructions, streets, lanes and so forth in 1873 “ (CHOKM, NV 623). Obviously, this plan authors of the book also named the plan of 1838, but, alas, it at all so.

About when has been constructed Piously - Simeonovsky church, in 1992 In the booklet “ Domes over a city “ its authors I. V.Degtyaryov and V.S.Bozhe, informed that “ the church has been built according to the decision published in number fourth “Orenburg diocesan sheets” for 1873 which said:“ By definition of the Consistory from the statement of Its Preosvjashchenstva, constructions of following churches are resolved: from January, 24th of this year in Cheljabe - stone on a city cemetery ”“. In the same place the document speaking about sanctification of a temple in 1883 is resulted.

From the subsequent razyskany by G.H.Samigulova it was found out that the new site for a cemetery has been taken away in 1876 and svjashchennotserkovnosluzhiteli about it have been warned. In September, 1878 building of a graveyard fencing, paths and so forth (OGACHO, F has been finished. And - 1, Op. 2, D. 31, L. 46-68). So piously - the Simeonovsky church was completed when the cemetery has already been taken out for city boundaries. On the plan of 1910 the Simeonovsky church near to the closed cemetery (the new cemetery is noted to the north from a city, near to brick sheds) is shown. Still there was also a graveyard chapel building on an old cemetery. Thus on a new cemetery the church, obviously, the Uspensky temple also is designated. Considerable surprise was called by a phrase: “ the temple Has stood and at artillery bombardments of Red barracks - at first White Guards, and then Red Army men fired, correcting it on a campanile “ (with. 27). Here it is available full feebleness of authors in the history of Civil war in territory of local edge, a military history and terminology as a whole is visible. The matter is that in the summer of 1919 to Chelyabinsk came not white, and as it will seem to authors strange, red. Surprisingly, what for white was to fire from artillery pieces at Red barracks (which, by the way, are at all near to Simeonovsky church) where the Voluntary regiment of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes it settled down allied white. Of major Blagoticha? Really, on memoirs cheljabintsa Century And. Protasov, white conducted a gun-fire on Severo coming around modern housing estates - the West to parts 27 - j a shooting division red, but conducted it from the positions located behind the river at buildings of prison, and fire of artillery pieces was corrected not “ on a campanile “ and korrektirovshchikom white, were on a campanile of Simeonovsky church. Such fire in artillery is called perekidnoj. The Simeonovsky church, Red barracks to any bombardment neither with red, nor from the white party were not exposed.

“ Voznesenija Gospodnja Temple (1905) (c. 36). The citation: “ Upon termination of Russian - Japanese war of 1905 in station settlement the Voznesensky temple attributed to church of Christmas of the Deipara " has been constructed;. However on with. 30, in article about Christmas - Bogoroditsky church, we read: “ To station church have been attributed temporarily marching Nikolaev church (1911) And Voznesensky graveyard church in settlement Port - Arthur (1916) “. And further: “ data on this temple very poor. It was possible to find out that five bells of this temple 31 pood is powerful, 13 poods, 6 poods, 1 pood and 22 pounds have been passed the Uspensky temple, and a temple have taken down “. But it is known to a photo 1960 - h on which the Voznesensky church continues to stand indifferently, and on a background under construction high-rise buildings of Lenin area are visible! And the final phrase of head absolutely ridiculously looks: “ On a place of a temple the chief of a site of a track maintenance of the Siberian railway the engineer Kosovan has planted a garden “. Engineer Ju.A.Kossovsky really was registered on the chief 1 - go a site of a track maintenance of the Siberian railway, but only on … 1909 (Vesnovsky Century And. All Chelyabinsk and its vicinities. - Chelyabinsk, 1909), and in 1920 has left to Poland that is why obviously could not lay out a garden on a place of a temple after its pulling down, i.e. in 1960 - e

“ the Chapel svt. Nikolay Chudotvortsa (1905) “ (with. 36). “ In a photo of Chelyabinsk (with. 14-15) in the foreground - prison church svt. Nikolay Chudotvortsa on a prison cemetery. Behind it the three-storyed building of old prison " is visible;. In this message all is incorrect. The chapel had absolutely other name (in honour of an icon “ Has rescued Not-made-by-hand “) and anybody no relation to prison had! Here a note from the local newspaper: “ Religious procession. On Wednesday on June, 8th, upon termination of the Divine liturgy in a cathedral church - it will be made Religious procession from all churches of a city to a chapel - to a monument to Alexander II (near Customs) it will be here again sent molebnoe singing about bestowal of victory Russian and allied powers to troops. The ring to a liturgy in a cathedral will begin in 8 ch. 30 minutes of morning “ (“ the Chelyabinsk leaf “ on June, 6th, 1915) . About what prisoner cemetery on the Southern area there can be a speech if in 200 m to the east, behind this area there was operating Kazansko - the Bogoroditsky cemetery? Then the National house have constructed on a cemetery? A building, which we see in a photo behind a chapel and the National house (nowadays the Theatre for Young People) is not prison, and the Chelyabinsk branch of the State Bank of Russia, constructed on a place of the former wooden prison lock.

On the same page the signature to a photo: “ On a photo - the Hristorozhdestvensky cathedral with a campanile, on the right - temples of a female monastery “. In the distance in this photo the Hristorozhdestvensky cathedral, and here on the right … Pokrovsk church is really visible. The first time authors have confused Pokrovsk church with church Odigitrievsky (on with. 23), and the second time - with all (two) temples of the Odigitrievsky monastery.

“ Alekseevsky church (1908) “ (with. 37). “ real school Under construction outside the city limits (nowadays street Red, 38) has wished to have the house church “. From what authors took, what the real school was under construction outside the city limits? Whence such statement?

“ Bogojavlenija Gospodnja Temple 196 - go the Insarsky regiment (1913) “ (with. 37). In the first, in imenovanii a shelf it is passed “ infantry “. Article is bodily copied from the encyclopaedia “ Chelyabinsk “ naturally, without source instructions. As a result of thoughtless reduction of the text in the end of article there was such phrase: “ After revolution the church has undergone to re-planning. The film lecture hall of military automobile institute " Here has taken place;. Here so! T e. Right after revolutions of 1917 the Chelyabinsk military automobile school (!) has placed a film lecture hall in church!

“ the Temple of the Smolensk icon of Bozhiej of Mother “ Odigitrija “ (“ Putevoditelnitsa “) At railway station of the item Chelyabinsk “ (with. 43). The church photo is resulted only. No information on it is present - to authors it remained absolutely unknown. Though simply enough to type the church name in any searcher on the Internet and to receive such data: “ On Chelyabinsk station the temple in honour of the Smolensk icon of Bozhiej of Mother is consecrated. Chelyabinsk, on October, 14th, 2004 on October, 14th in Chelyabinsk have consecrated new church - in honour of the Smolensk icon of Bozhiej of Mother - Odigitrii, patronesses of all travellers. A temple have constructed at railway station. And now orthodox christians had a possibility to come in holy site before road …

Temple in honour of Smolensk icon of Bozhiej of Mother have constructed in deadlines - for five months. Worked in three changes, and even at night work here boiled. Builders wanted to be in time to an orthodox feast - to a Holy Protection. A building of church and a campanile have created on offerings of railwaymen - Deductions from salaries, contributions of suppliers and firms - carriers.

Church utensils, icons and an iconostas - from Sofrino, from Russian Orthodox Church production association. Behind domes and a roof far it was not necessary to go - have brought from Three-mountain the Chelyabinsk area. An icon in glass - over an input in a temple - have created in Chelyabinsk.

the Temple at station will protect passengers, church-goers are assured. Not casually a name have given in honour of Odigitrii that means “ Putevoditelnitsa “. In style of Old Russian temple architecture XII-XVI of centuries the building of the future church shop will be constructed. Building is not finished, and 6 million roubles of offerings - not the definitive sum. As Victor Sorokin, the head of fund “Assistance“ JUUZHD - Open Society “Russian Railway“ has informed, fund raising will be continued:“ To make a temple and its territory one of the most beautiful in a city ”.

While the temple of the Patroness of all travelling is closed by an old building of suburban cash desks. But soon it will take down, and then the church in honour of the Smolensk icon of Bozhiej of Mother will be visible from different directions. And, as builders assure, articles of faith will not lose external appearance at least 50 years “ (http:// www. pravoslavie. ru/ news/ 11458. htm).

In end of the mournful list of pearls about the Chelyabinsk temples, we will tell about church, which authors three times (!) (The fly-leaf, with. 23, with. 36), have managed to confuse with temples of the Odigitrievsky female monastery, one by one with both at once, but about her have written very avariciously: “ Near to a monastery the Spiritual school settled down. P.I.Pertsev`s merchant on the means has constructed Pokrovsk uchilishchnuju church (nowadays a street Tsvillinga and Commune corner “ (with. 23). Such here a modest addition in the end of the section devoted to temples of the Odigitrievsky female monastery. Actually the church in honour of a Holy Protection of the Holy Virgin Theotokos had no relation to a monastery. The one to whom the history of this church is interesting, can find the information on it in the encyclopaedia “ Chelyabinsk “ (CH, 2001. With. 967). On it we will end the review of the description of temples of Chelyabinsk and punktirno we will walk on “ stories and architecture “ area churches.

“ Temples of Troitsk “ (with. 46-69). All information on tserkvam Troitsk to last comma it is written off from the book “ Orthodox temples of Troitsk. The collection of articles and materials “ (Troitsk, 2005). As composers of last were not engaged in plagiarism, and have adequately worked in archives, claims to this part of head are not present. And here churches of Troitsk area in the same book are not described and consequently in article about Christmas church in with. Kljastitsky year of the termination of its building - 1870, and here in capital work Chernavsky is specified 1860 (Chernavsky N.M. the Orenburg archdiocese in the past eja and the present. Vyp. 1// Works of the Orenburg scientific archival commission. Vyp VII. - Orenburg, 1900. - With. 300).
“ Layer Temples “ (with. 76-81). “ St. Alexander Nevsky`s Church in with. Demarino. 1888 “ (with. 79). Whence there was this date, it is not known. Chernavsky specifies 1890 (Chernavsky N.M. the Orenburg archdiocese in the past eja and the present. Vyp. 1// Works of the Orenburg scientific archival commission. Vyp. VII. Orenburg, 1900. With. 302).

“ temples of the Chrysostom “ (with. 82-91). In a table of contents on with. 83 the colour photo Piously - the Troitsk cathedral with such signature is resulted: “ the Chrysostom of the beginning of the XX-th century. A photo of Prokudina - Mountain “. It is not out of place to remind that the inventor of a colour photo in Russia had also a name - called its Sergey Mihajlovich. Across Ural Mountains it has made the trip in 1909-1910 when all pictures, instead of in foggy " have been made; the XX-th century beginning “. It concerns and the further signatures to S. M.Prokudina`s photos - Mountain.

In the reviewed book the information on seven temples whereas all in the Chrysostom for all its history there were in total 15 temples is given. How authors over the text on zlatoustovskim to temples worked, demonstrates the text about Piously - Troitsk a cathedral (with. 85). In its basis - the information from the book of Century E.Bokova “ the Description Zlatoustovsky Piously - the Troitsk cathedral “ (Ufa, 1904). At the discretion of authors it has been any way reduced without all reservations and ottochy, words which have seemed to authors necessary have been included in it, and finally all it is submitted as “ the story of the eyewitness “. But their Vladimir Egorovich as these events have occurred in 1842 has brought, and he was born only in 1851 and consequently at all desire could not witness.

It is inexact the liquidation history Piously - the Troitsk cathedral, placed on is stated also with. 86 reviewed works: “ Piously - the Troitsk cathedral has been closed in 1928. In it the museum has taken place. On March, 13th, 1929 the decision about cathedral liquidation was accepted. Have removed crosses and bells, bell copper have sent on a meltdown “. Actually the cathedral has been closed in the beginning of 1929, and in March, 1929 there was a speech not about building liquidation, and about liquidation of cult establishment. Process of physical destruction of a building was too not single. Only in 1932 the campanile which was recommended to be taken down in 1929 has been disassembled, a building have broken only in second half of 1934.

the History of Three-Svjatitelsky (Nikolsky) church too is stated hastily. Authors without superfluous doubts have specified: “ In 1931 church have destroyed “. In practice in 1931 (on April, 6th) Gorkomhoz was only converted to the city authorities with the petition for a pulling down of a campanile, a collar and boxes of the former Three-Svjatitelsky (Nikolsky) church. Under archival documents it was not possible while to find exact dates of real destruction of a building of Three-Svjatitelsky church. Thus we will underline that the church building is visible in many photos of first half 1930 - h (after the specified 1931, already without boxes and gate, but with a campanile).

On the same with. 88 the photo of the Peter and Paul church (it is Really Peter and Paul church) at the upper left is resulted, and in the bottom part of page the reproduction of a pre-revolutionary card " is resulted; Zlatoust. Ή 62. A kind with jugo - West side “. At the upper right on this image the Three-Svjatitelsky church is well visible. And on page it is a question of the Peter and Paul church. It seems that authors at all have not understood that have placed in a material about the Peter and Paul church of a photo of two different temples.

About Piously - Troitsk a temple in the penultimate paragraph on with. 89 affirms that in its territory settles down “ a chapel “. Actually no chapel there is present, and is krestilnja, built in second half 1990 - h In a photo placed on same 89 with. With the signature “ the Campanile Piously - Troitsk church “ Actually the church is represented from a front entrance (the campanile of this church is not an independent construction, and it is built on over the basic building).

There is an ambiguity and in the story about Piously - Simeonovsky church (with. 90). It is told: “ It was the unique wooden (timbered) temple in a city “. A leah concerns it the certain period of history of the Chrysostom or to all its history remains a riddle. Apparently, the first was wooden zlatoustovskaja the church burnt by E.Pugachevym, wooden are current Piously - Troitsk and Ioanno - Zlatoustovsky churches.

Not superfluous would be at redakture to correct and such statement: “ on September, 16th, 2007 on that place where there was an old church, has been constructed and consecrated new Piously - Simeonovsky church “. Truly the Miracle Is Lord`s - the church for the sake of just Simeona Verhotursky in the uniform afternoon was erected and consecrated! To the editor followed only date after a word “ it is shined “ and claims would not be.

On with. 91 it is readable under a photo: “ Voznesenija Gospodnja Temple in the Chrysostom “. But in the Chrysostom never was and there is no such temple. On a picture the temple in a name prp is represented. Seraphim Sarovsky! Apparently, it is incorrect and the specified date - 2008 as the main dome (on a picture it lies on the earth) has been put on a temple building on September, 12th 2007 (!)

“ Temples of Miass and Coosa “ (with. 92-104). “ Church of apostles of Peter and Paul. 1815 “ (with. 96-97). On with. 97 it is readable: “ In 1880-1890 - h years when church any more vmeshala believers, to it side-altars from northern and southern parties with altars and separate inputs have been attached. To pritvoru the parvis has been attached. Reorganisation was carried out under the project of the architect of Zlatoustovsky mountain district F. A.Telezhnikova who has executed also the project of a carved iconostas “. Collegiate asessor Feodor Aleksandrovich Telezhnikov was born in 1806, has retired in 1863, has left the Chrysostom to Ekaterinburg, and to 1890 - m of, possibly, for a long time already lay on a cemetery. Authors poputali time. F.A.Telezhnikov really was the author of the project of an iconostas for reconstructed Peter and Paul church in Miass (which in the book and it is not mentioned), and there was it in 1836 To temple reconstruction in 1887-1890 telezhnikov no any relation had. (Telezhnikov Feodor Aleksandrovich// the Chelyabinsk area. The encyclopaedia. Chelyabinsk, 2006. T. 6. “ Si-F “. With. 461). And further: “ In 1930 - h years the church has been destroyed. On its place there is a monument to V.I.Lenin “. The Peter and Paul church has been closed by the decision of Presidium of the Ural area from July, 19th, 1932 under the petition of the Zlatoustovsky City Council and destroyed in 1937.

“ St. Alexander Nevsky`s Church. 1881 “ (with. 98-99). Authors “ have not found “ images of this most beautiful miasskoj churches though its photos are even on the Internet. They have not resulted and exact data on closing and a church pulling down. The temple has been closed by the decision of the City Council from April, 7th, 1932 and blown up in 1938

“ St. Alexander Nevsky`s New church. 2007 “ (with. 99). There is only an architectural description and a temple photo. No information on a bookmark, building and sanctification of church is present. Really data on this temple are so inaccessible?

authors of the volume and more have not noticed one church near Miass (as a whole on areas remained “ not noticed “ tens churches!) . It is magnificent stone Arhangelo - the Mihajlovsky temple in with. turgojak, consecrated in 1880 and lost presently (Chernavsky N.M. the Orenburg archdiocese in the past eja and the present. Vyp. 1// Works of the Orenburg scientific archival commission. Vyp VII. - Orenburg, 1900. - With. 302).

“ Church of the Icon of Kazan of Bozhiej of Mother in Coosa. 1882 “ (with. 104). In S. M.Prokudina`s resulted photo - Mountain with the signature: “ Kazansko - Bogoroditsky church. 1911 “ - the Satkinsky factory and church for the sake of Svt is represented. Nikolay Chudotvortsa.

“ Temples of Satkinsky area “ (with. 105-114). In the list of churches of area (with. 105) are specified: “ Blessed trinity Church in Satka (1782-1785); Church of Christmas of the Deipara in Satka (1902); Church svt. Nikolay Chudotvortsa in Satka (1913); Voznesenija Gospodnja Church in with. Ajlino (1869-1875) “. On with. 105-114 description of church in honour of Christmas of the Holy Virgin Theotokos on Satka (such is the correct name of church) is absent.

“ Temples of Krasnoarmejsky area “ (with. 135-144). “ Church of a Holy Protection of the Holy Virgin Theotokos in with. Kirdy. 1870 “ (with. 141). The date of the construction which have been taken out in heading by nothing proves to be true. Authors there and then write: “ construction Date (second half of XIX-th century) is supposed on the basis of survey of the building which have revealed some prosaic simplifications architecturally - the constructive elements, peculiar to later time, and also on the basis of an archival material for 1852 where Kirdy are called still as village, hence the church there during that time yet was not (“ Revizsky fairy tales of village Kirdinsky “) . The author, the builder, the customer are unknown “. Why authors have put in heading 1870 - too it is not known.

“ Temples of Verhneuralska “ (with. 145-149). With this oldest in area a city authors have arrived especially cruelly, having deprived its of six (!) From seven churches existing there. We will result their list with instructions of year of construction (a source: Chernavsky N.M. the Orenburg archdiocese in the past eja and the present. Vyp. 1// Works of the Orenburg scientific archival commission. Vyp. VII. Orenburg, 1900. With. 297).

a cathedral for the sake of Svt. Nikolay Chudotvortsa. Stone. 1875

Pripisnye to a cathedral: Church for the sake of St. George Pobedonostsa. Wooden. 1898-1899

Church for the sake of All Sacred (Graveyard, wooden). 1883

Church in honour of Bogojavlenija Gospodnja. Wooden. 1849

Church in honour of the annunciation day of the Holy Virgin Theotokos. Stone. 1836

Pripisnaja to it: Church in honour of assumption of the Birth-Giver of God of the Holy Virgin Theotokos. It is old. Cemeteries. 1792-1796

Church for the sake of the St. great martyr Barbarians at the Pokrovsk female community. Wooden. 1895

From all list authors have noticed only one church. We result simply lethal citation from article beginning: “ More than 100 years decorate Verhneuralsk a temple for the sake of the prelate and miracle man Nikolay Mirlikijsky. The church has been constructed on similarity of capital Christ the Saviour Cathedral and opened on May, 5th, 1875 “. We will begin that from the moment of construction and sanctification (“ open “ benches and shops) the Nikolaev temple became cathedral church instead of Blagoveshchensk and remains to it up to that moment. About it in the book words! The second. As it is possible to construct a temple “ on similarity of capital Christ the Saviour Cathedral “ in 1875 if last has been erected only in 1883? And to remind authors a fact of common knowledge that at that time Moscow, and St.-Petersburg and at all was capital of Russia at all as - that even is awkward …

But also it not all! On with. 149 the photo of Bogojavlensky church copied from a known photo album " is resulted; the Chelyabinsk area in photos. 1900-1920 “ (Chelyabinsk, 2000) with absolutely improbable signature. Under the image of small wooden church appears: “ Verhneuralsky Piously - the Troitsk cathedral. It is blown up in 20 - h years of the XX-th century “. Any cathedral with the name “ Piously - Troitsk “ in Verhneuralske never both was not. Also allow to ask, dear authors, where, when and from whom you heard that wooden church blew up???

“ Temples of Uvelsky, Ujsky and Etkulsky areas “ (with. 174-187). “ Church of the Archangel of Michael in with. Mordvinovka. 1887 “ (with. 176-179). Chernavsky gives other date - 1890 (Chernavsky N.M. the Orenburg archdiocese in the past eja and the present. Vyp. 1// Works of the Orenburg scientific archival commission. Vyp. VII. Orenburg, 1900. - With. 301). On with. 179 the photo ostensibly this church with the signature is resulted: “ I.Gorokhov`s Photo. 1926 “. A photo of really I. G.Gorokhov and 1926 But only the church for the sake of the St. Archangel of Michael in is represented on it not with. Mordvinovka, and Voznesensky church in with. Nikolaevka (nowadays Krasnoselsky) that proves to be true an inscription on the glass negative stored in funds of the Chelyabinsk museum of local lore.

“ Church of the Archangel of Michael in with. Petrovsky Uvelsky area. 1861 “ (with. 180-181). Chernavsky gives other date - 1854-1868 (Chernavsky N.M. the Orenburg archdiocese in the past eja and the present. Vyp. 1// Works of the Orenburg scientific archival commission. Vyp. VII. Orenburg, 1900. With. 305).

“ church of the Archangel of Michael in with. Krasnokamenka Ujsky area. 1914 “ (with. 182-183). Such name whence undertook, it is not known. According to the archdiocese, received by edition during work over entsiklopediej “ the Chelyabinsk area “ the church was called for the sake of the St. apostle and evangelist John Bogoslova.

“ Temples of Kyshtym “ (with. 189-199). On with. 190 the big citation from the book " is resulted; Wards and churches of the Ekaterinburg archdiocese “ 1902 of the edition. We will result from it a fragment: “ In 1730 N.Demidovym has been constructed of a wild stone a temple which on an exterior and reorganisations was not exposed to any changes, and exists and on the present in the original form. (1902 Means. Unfortunately, today the temple is destroyed. - a comment sost.) … the Temple two-storeyed, in the top cold temple the holy table is consecrated in memory of Descent of St. Spirit, in bottom, warm - in memory useknovenija by Chestnyja of Head of the Forerunner and Baptist Gospodnja John … “. Further, on with. 191, it is told about Soshestvija Svjatago Duha`s church: “ the First stone two-storeyed church of Kyshtym is constructed in 1764 “. If you have not understood, in both fragments of the text it was a question of the same church. About existence in Kyshtym in XVIII-XIX centuries of two churches of Descent of St. Spirit it is not known. How to connect the message that the temple is destroyed (with. 190) and a photo with a kind of this church in 2006 (with. 191), no less than with the information on temple restoration, we do not know.

“ Temples of Kaslinsky area “ (with. 200-212). In a table of contents on with. 201 the photo with an inscription is resulted: “ Kaslinsky settlement in the XX-th century beginning. In the centre - church of Ascension of Gospodnja “. On a photo it is represented Uspensky edinovercheskaja church. The same photo, only with not cut off right edge (three churches are well visible: Uspensky edinovercheskaja, Nikolsky and Voznesensky), it is resulted and on with. 204 with such signature: “ Kasli in the XX-th century beginning. On the right - Voznesensky church “.  

“ Uspenija Bozhiej Materi`s Church in Kasljah. 1785 “. On with. 203 it is informed: “ the First stone temple in Kasljah - assumptions of the Birth-Giver of God of God`s Mother - has been constructed in 1777-1785 on a place of the wooden church which have burnt down during Pugachevsky rebellion “. The illustration with the signature is There and then given: “ the Design drawing of Uspensky church. 1810 “. How the project of the church constructed by 1785 could be developed in 1810? And an illustration, it is how much possible to judge, it is taken from the Atlas of Kaslinsky factory. Similar atlases were made in κξνφε1830 - h - νΰχΰλε1840 - h

“ Temples of Top and Bottom Ufaleja and Njazepetrovska “. (With. 213-219).

the Art criticism description of Verhneufalejsky temples is made in 2006   V.A.Chernyh, whose text, with a transfer of paragraphs in different parts of the block, is used in head about Ufalejsky temples. The art criticism conclusion on architecture of a temple in honour of Ka - zanskoj icons of Bozhiej of Mother in Bottom Ufalee is made in 1986 by the Chelyabinsk critic V.Medvedevoj.

On with. 213 temples of Top and Bottom Ufaleja and Njazepetrovska are listed. However among them there is no church in honour of Christmas of the Holy Virgin Theotokos on the Top Ufalee which photo, however, is taken out on this sheet.  

About the church it is not told words, but in the text about a temple in honour of the Icon of Kazan of Bozhiej of Mother in Bottom Ufalee (p. 217) why - that the line from history of a modern Verhneufalejsky temple in honour of Christmas of the Holy Virgin Theotokos is squeezed, namely: “ protopope Anatoly Zemljanov " was the First prior and the builder of church; Which really was the first prior, but modern Verhneufalejsky church, and only in 1993 - 1994 when there was its building. To the Nizhneufalejsky temple father Anatoly Zemljanov has no slightest relation, and in the middle of 19 its centuries, as well as his parents that is called, and in the project was not.

From V.A.Chernyh`s text on Ufalejsky tserkvam this unique phrase about a modern Verhneufalejsky temple in honour of Christmas of the Holy Virgin Theotokos (it is constructed in 1993) has been snatched out and squeezed in the text about Nizhneufalejsky church in honour of the Icon of Kazan of Bozhiej of Mother.

And in the signature under a photo of church in honour of Kazan Bozhiej of Mother (p. 217, 218) the temple is named why - that by Kazan though its name, if to be exact, according to documents even 19 centuries, - Kazansko - Bogoroditsky. The photo on p. 217, above, is signed: “ the Kazan temple. A kind with jugo - the east. A photo of the beginning of XX century “ Actually the photo is made in most   the beginning 1880 - h years the first teacher of Nizhneufalejsky national school Peter Andreevichem Samoilov.

With 217: “ the First wooden church in Bottom Ufalee has been constructed with the factory basis, but it has burnt down during a fire in 1849. On its place in 1852-1853 it is erected small stone odnoprestolnaja tserkvv in honour of the Icon of Kazan of Bozhiej of Mother. Means for church plant owner M.P.Gubin " has offered;. Means for building of a temple plant owner M.P.Gubin in 1853 to offer could not in view of the death in 1819 in any way as his son Konstantin Mihajlovich (to which was not able to do it also Ufalejsky factories after death of the father), died in 1848 belonged. Money for church building have been allocated by Konstantin Anastasiej Iosifovnoj Gubinoj`s widow who just carried out at this time radical reconstruction of factories Serginsko - Ufalejsky mountain district.

With. 217: “ Restoration of walls, an iconography, local artists A.Makarov and V.Myzhevsky " carried out;. Actually restoration of walls, an iconography of the Nizhneufalejsky temple in honour of the Icon of Kazan of Bozhiej of Mother were carried out in 1992-1994 by local artists V.A.Malyh and A.I.Kumanov.

We wanted to ask people who prepared this book: if you not in a status to distinguish in a photo one temple from another if you cannot simply build the consistent text, do not know history of a lay-out of a city, are confused in dates, in plans, photos, - as at you has sufficed “ boldness “ to undertake preparation of such book? The most terrible that the book such is necessary for a long time and, naturally, it will be claimed. And as it is well published, also influence will render the corresponding. After all the most part of readers of concept has no that in the book of mistakes and errors, as weeds in the field. And if in some places these nestykovki are evident at once, as in a case with the description of history of the first Chelyabinsk church of Nikolay Chudotvortsa the false information most part will be conceived for the authentic.

As a whole the book “ Orthodox temples of the Chelyabinsk area: History and architecture “ calls so much questions that for the answer to them it is required to write time work to two - three exceeding on volume the considered edition. External appearance impresses, it is indisputable. And to the maintenance and it would be desirable to put a label “ Attention!!! Demands careful check! “. To tell the truth, if in the book at all there were no texts, and there was it simply an album with meeting of photos, from it also authors and, first of all, readers only would win.

V.S.Bozhe, the historian, the winner of the Ural award of regional studies of V.P.Birjukova, the honorary member of Academy of the Russian encyclopaedias

And. Century Goats, the regional specialist, the honourable citizen of the Chrysostom, the winner of the Ural award of regional studies of V.P.Birjukova

I. V.Kuptsov, the historian, the scientific adviser of the encyclopaedia “ the Chelyabinsk area “

G.H.Samigulov, the candidate of historical sciences, senior lecturer JUUrGU

V.A.Chernyh, the historian, the honourable art worker of Top Ufaleja.

Will return to article >