This page is the pearl of our site and, perhaps, of all Russian second-hand books. Information on the results flows here real deals with antique books with prices of old editions. This is undoubtedly serious work, since the vast majority of transactions are now anonymous and not public. As you understand, these statistics are necessary to determine the market value of old books and second-hand books - this question arises for everyone who gets into the hands of a book published more than 50 years ago. If for the first time you are faced with the need to determine the approximate price of an antique book or a second-hand book, please, prepared by bibliographer Alexander Lugachev - it will give answers to many questions.
The basis of the archive of transactions are sales that took place during numerous antique book auctions, as well as sales in which I personally participated as a party (buyer or seller) or an invited expert. The prices of these transactions with old books are as close as possible to the objective ones, because the buyers at the auctions and the organizers of the auctions are professional antique dealers and second-hand booksellers, employees of museums and archives. I promise you that the work to complete the archive of transactions will be carried out slowly but steadily. Already now it has more than a hundred thousand entries and it can be used to determine the market value of an antique book - today it is the most complete archive of second-hand transactions at Russian antique auctions.
In the table, "Price of a Book" means the starting price originally requested by the seller and recommended by experts, and "Transaction Price" is the final price of the antique book at which it was sold. For auctions, the transaction price is usually higher than the starting price, for non-auction sales - on the contrary (sellers can go for wholesale discounts, as well as price concessions due to difficult life circumstances). Keep in mind that the same antique book, but published in different years, with different degrees of safety, in different covers and bindings, with different marks, can be valued differently by the market. The difference is especially noticeable if one transaction with an antique book took place at the height of the financial crisis, and the other - at an oil price of $ 120 per barrel ...
Clue.For the correct search of an old book or a second-hand book in the transaction archive, it is most reasonable to enter onlyauthor's surname in the nominative case
. Then you will get full statistics on several editions of this author published in different years, and your idea of prices for old books will become more logical and detailed.
Rice. 19. Only in spring, with the beginning of sap flow, bison actively eat tree bark soaked in mineral salts.
Rice. 20. Young bison love to hone their horns, frantically “butting” trees.(photo by E. Arbuzov)
There is no one to stand up for the bison - after all, it is possible to show its role in ecosystems, its necessity in our forests, only by arguing this with conscientious scientific research. And we don't have them yet. There is no support for bison restoration plans on the part of hunting organizations, because this species does not yet have the status of a hunting object - after all, it is listed in the Red Book. The hunting economy would be more willing to populate their lands with bison if they had scientifically developed programs for managing this species. Now there are no such studies, we are just starting to conduct them, and this delay does not allow us to promptly and correctly respond to a conflict between a bison and a villager or a forester. But such experience will still be accumulated, and the bison will have a “place under the sun”! If it is possible to implement plans for the reconstruction of the range of the bison, to restore its natural habits and way of life, then this species will contribute to leveling the balance in nature, which has been shaken by human fault. The necessary result of all the work begun in 1923 by the Society for the Preservation of Bison will be achieved. Of course, we are still far from reaching the final goal, but the path we have traveled inspires hope.
Moreover, such works are also important for us as a methodological guide. The experience gained can be used in measures for the conservation and restoration of other animal species that find themselves in a similar situation. After all, we all know very well that the process of extinction of species has not only not been stopped, but is growing. Increasingly, enthusiasts have to resort to emergency measures to save animals - captive breeding. It is mandatory for species that have disappeared in the wild, but it is necessary even for those that still exist even in small free-living populations. In order to maintain the declining population of the Mauritian kestrel, which consisted of only six birds in 1974, aviary breeding measures had to be urgently developed. Success was achieved only in 1978. And if the last wild individuals could not "reach" up to this point, it would hardly have been successfully released into the natural environment of the island of Mauritius of captive-born kestrels. Thanks to comprehensive protection and breeding measures, in 1984 the number of this species increased to fifty individuals.
Only a well-established breeding of American cranes in the Patuksent nursery helped to increase the reproductive potential of the last two dozen birds remaining in the wild. The population of the Arabian oryx in the Middle East, which numbered only a few dozen animals, since 1980 began to replenish with animals born in zoos in North America and Western Europe.
However, it is not always possible to arrange such an influx of new individuals from breeding centers to the last centers of the existence of wild animal populations in a timely manner. The last example is the California condor: despite various conservation measures for birds, the number has steadily declined from thirty-five to seventeen individuals from 1978 to 1985; there was a real threat of loss of species. The only hope is to establish breeding in captivity. The last bird was caught in nature in April 1987. Now only the efforts of scientists and zookeepers in San Diego and Los Angeles are able to revive the California condor, having achieved the reproduction of the last twenty-seven birds. Today, the condor is at the beginning of the path that the bison has traveled since the 20s of our century.
Breeding centers - this is the last step, after stepping over which, the species goes into oblivion. Lingering on it, you can avoid the disappearance, but only temporarily. This should be understood as the role of nurseries and zoos - as a haven for rare animals in the struggle to preserve the diversity of nature. The words of William Conway should be well understood: “Captive breeding programs cannot serve as a general defense against an epidemic of extinction, they only help to eliminate such specific “symptoms” of this epidemic as the loss of higher animals.” Further, their return to nature must be mandatory.
I am sure that the accumulated experience of working with bison is interesting not only as a special case of saving one zoological species. It is also important because the problems that arose at every step along the untrodden road made it possible to work out various aspects of the strategy for the conservation and restoration of endangered representatives of the animal world. The results of this work are the model that can be used to revive other species that find themselves in a similar situation. I would like to hope that this book will also contribute to solving the urgent problems of wildlife protection.
Bashkirov I. Caucasian bison. - In: Caucasian bison. - M., 1940. - S. 3-72.
Bikhner E. A. Mammals. - St. Petersburg, 1902. - 867 p.
Gusovsky M. Song about a bison. - Minsk: 1980. - 194 p.
D. Ya. Dalmatov The history of bison or tur, found in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, Grodno province. - Forest Journal, 1849, No. 28. - S. 220-222.
Deryagina M. A. Intraherd relationships in bison, bison and their hybrids. - Zoological Journal, vol. 51, no. 3, 1972. - S. 429-434.
Dinnik N. Animals of the Caucasus, part I. Cetaceans and ungulates. Notes of the Caucasian branch of Russian. geographer, about-va, book. 27, no. I, 1910. - S. 138-158.
Zablotsky M. A. Modern bisons of Belovezhskaya Pushcha. - Scientific and methodological notes of the Main Directorate for Reserves. - M., 1947, v. 9. - S. 129-142.
Zablotsky M. A. The need to study the features of the bison and its restoration in the USSR. - In the book: Scientific and methodological notes of the Main Directorate for Reserves. - M., 1949, v. 13. - S. 128-146.
Zablotsky M. A. Pen keeping, feeding and transportation of bison. - M., 1957. - 114 p.
Bison. Morphology, systematics, evolution, ecology. - M.: Nauka, 1979. - 495 p.
Kalugin S. G. Restoration of bison in the northwestern Caucasus. - Proceedings of the Caucasian State Reserve. M.: 1968, no. 10. - S. 3-94.
Kartsov G.P. Belovezhskaya Pushcha: its historical outline, modern hunting economy and the highest hunting in the forest. - St. Petersburg, 1903. - 414 p.
Conway W.D. General overview of captive breeding. - In: Biology of Nature Protection. - M.: Mir, 1983, - S. 225-237.
Korochkina L. N. Habitat and stadial distribution of bison in Belovezhskaya Pushcha. - In the book: Belovezhskaya Pushcha. Minsk, 1973, no. 7. - S. 148-165.
Krestovsky V.V. Bialowieza Forest. Travel notes. - Russian Bulletin, 1876, v. 126, No. 11. - S. 72-136.
Kulagin N. M. Bison of Belovezhskaya Pushcha, - M., 1919, - 166 p.
Satunin K. A. Caucasian bison. - Natural science and geography, No. 2, 1898. - S. 1-21.
Usov S. A. Bison. - 1888, vol. I. - S. 67-158.
Filatov D.P. About the Caucasian bison. - Notes of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, series 7, vol. 30, No. 8, 1912. - S. 1-40.
Kholshchevnikov N. V. About bison in Belovezhskaya Pushcha. - Forest magazine. St. Petersburg, 1873, v. 5.- S. 81-90.
Leopold Walicki's Experiments on Cross-Breeding European Bison with Cattle in the Context of 19th century Biological Sciences
Piotr Daszkiewicz*, Tomasz Samojlik**, Malgorzata Krasinska**
*Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France; [email protected]**Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Bialowie a, Poland; [email protected], [email protected]
In this paper we aim at recounting the long-forgotten achievements of Leopold Walicki, Polish landowner and naturalist, who in the years 1847-1860, successfully bred fifteen European bison - cattle hybrids. This experiment has overthrown a misconception, common in 19th-century biological sciences, about the impossibility of cross-breeding these species. Although it was a major mammalian hybridization experiment, it was nearly completely forgotten and not adequately used in the 19th-century scientific discussion, even though Walicki's experiment was mentioned by two prominent 19th-century biologists: Karl Eduard Eichwald (1853) and Franz Muller ( 1859). Surprisingly, head forest manager of Grodno Province, Dmitri Dolmatov, who supplied European bison from Bialowie a Primeval Forest for Walicki’s experiments, was far better recognized in the 19th-century scientific literature for his successful feeding of European bison calves with cow’s milk. Walicki's work was for the first time described in detail by Georgy Karcov (Kap^B, 1903); it is still interesting in the context of current research, as no one has yet been able to reproduce Walicki's success in obtaining a fertile male hybrid in the first generation.
Keywords: European bison, Bialowie a Primeval Forest, hybrids, natural history
European bison Bison bonasus was relatively common in the forests of Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, but in the second half of the 18th century, free-living lowland bison survived only in one place - Bialowie a Primeval Forest (currently straddling the border between Poland and Belarus). In this forest the species enjoyed long-lasting protection as royal game of Polish kings and Lithuanian grand dukes, but it had also been promoted by the traditional utilization of the forest and, since 1700, intentional management (haystacks left for winter on forest meadows offered supplementary winter fodder for bison, see Samojlik, J drzejewska, 2010, pp. 23-31). At the same time it was a species rarely occurring in naturalists' works. Most descriptions of European bison until the 18th century were based on short note published by Sigismund Herberstein1 (1549).
By the end of the 18th century a new description of the species, based on personal observations, was published by Jean-Emmanuel Gilibert2 (Gilibert 1781; 1802, p. 493-495). In sub-
1 Sigismund von Herberstein (1486-1566) was an Austrian diplomat who, in 1517, visited Moscow with a mission from Emperor Maximilian I. On his way, he visited the kingdom of Poland, and had a chance to observe European bison and aurochs ( Bosprimigenius). In Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii, published in 1549, he included a description and illustrations of both of those species.
2 Jean Emmanuel Gilibert (1741-1814), French physician and botanist, was invited to Poland in 1775 by Polish king, Stanislaus Augustus Poniatowski. Gilibert's task was to establish veterinary and medical schools in Grodno (100 km from Bialowie a Primeval Forest). Apart from his duties, he engaged himself in scientific work: he organized a botanical garden with around 2,000 species of plants, took
sequent decades, his work became a milestone of the knowledge on European bison behavior. He described his failure to feed European bison calves with cow’s milk (instead, he used goats, which were placed on a table during the time of feeding), and similarly failed attempt to interbreed European bison with cattle. From that point on, the scientific world was strongly convinced that such hybridization was not possible, and that there was a biological barrier not allowing European bison calves to be fed by cows. The fact that only one known population of European bison existed in a remote forest, which, since 1795, became a part of Russian empire (the existence of the Caucasus population was called into question, Daszkiewicz, Samojlik, 2004, p. 73-75 ), and these animals were very rare in zoological gardens and menageries, strongly limited possibilities for such experiments.
A program of research on the status of European bison had already been proposed in the 18th century. Georges-Louis Buffon (1707-1788) described different species of Bovidae in his “Histoire naturelle” and recommended crossing them with each other and with domestic cattle, not only to answer questions about their species status ('true species' or 'climatic forms ') but also to examine the concept of domestic bovine origin, the history of domestication and 'degeneration' (a concept resulting from the observation of the decrease in body size compared with the findings from archaeological excavations and wild animals; Buffon, 1764, p 284-336).
In 1846, head forest manager of Grodno Province Dmitri Dolmatov3 successfully fed European bison calves caught in Biafowie a Primeval Forest with cow’s milk. He observed the bison fed by cows and playing with domestic cattle, and his observations were published in Russia, England, France and Germany (Brehm, 1877, p. 395; Dolmatov, 1848, p. 18-19; 1849, p. 150 -151; Dolmatov, 1849, pp. 220-222; Gervais, 1855, pp. 184-185; Viennot, 1862, pp. 849-850). Animals caught by Dolmatov were transported to London, Tsarskoe Selo, and were also offered to Leopold Walicki,4 a Polish landowner and naturalist, for his experiments on cross-breeding European bison with cattle Bos taurus. In Wilanow near Grodno, he successfully bred fifteen hybrids in the years 1847-1859 (Krasi ska, 1988, p. 15). It is important to mention that Walicki obtained fifteen hybrids, among them one fertile male hybrid from the first generation F1. This achievement - fertile F1 male - was never reached again, including contemporary experiments conducted at
up botanical expeditions to different parts of Lithuania, described several species of Lithuanian fauna, including European bison, brown bear, moose, lynx, beaver, badger, hedgehogs, and even mice.
3 Dmitri Dolmatov (Dalmatov, Dolmatoff; died 1878) was the head forest manager of Grodno Province since 1842. Apart from being a forester by training, he was also a naturalist and a painter. He has published several papers on Bialowie a Primeval Forest and European bison, focusing particularly on the issue of the possibility of domestication of these animals.
4 Leopold Walicki, owner of the Wilanow landed estate and initiator of experiments on cross-breeding European bison with cattle. In 1847, he received two European bison from Bialowie a Primeval Forest, and the year after he managed to get first hybrids. His experiments abruptly stopped in 1857, when he was arrested by Russian authorities for the pro-Polish political activities. In 1860, after returning from prison, he started the cross-breeding trial again, using two new bisons sent from Bialowie a. Contrary to our previous knowledge, based mainly on a short note in Karcov (Kap^B, 1903, p. 225), Walicki did not die in 1861. Latest discoveries in the Russian National Historical Archive in St. Petersburg. Petersburg (PrHA) show that Walicki took part in the Polish national uprising of 1863, was arrested and sent into exile to the Irkutsk province, where he died in the late months of 1875 (PTHA. O. 1286. On. 31. No. 1556 and O. 381. On. 12. No. 7662). The fate of hybrids obtained by Walicki is unknown. In the early 1870s one hybrid bison was seen in Swislocz (80 km from Grodno, currently in Belarus), perhaps it was in some way connected with Walicki’s experiments (Kap^B, 1903, p. 225). Authors are grateful to Anastasia Fedotova for her help in finding new information on Leopold Walicki's participation in the 1863 uprising and his later whereabouts in the Russian State Historical Archive (RGIA. Found 1286. Opis' 31. Delo 1556; Found 381. Opis' 12 .Delo 7662).
Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences (Krasi ska, 1988). This was undoubtedly one of the major mammalian hybridization experiments in the 19th century.
Obtaining hybrids of European bison with domestic cattle exceeded the typical mid-19th-century interest in inter-species hybridization aimed at obtaining new hybrids, often for practical purposes. This did not answer the question of the origin of domestic cattle (was its ancestor the bison or aurochs? Or perhaps some other species?), and the question of the existence of two distinctive species of Bovidae in historical times, as the difference between European bison and aurochs were still being discussed by zoologists.
Overcoming old prejudice
The belief that it was impossible to cross-breed European bison with cattle lasted for almost seventy years. It is thus a perfect example of how one failed experiment, which reflects the prejudices of an era, can prevent the advance of science for a long time. Very little is known about bison-cattle crossing attempts prior to Gilibert's experiment. Although no descriptions of similar undertakings are known, secondary sources make it likely that such attempts took place.
Jean-Baptiste Dubois de Jancigny (1752-1808), French naturalist and writer, served as professor of natural history and librarian at the School of Knights in Warsaw in the years 1775-1759, the first state school in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In 1776, he published his ‘Essai sur I’histoire litteraire de Pologne..’. in Berlin. The book compiled older facts on Polish and Lithuanian nature, occasionally supplemented by the author’s own observations and comments. He wrote about the European bison as follows:
"When it comes to European bison, it was due to genius, great in the observation equally to the Nature itself, to put it in the Bos family. I must honestly admit that my doubts were not fully dispelled by his argument, as according to information I obtained in Poland attempts at crossing bison with domestic cows were numerous, yet all failed" (Dubois de Jancigny, 1778).
Nevertheless, no documentation concerning hybridization attempts mentioned by Dubois de Jancigny is known. The only known and documented 18th century attempt was the one conducted and described by Jean-Emmanuel Gilibert, who spent eight busy years (1775-1783) in Poland (Commonwealth of Both Nations). Gilibert received four bison calves - two males and two females - trapped by Polish royal forest wardens in Bialowie a Forest. The males died soon after, but Gilibert managed to breed females, although he failed to have them fed by cows. He attempted to cross-breed a three-year-old bison female with a bull of Ukrainian breed without success (Gilibert 1781; 1802, p. 493-495).
In the 18th century, the belief in “hatred” between domesticated and wild animals was common. These beliefs were undoubtedly rooted in folk superstitions, fairy tales of Lafontaine and followers, in which animals bore human traits, and the Enlightenment ideas about the conflict between free and enslaved people transferred to the animal realm. Dubois de Jancigny wrote straight out that “the natural hatred of the free to the domesticated animal” is a “major obstacle” for the hybridization of bison with domestic cattle. Obviously, this concept was particularly close to political exiles, mainly the Polish emigration after the fall of the November uprising against the partitioners of Poland (Chod ko, 1836, p. 54). Gilibert observed this “natural antipathy” and described the aggression of the bison he bred towards Dutch cows grazing next to her. For Gilibert,
European bison fighting in Biafowie a Primeval Forest (drawn by Michaly Zichy, from:
Hunting..., 1861, p. thirty)
this antipathy was an obvious evidence of the species differentiation between bison and cattle: "if the bison is in fact a cattle brought to the state of slavery a Long time ago, why do tamed bison retain such a strong hatred towards cattle?" Belief in “antipathy” was reinforced in the 18th and 19th century by constantly repeating Jan Ostrorog's 15th-century chronicle that bison and aurochs were not to be kept in the same enclosures, as they immediately engaged in lethal fights (Viennot, 1862, p. 850).
The failure of Gilibert's experiment marked the history of biology for many years. In subsequent decades, even after the development of science rejected the naive beliefs in “antipathy”, it was still assumed that the interspecific barrier was too strong for cross-breeding, and that bison could not be fed by cows. It is noteworthy that the belief lasted despite successful attempts to cross-breed buffalo with cattle. It was the desire to correct those misconceptions that drove Dolmatov to his breeding experiments:
"I have turned my attention particularly to refute by experience the erroneous opinion, accredited by all the writers who have treated on this subject, namely that the calf of the Bison cannot be suckled by our domestic cow. This fable has been repeated even in the work of an esteemed writer of our times, Baron de Brinvers , who relying upon the recital of another writer, the learned Gilibert, asserts that two female Bison calves, caught in the forest of Bialowieza, seven weeks old, constantly refused the teats of a M. de Brinvers had not himself the possibility of verifying this fact; and he cites traditions, communicated to him by the old inhabitants of the environs; for if any one of the forest guards, or the peasants who inhabit the forest,
had even met a Bison calf, parted by any accident from its mother, he would rather have left it, than seized and nursed it, in contravention of the severe law, which prohibits the capture or killing of a Bison. It was therefore only the supreme order of His Majesty the Emperor, emanating from the desire expressed by Her Majesty Queen Victoria to possess in her Zoological Garden two living Bisons, which has enabled me to rectify the error above mentioned" (Dolmatov, 1848).
Dolmatov managed to debunk a myth of the impossibility of feeding young bison by a domestic cow. The next step was to test whether hybridization was possible. In the case of Wal-icki's experiments, the practical advantages were also taken into account. As described by Franz Muller (1859, p. 155-166):
"about four years ago under the act of his highness , a number of juveniles were transferred to the surrounding landowners. An attempt to create a new breed by crossing them with cattle was made. The new breed was to be bigger, stronger and thus more useful , as in this area cattle, similar to horses, are small and weak".
Pavel Bobrovski (Eo6opobckhh, 1863) mentioned that the experiment was started to investigate
“1) the possibility to breed and multiply bison in farm conditions, maintaining the natural beauty, health and size of the animal, 2) the possibility to cross them with domestic cattle, and if the strength, size, beauty and wildness is not lost during the process".
It is easy to understand that practical problems posed this way were of more interest to the local administration than finding answers to purely scientific questions about the status of species, boundaries and hybridization, or deliberations on the history of domestic cattle and domestication processes.
Walicki's experiment and the discussion on the concept of species and hybridization
In the 19th century, the relationship between the definition of species and hybridization was still under discussion. The possibility of interbreeding individuals belonging not only to different species but even to different orders, called into question the physiological (that is based on the criterion of inability to obtain fertile interspecific hybrids) definition of species. False information on a successful hare-rabbit cross-breeding and the fertility of the resulting hybrid became the basis for a broad discussion among 19th-century biologists. It is worth to emphasize that this polemic far exceeded the frames of the scientific dispute, as this shift in the species definition justified the recognition of different species of man by some anthropologists (see the discussion in: Blanckaert, 1981).
Already in the 18th century, Buffon allowed for the existence of exceptions to the definition of “physiological” species, such as fertile dog and wolf hybrids. Shortly before Walicki's experiment, in 1840, eminent French physiologist Pierre Flourens (1794-1867) rejected Buffon's definition of species, recognizing that there can be no exceptions to the rule. Based on the criterion of the possibility of obtaining fertile hybrids, he defined not only species, but also genus. Two species of the same genus could produce infertile hybrids, and fertile hybrids could only be the result of crossing individuals belonging to different “breeds” of the same species. Also the view presented by Pierre-Honore Berard (1797-1858) should be mentioned, as he believed that two species can produce hybrids with varying degrees of fertility. hybridization
was undoubtedly one of the most debated issues in biology in the mid-19th century. It is worth remembering that Charles Darwin devoted a separate chapter to this issue in his “Origin of species”, considering that domestication (and thus natural selection) may actually weaken the insulation barrier between species.
What role did Walicki's experiment play in this discussion? Surprisingly, such an important event (obtaining hybrids between different genera) went virtually unnoticed and is absent in the 19th-century discussion on the definition of species and hybridization. Perhaps two reasons contributed to this. The first is simply a low recognition of these experiments in the major research centers leading to the above-mentioned discussion, even though Walicki’s results were publicized by Karl Eduard Eichwald (1853, p. XVIII-XIX) and Franz Muller (1859). Interestingly, Dolmatov’s breeding of bison calves fed by domestic cows was by far more known in Western Europe than Walicki’s hybrids between bison and cattle. The second reason originated probably from the fact that back in that time many authors accounted for European bison to the Bos, not Bison genus, and were thus not interested in hybrids between two species of the same genus.
Bison, aurochs and the degeneration of species
Walicki's successful experiment could also contribute to a better understanding and acceptance or rejection of other important 19th-century biology concepts. These included a dispute on species identity or differences between European bison and aurochs, extending from the second half of the eighteenth century, and a dispute on the history of species domestication. If, according to the 19th-century understanding of species, there is a reproductive barrier between bison and domestic cattle and hybrids are not fertile in later generations, it would be logical to deduce that bison are not the ancestor of domestic cattle. Furthermore, it would be a sound argument for defining the aurochs as a separate species, thus being the probable ancestor of domestic cattle. The dispute was finally closed by August Wrze niowski (1836-1892) in “Stu-dien zur Geschichte despolnischen Tur”, article that originally appeared in 1878, over thirty years after the beginning of Walicki’s experiments (Wrze niowski, 1878). In this discussion, however, Walicki was not even once quoted.
Were Walicki’s results in any way included in 19th-century discussion on the degeneration of the species? Both bison and domestic cattle were used as examples in deliberations on “degeneration” characteristic for zoology of that period, yet Walicki was almost never cited. Only R.T. Viennot (1862) using this concept when he explained the success of Dolmatov versus the failure of Gilibert's attempts:
"Gilibert resided in Poland for a long time and had an opportunity to closely study four of these animals kept in captivity. They had to be fed by goats as a result of their stubborn refusal to suckle on cow which was first brought to them. They maintained this hostility to domestic cattle, and whenever cows were driven to the same enclosure, bison chased them away, despite similar statements by various authors, Mr. Dimitri de Dolmatof, Grodno province forest administrator, in a memo from 1847 stated that events he repeatedly witnessed contradicted this opinion and that young bison were well fed by the domestic cow. Maybe you can reconcile these statements admitting the existence of some kind of degeneration of modern bison compared to their great ancestors".
In the context of 19th-century concepts of zoology, Walicki’s experiments were only discussed as proof that the domestication of European bison was impossible, and even hybrids of domestic cattle and bison were too strong and wild to use them for work in agriculture.
Although Walicki’s experiments overthrew the misconception about the impossibility of cross-breeding European bison with domestic cattle that had been acknowledged for several decades, it was not adequately appreciated or used in the 19th-century scientific discussion on the concept of species and hybridization. Walicki's work was not known in the major research centers in Europe. Interruption of breeding experiments (Walicki was arrested for experiment political reasons) and termination of the caused by Walicki’s death show how political repressions impacted the development of science. The fact that two prominent 19th-century naturalists Karl Eduard Eichwald (1853) and Franz Méller (1859) mentioned Walicki's successful cross-breeding of bison with domestic cattle in their work, did not change the fact that it went almost unnoticed until the twentieth century . The first detailed description of such an important experiment was published by Georgy Karcov (in Russian) in 19G3, over half a century since the end of Walicki’s work (Kartsov, 19G3).
Blanckaert C. Monogenisme et polygenisme en France de Buffon a Brocca (1749-1880). PhD Thesis. Paris: Universite Paris I, 1981. 521 p.
Brehm A. Brehms Thierleben. Die Saugetiere. Leipzig: Verlag des Bibliographischen Instituts, 1877. Vol. 3.722p.
Buffon G. L. Histoire Naturelle. Generale et Particulière avec la Description du Cabinet du Roi. Vol. 11. Paris: De L'Imprimerie Royale, 1764. 450 p.
Chodzko L. La Pologne historique, litteraire, monumentale et pittoresque. Paris Au Bureau Centrale, 1836. 480 p.
Daszkiewicz P., Jqdrzejewska B., Samojlik T. Puszcza Bialowieska w pracach przyrodnikow 17211831, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper, 2004. 202 p.
Daszkiewicz P., Samojlik. T. Historia ponownego odkrycia ubrow na Kaukazie w XIX wieku // Przegl d Zoologiczny. 2004 Vol. 48. No. 1-2. P. 73-82.
Dolmatov D. Note of the capture of the aurochs (Bos urus Bodd.) // Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London. 1848. Vol. 16. P. 16-20.
Dolmatov D. Note on the capture of the aurochs (Bos urus Bodd.j // The Annals and magazine of natural history: zoology, botany, and geology. 1849. Vol. 3. 2nd series. P. 148-152.
Dubois de Jancigny J.-B. Essai sur lhistoire litteraire de Pologne. Par M. D** ... reflexions generales sur les progres des sciences et des arts, histoire naturelle et geographie. Berlin: G. J. Decker, imprimeur du Roi, 1778. 566 p.
Eichwald K. E. Lethaea rossica: ou, Paleontologie de la Russie. T. 2. Stuttgart: Libraire et Imprimerie de E. Schwezerbeit, 1853. 1304 p.
Gervais P. Histoire naturelle des mammiferes: avec lindication de leurs mreurs, et de leurs rapports avec les arts, le commerce et lagriculture. Vol. 2. Paris: L. Curmer, 1855. 344 p.
Gilibert J.-E. Indagatores naturae in Lithuania. Vilnae, 1781. 129 p.
Gilibert J.-E. Abrege du Systeme de la nature, de Linne, histoire des mammaires ou des quadrupedes et cetacees: Contenant, 1. la traduction libre du texte de Linne et de Gmelin; 2. l'extrait des observations de Buffon, Brisson, Pallas, et autres celebres zoologistes; 3. l'anatomie comparee des principales especes: le tout relatif aux quadrupedes et aux cetacees les plus curieux et les plus utility. Lyon, 1802. P. 482-506.
Herberstein S. Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii. Basilea, 1549. 237 p.
Krasinska M. Hybrydy ubra i bydla domowego. Wroclaw: Ossolineum, 1988. 192 p.
Muller F. Mittheilungen uber eine Reise nach Grodno in den Bialowescher-Wald und uber die Auerochsen // Mittheilungen der Kaiserlich-Koniglichen Graphischen Gesellschaft. Wien: Druck von M. Auer, 1859. P. 155-166.
Samojlik T., Jqdrzejewska B. The history of the protection of European bison in Bialowie a Primeval Forest until the end of 18th century // European bison conservation in the Bialowie a Forest. Threats and prospects of the population development / ed. by R. Kowalczyk, D. Lawreszuk, J.M. Wojcik. Bialowie a: Mammal Research Institute Polish Academy of Sciences, 2010. P. 23-31.
Viennot R.T. Note sur Aurochs ou Bison d'Europe // Bulletin mensuel de la Societe Imperiale Zoologique d'Acclimatation. 1862. Vol. 9. P. 842-860.
Wrzesniowski A. Studien zur Geschichte des polnischen Tur // Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaftliche Zoologie 1878. Vol. 30, Suppl. 45. S. 493-555.
Bobrovsky P. Materials collected by officers of the General Staff. Grodno province. St. Petersburg: Printing House of the General Staff, 1863, pp. 404-459.
Dolmatov D. The history of bison or tur, found in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, Grodno province // Forest Journal. 1849. No. 24. S. 188-191; No. 27. S. 212-215; No. 28. S. 220-222.
Kartsov G. Belovezhskaya Pushcha. Its historical outline, modern hunting economy and the Highest hunts in Pushcha. St. Petersburg: F.A. Marx, 1903. 414 p.
Hunting in Belovezhskaya Pushcha. St. Petersburg: IAN, 1861. 71 p.
Experiments of Leopold Walitsky on crossing bison with cattle in the context of 19th century biology
Piotr Daszkiewicz*, Tomasz Samoilik**, Małgorzata Krasińska**
*Museum of Natural History, Paris, France; [email protected]** Institute for the Study of Mammals, Polish Academy of Sciences, Bialowieza, Poland; [email protected], [email protected]
In our article, we describe the forgotten achievements of the Polish landowner and naturalist Leopold Walicki in the hybridization of large mammals. In 1847-1859. he managed to get 15 hybrids between European bison and cattle. Walitsky's experiments refuted the opinion of biologists of the 19th century. about the impossibility of crossing these two species. Later, his significant successes were almost forgotten and rarely mentioned in scientific discussions, although they were referred to by two major naturalists - Karl Eichwald (1853) and Franz Müller (1859). Even the forester of the Grodno province Dmitry Dolmatov, who provided bison from Pushcha for experiments to Valitsky, is more often mentioned in the scientific literature (due to the fact that he was the first to feed bison with cow's milk). Valitsky's works were first described by Georgy Kartsov (1903) and still deserve the attention of researchers, since so far no one has been able to repeat Valitsky's success - to get a fertile hybrid male in the first generation.
Keywords: European bison, Belovezhskaya Pushcha, hybrids, natural history
Elizaveta Perepenko
Several generations of my ancestors honestly worked for the good of the Fatherland in various fields of activity. Among them were the military, lawyers and teachers, engineers and scientists - all of them, regardless of ranks and titles, were worthy people, never lost their honor, enjoyed the respect of the people around them. Not only in the surviving archival documents, but also in various literary sources, their impeccable service is noted, awards “for outstanding success” are mentioned. Many people can say the same words about their ancestors, since Russia was created precisely by the actions of many Russians. However, immediately after the October revolution that ruined our country, their work and honesty, knowledge and abilities became unnecessary, and they themselves were declared "alien class elements." The "Red Wheel", hyped by Lenin and his like-minded people, quickly rushed across Russia, crushing not only the above-mentioned "elements", but also workers, and peasants, and even former comrades-in-arms - revolutionaries. People were not only physically destroyed ... Their graves were wiped off the face of the earth, their names (and even "Personal Affairs"), as a rule, were withdrawn from circulation, and the remaining orphans were sent to special orphanages and colonies, where they were often given other surnames so that relatives couldn't find them. I was “lucky”: left without parents at a conscious (seven-year-old) age, I remembered my last name, but, like thousands of compatriots, I grew up “without roots”. As a result of repressions, war, (in particular, the Leningrad blockade), no documents and photographs have been preserved. When my father returned from the camps and exile, he also never talked about anything or anyone: apparently, he did not want to complicate my life with “excessive” knowledge about my ancestors. Many of my colleagues in the Russian Geographical Society and the IRO say the same thing: “My parents didn’t tell me anything.” Just like all of them, I consider it my first and most important duty to return from oblivion the names of my ancestors worthy of respect and memory. Starting, practically, "from scratch", has already "got to the bottom" until the beginning of the XVIII century. Now I am not a "rootless orphan" - behind my back are more than one hundred and fifty of my relatives.
The Dalmatovs are my maternal ancestors. This is the least studied branch of my family tree - only four generations. According to the service records, my great-grandfather, Dmitry Yakovlevich, came from "chief officers' children." According to Peter's "Table of Ranks", chief officers are ranks from ensign to captain. That's why for a long time I thought that the fathers of "chief officers' children" should have been military men. As a result of this erroneous opinion, she unsuccessfully dug up a lot of files in the military archive ... It turned out, however, that they could also be civil officials of the corresponding class (8 - 13, according to the same "Table of Ranks"). It is possible that this information will help someone avoid my mistakes. In any case, the first of the Dalmatovs known to me, my great-great-grandfather Yakov (1) was a service man. The family lived in Saransk, Penza province, in their own stone house. The years of birth and death are unknown, as well as the name of his wife.
Yakov's son - Dmitry (2/1) - was born in 1814. (The date is from archival documents, although it raises some doubts. It turns out that when my great-grandfather graduated from the Forest Institute, he was only sixteen years old). Orthodox religion. He graduated from the full course of sciences at the St. Petersburg Forestry Institute and in August 1830 was assigned to the drawing department of the State Property Department with the rank of XIV class. In 1832 he was appointed as an intern in the forest section of the Penza province. In August 1833 he was awarded the rank of provincial secretary. On November 7, 1835, by order of the Department of State Property, he was transferred to the district forester in the Nizhny Novgorod province, in the 1st district. In 1841, special thanks were expressed to him for restoring statistical information about the forests of the Semenovsky district and the project of maintaining a proper economy in them. In February 1842, he was appointed to the position of a scientist forester of the Grodno Chamber of State Property (in Belovezhskaya Pushcha). For distinction in service in 1842, he was promoted to lieutenant, in 1843 to staff captain, in 1845 to lieutenant colonel, and in 1850 to colonel. In 1848 he was awarded an annual salary for excellent service. Dmitry Yakovlevich, “having studied Belovezhskaya Pushcha well during his service in it, submitted to the ministry a detailed and comprehensive description of it along with a project for profitable forestry” . He was the initiator of research work in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, in particular, from 1846 he was engaged in the domestication of bison. “In the scientific world, he gained fame as an authoritative researcher of the Bialowieza bison. For his works on the natural history of this animal - "Belovezhskaya Pushcha and the history of the bison" - in 1848 he was elected a Full Member of the Russian Geographical Society, and also received a gold (according to other sources - silver) medal from the London Zoological Society with the inscription "To Mr Dalmatof in aknowledgment of services rendered to the society” (“To Mr. Dalmatov in gratitude for the services rendered to the society”). For compiling the "History of the Bison" in October 1849, he was thanked by the Minister of State Property (Russia) and issued 250 rubles. silver . The results of the scientific work of Dmitry Yakovlevich were published in 1846 - 1878. in "Forest Journal" and other periodicals.
Since 1848, Dmitry Yakovlevich was the Perm provincial forester, and for the last twenty-two years he served as the manager of a post office, first in Ufa, and from March 1871 in Vyatka. In addition, he was a member of the Committee of the Orthodox Missionary Society and the Vyatka Local Administration of the Society for the Care of Wounded and Sick Soldiers. Dmitry Yakovlevich died in 1876, shortly after the death of his eldest son Nikolai (3/2) in Serbia - in January of that year. He was awarded the orders of St. Anna 2nd class, St. Art. 2nd st. with a crown to wear around the neck, St. Vl. 4th st. for the XXXV years of impeccable service, as well as insignia for the 15th and XX years of impeccable service and a medal in memory of the war of 1853-56. , but I read about the highest, in my opinion, award in the newspapers of that time. “... He (Dalmatov) deserved the high nickname “friend of mankind” for the fact that he treated / with homeopathy * / poor patients in Ufa: workers, peasants, who came even from distant villages, seminarians, and was a true comforter, especially the latter who saw in Dalmatov a good mentor and leader. Many of the seminarians owe their careers to him, his heart lay most of all with them, the deceased directed his spiritual warmth, which he was so rich in, to them ... and helped. Peace to your soul, noble man, “friend of mankind”!!”
* In the Department of Manuscripts of the National Library of Russia there is a letter from D. Ya. Dalmatov to V. V. Grigoriev (from Ufa - dated January 28, 1860) with a proposal to translate a homeopathic manual into the Kyrgyz language. .
D. Ya. Dalmatov was married three times.
1st wife - Ekaterina Ivanovna Zvereva. After the death of his wife, Dmitry Yakovlevich and his son Nikolai - (3/2) - inherited the hereditary estate of Ekaterina Ivanovna in the Gorbatovsky district. (They are included in the second part of the Noble genealogy book of the Nizhny Novgorod province)
The second wife is Yulia Alekseevna. In the track record for 1852 - "widows by a second marriage." From this marriage there were two children - Konstantin, 4/2, and Alexandra, 5/2.
3rd wife, since 1853, - Varvara Petrovna, (1835 -1903), a graduate of the Moscow Orphanage. The marriage took place in Perm. Despite the household chores of raising eight children, she was also engaged in "social work" - she was a member of the Vyatka charitable society. After the death of Dmitry Yakovlevich, she moved with her younger children to the city of Petrokov, where she worked in a women's gymnasium, passing the test for the title of home teacher. It is noted that she is “in service since August 1, 1879, in office since January 1, 1886.”
In total, Dmitry Yakovlevich had twelve children: three sons and eight daughters (one of them died in childhood) - this is the third generation of the Dalmatov family. The fate of the sons is the most interesting; it is not for nothing that their activities are reflected in various literary sources. However, two of the daughters (Mary and Elizabeth) were also extraordinary personalities.
The eldest son, the first-born - Nikolai, 3/2, - was born on January 13, 1841. Baptized according to the Orthodox rite on January 19 in the Ascension Cathedral in the city of Semenov, Nizhny Novgorod province. (After the death of his mother, Nikolai Dmitrievich left 96 male souls in the village of Zemenki, Semenovsky district, Nizhny Novgorod province). “He received his primary education at home under the direct guidance of his very enlightened father, who had an influence on the whole way of life of his son - a remarkable personality, possessing energy, a remarkable mind and an honest good heart, ready for self-sacrifice for the common good. Dalmatov, the son, owes his further development and acquisition of knowledge to one engineering colonel, a talented publicist, whose excellent library Nikolay constantly used. After serving a little in military service, during which he was distinguished by rare humanity towards his subordinates, Nikolai Dmitrievich retired with the rank of second lieutenant and left for Nizhny Novgorod to take part in zemstvo affairs. In 1859, without concluding any conditions with his peasants, he gave them full freedom and donated all 1,000 acres of land received by will from his mother, but left nothing for himself. In the future, sometimes he himself needed the most necessary, because he often gave his money to those in need. . “At the end of the 60s, without any means, he went to Bulgaria to fight for freedom against the Turkish enslavers together with the Slav brothers.” The uprising did not take place. Nicholas was forced to look for work. In Belgrade, he entered the cartridge factory, where he became close friends with some patriots of the Danubian Slavs. Two years later, having learned Serbian and Bulgarian, he returned to his homeland, where he worked in various positions and provinces, mainly in factories. He was engaged in literature and placed in the "Russian Word" a number of articles on serious issues. “An eternal worker, deeply gifted, honest, energetic, he always remained true to his spiritual ideal ... He was a “man” in the beautiful sense of the word, a person worthy of both surprise and imitation.” “With the beginning of the Herzegovina uprising in 1875, the thirst for struggle for a holy cause woke up in him again: he went to Belgrade almost as the first Russian volunteer.” On January 8, 1876 he was killed in Bosnia. A letter from Stoyan Ugrinich (one of the leaders of the national liberation struggle) to his father Dmitry Yakovlevich Dalmatov tells about his courage and courage. - “... We and the entire Serbian people mourn Nikolai Dmitrievich as one of the most generous victims and a courageous fighter for the liberation of the Serbian people from the Turkish yoke. ... Your son is buried with full military honors. The Serbian people remember his merits so well that they want to erect a special monument to him.” * The letter of Stoyan Ugrinich is in the Public Library (RNL, in St. Petersburg), in 1963 it was handed over by Nikolai Dmitrievich's niece - Natalia Aleksandrovna Dalmatova - .*
The middle son, Konstantin, 4/2, was born on April 6, 1850. Orthodox religion. He was educated in the military corps. From 1871 he served in the Ministry of State Property. In 1883 he had the rank of titular councillor. Artist, collector (he collected the richest collection of ancient embroideries, lace, fabrics, etc., “both Russian and Little Russian, Chuvash, Mordovian, Votyak, Cheremis and others, giving an idea of the national ornament of these peoples.” Part of it was acquired the Ministry of Finance for the Stroganov School in Moscow, the other - the Russian Museum for the ethnographic department), the publisher (published seven albums of embroidery patterns), arranged five exhibitions on the same subject; in 1889 he made patterns ... for decorating the “Russian tower” in the Danish royal park of Fredensborg.
Wife - Akilina Mintyevna Petukhova, "a girl from the peasants, listed in the petty bourgeoisie of the city of Vyatka." Their two daughters - Nadezhda and Yulia - were not born in marriage, although from the day of birth they lived inseparably with their parents and were brought up at the expense of their father. On October 27, 1883, according to the petition, “daughters were allowed to take the father’s surname and enter into the rights of legitimate children” - since “in view of approving morality and official activity”, “royal mercy was rendered in his family business”.
* In the future, the spouses, in all likelihood, broke up, since in 1915 they lived at different addresses. *
In the 1900s, Konstantin Dmitrievich had the rank of collegiate assessor. Lived and worked in St. Petersburg.
2nd wife - (in 1917) - Ekaterina Mikhailovna.
After 1917, his fate is unknown.
The youngest son, Alexander Dmitrievich, 14/2, was born on June 19, 1873. He was of the Orthodox faith. He received a military education. In 1896 he was a cornet of a dragoon regiment, from 1910 he was a headquarters captain at the Officers' Cavalry School, in 1917 he was a colonel of the guards. In addition, he was a highly skilled photographer. At the request of Georgy Kartsov, he took part in illustrating his book about Belovezhskaya Pushcha - it contains more than two hundred photographs of bison. “Thanks to A. D. Dalmatov, the fauna of the Pushcha is presented in the publication with snapshots of wild animals in their daily lives. These photographs are so valuable for the hunter that the animal is captured in them in its real, unpainted setting. . In 1914, he published the Army and Navy magazine, and he himself was an editor, a publisher, an author of many articles, and a photojournalist. He shot not only on the ground - “Laying of the regimental church of l - guards. 1st Infantry Regiment of Catherine the Great in Tsarskoe Selo on March 11, 1914", but also in the air - Sikorsky's Ilya Muromets over St. Petersburg", as well as "View of St. Petersburg from Ilya Muromets and the internal view of the aircraft" - (in 6). In addition, he was also the author of several books and ... musical works. * In one of the newspapers for February 1905 there was a brief message about the waltz "Pacific Waves" by A. Dalmatov and that "the income from the sale will be directed to the development of the navy" *
Wife - Elizaveta Ivanovna, daughter of Ivan Ivanovich Dernov, hereditary honorary citizen, merchant of the 1st guild, vowel of the St. Petersburg Duma, member of the Mariinsky Society for the Care of the Obukhov Hospital. Ivan Ivanovich died on August 22, 1905, and was buried at the Novodevichy Cemetery in St. Petersburg. Alexander Dmitrievich and his family lived on Tavricheskaya Street in house number 35, built by I. I. Dernov in 1905. It is known as the "house with a tower", one of the apartments of which entered the history of the "Silver Age" of Russian culture. Since 1918, Alexander Dalmatov - one of the organizers (or the head? - according to his daughter N. Dalmatova) of the "red" cavalry school, earned gratitude from S. M. Budyonny, but later, despite his services to the Soviet authorities and the Red Army, was fired, worked at a film factory. .
Alexander Dmitrievich was repressed in the 30s. Even positive reviews about his work did not save him. Rehabilitated posthumously. His wife died in evacuation in 1941-43. .
Since Dmitry Yakovlevich Dalmatov himself was a great worker, he believed that his daughters should also work. The information found shows that they worked, following the advice of their father. Let me remind you that the daughters are also the third generation of the Dalmatovs.
Alexandra Dmitrievna, 5/2, was born on March 11, 1852. Orthodox religion. Not earlier than March 25, 1879, she married NN Miller.
In 1898, the widow, D.S. With. Alexandra Dmitrievna Miller lived in St. Petersburg. She worked as a teacher's assistant in a Sunday girls' school on Vasilyevsky Island (Bolshoy pr., 69) in 1902 and lived at the same address. .
Nadezhda Dmitrievna, 6/2, was born on January 25, 1855 in Ufa, of the Orthodox faith. She was an artist. . She married no earlier than September 7, 1875. She died in Moscow after 1917.
1st husband - Sergey Alekseevich Kitovsky, in 1880 was a provincial surveyor in Vyatka. In 1910 he was a member of the board of the Moscow Land Survey Office.
2nd husband - Alexander Konstantinovich Pozharsky, in 1910 - captain of the Rostov Grenadier Regiment (Moscow).
Maria Dmitrievna, 7/2, born September 27, 1853 in Perm, died after 1917 in Petrograd (Leningrad). Orthodox religion.
From 1871 she lived with her parents in Vyatka. She got married there. After the death of her husband, Maria Dmitrievna Senyavina, widow of Dr. s., moved to St. Petersburg (not earlier than 1886). She worked first as an assistant inspector of the Higher Women's Courses (in 1892), then (no later than 1900) as an inspector at the Women's Medical Institute. After 1910, she lived with the family of her younger brother Alexander - on Tavricheskaya street, house 35. .
Husband - Apollon Nikolayevich Senyavin (son of Nikolai Dmitrievich Senyavin, born in 1798, a graduate of the Naval Cadet Corps, grandson of the Russian Admiral Dmitry Nikolayevich Senyavin) - in 1862 he graduated from St. Petersburg University "in the category of legal sciences". On November 25, 1870, he was appointed assistant prosecutor of the Samara District Court, and on December 5, 1874, he was appointed prosecutor of the Vyatka District Court. In 1880 he was a collegiate adviser, a full member of the provincial statistical committee in Vyatka. Awards: Order of St. Art. 2nd st. with the Imperial crown, St. Anna 3rd class. . They have a son Nikolai (*1877) and a daughter Maria (*April 5, 1886 in Vyatka). Nikolai Apollonovich graduated from St. Petersburg University, was a lawyer. * Had a son Cyril. His descendants - Nikolai Kirillovich (*1932) and Kirill Nikolayevich (*1960) Senyavin - live in St. Petersburg*. Maria Apollonovna was a surgeon - traumatologist, worked in 1914 at the clinic of the Women's Medical Institute, in 1915 - as an assistant at the hospital. Peter the Great, then in the Vreden clinic. * Roman Romanovich Vreden (1867 -1934) - surgeon, one of the founders of orthopedics in Russia, director of the Orthopedic Institute in St. Petersburg, professor at the First Leningrad Medical Institute. * After 1917, she also worked in one of the clinics, but in 1935 she was expelled to Saratov, where she fell ill and died in 1937.
Olga Dmitrievna, 8/2, in the marriage of Shestakova, was born on June 11, 1856 in Ufa. In 1875, D.S.S. Pavel Andreevich Shestakov. Dmitry Yakovlevich Dalmatov, Olga's father, was also a member of the aforementioned department, so it can be assumed that she was the wife of Pavel Andreevich. (The surname - Shestakova - is known from the inscription on the surviving photograph of Olga Dmitrievna). In 1880 he was a justice of the peace, then a fellow prosecutor of the Vyatka District Court. On April 1, 1887, he was appointed a member of the Petrokovsky District Court. * Apparently, the move of Varvara Petrovna Dalmatova to the city of Petrokov was connected with this appointment. *
Varvara Dmitrievna, 9/2, was born on November 24, 1858. Orthodox religion. She died in 1892. Her husband, Ludwig Stanislavovich Dravert, graduated from the law faculty of Moscow University. He entered the service in January 1871. In 1879 he was a collegiate adviser. By 1881 he was a fellow prosecutor of the Vyatka District Court. On June 15, 1881, the general meeting of the court elected him as its member. In 1906 he was chairman of the Vyatka district court. then became a senator. It is surprising that with such a father, their son Peter "hit" into revolutionary activity - he became a "socialist". . * However, he was not the only one in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century who fell into madness. Truly, they did not know what they were doing. * Their grandson Leonid Petrovich, who was born in 1901 in Kazan, from his youth "went" even further: he became a member of the Left Socialist-Revolutionary Party. In 1925, he was sentenced for three years to imprisonment for a political isolator for Left Socialist-Revolutionary activities, in 1928 to exile for three years in Kazakhstan, in 1931 to exile for three years in the Urals, then in Bashkiria. In February 1937 he was arrested on charges of anti-Soviet terrorist activities, on April 25, 1938 he was sentenced to death by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court. Rehabilitated. .
*Although the Draverts are not blood relatives of the Dalmatovs, but only their “in-laws”, it should still be noted that in addition to Ludwig Stanislavovich, other representatives of this family also worked in Vyatka: Ludwig’s father, Stanislav Ivanovich, in 1857 was a collegiate assessor, ruler office of the civil governor of Vyatka, his father's brother - Ignatius Ivanovich - was a titular adviser, a member of the Vyatka provincial government and manager of the chamber of state property. In 1880 - Stanislav Ivanovich Dravert, p. s., was the head of the economic department of the Vyatka State Property Administration; Adolf Stanislavovich Dravert, collegiate assessor, was a doctor in Urzhum, Vyatka province; court adviser Ignatius Ivanovich Dravert was an assistant to the ruler of the governor's office . *
Elena, 10/2, was born in Ufa on April 10, 1865. After the death of her sister Olga, she married the widowed L. S. Dravert.
Elizabeth, 12/2, my grandmother, was born on May 27, 1870 in Vyatka. In the 80s she lived in Petrokov. She worked with her mother, Varvara Petrovna, at the gymnasium as a class lady, then as a teacher. In the early 1900s she lived in Dagestan - at the place of service of her husband - Ivan Ivanovich Reiman. He was born on August 30, 1850, of the Orthodox faith. He was educated at the 2nd Military Konstantinovsky School. He entered service on September 1, 1869. After graduating from college, he was assigned to the First Rifle Battalion, in Tsarskoye Selo, where, starting with the rank of ensign, he served for fourteen years - up to major. Then he served in various command positions, including commander of the 6th Infantry Battalion (from 1887 to 1889). The aforementioned battalion lodged in the mountains. Tomashov, Petrokov province, and at that time Elizaveta lived with her relatives in Petrokov. There she met her future husband. However, Ivan Ivanovich was married, so their marriage took place only eleven years later, in 1900. On March 6, 1900, Ivan Reiman, with the rank of major general, was appointed head of the 64th infantry reserve brigade, whose headquarters was located in Temir-Khan-Shura (Dagestan). In the same place, in 1902, their daughter Irina, my mother, was born. Ivan Ivanovich died in 1903, leaving a widow with a young daughter. * In addition to Irina, my grandfather had four more minor children from his first marriage. Studying the track record of my grandfather, I found a very interesting information about how the military authorities were fussing about the possibility of raising the widow's pension and, in general, improving her financial situation (not only two sons were placed in the cadet corps, but there was other help). In a word, the needy family of the deceased officer was not left to the mercy of fate.* Elizaveta Dmitrievna, after the death of her husband, did not give up, but continued her “career” as a teacher. It is not known when she left Dagestan, but she did not give up in the face of difficulties. In the pre-revolutionary years, she was already the headmistress of a private gymnasium in Minsk. In the 30s she lived in Leningrad with the family of her daughter, who graduated from the university in Minsk and worked as a referent at the Institute of Experimental Medicine in Leningrad. In 1935, after the arrest of her husband, Dmitry Pavlovich Shcherbov - Nefedovich (1906 - 1981), she was fired "due to redundancy." Then she was again hired at the same institute, but only as a librarian. Fearing reprisals as "members of the family of an enemy of the people", they moved to the city of Pushkin (the former Tsarskoye Selo, then it was a suburb). Grandmother ended her teaching career in the same city where long before that her late husband had started his military career. A month after the start of the Great Patriotic War, their daughter Irina was arrested on a false denunciation by her colleague. Only 52 years later it became known that she died in "places of deprivation of liberty" on July 25, 1946. She was buried in the village of Yagdynya Verkhne - Bureinsky district of the Khabarovsk Territory. Elizaveta Dmitrievna, starved to death in July 1942 in besieged Leningrad.
The youngest daughter of Dmitry Yakovlevich Dalmatov - Natalya, 13/2, was born on February 20, 1872. Died in childhood. .
The fourth generation of the Dalmatovs includes the children of Konstantin (4/2) and Alexander (14/2), since the descendants of the daughters, although they are Dalmatovs by blood, but, like me, have other surnames.
Nadezhda, 15/4, was born on September 2, 1875 in Vyatka. They were baptized on September 7 according to the Orthodox rite in the Resurrection Cathedral in Vyatka. Receiver - Nadezhda Dmitrievna Dalmatova; priest - Onesifor Vadikovsky. .
Julia, 16/4, was born on March 14, 1879 in St. Petersburg. Baptized March 25th. Godparents: Collegiate Councilor Ludwig Stanislavovich Dravert and the daughter of the State Councilor, Alexandra Dmitrievna Dalmatova.
George, 17/14, was born in St. Petersburg on April 6, 1909, died no later than 1934, in Leningrad. He was buried at the Novodevichy Cemetery, but the grave has not been preserved.
Natalya, 18/14, was born on January 5, 1911 in St. Petersburg. She studied at the art school, which was located in her grandfather's house, known as the "House with a tower."
1st husband - Boris Bobrischev - Pushkin - was repressed.
2nd husband - Anatoly Korolkov.
3rd husband - Luigi NN (Italian, pilot),
4th husband - Konstantin Fedorovich Sukhin, journalist, correspondent for the Izvestia newspaper, died in the early 70s.
Son - Vladimir (Bobrishchev - Pushkin), born in 1929, + 1976.
Daughter Ariadna Anatolyevna Korolkova - 1932 - 1995.
Vladimir, the son of Natalia Alexandrovna, having been evacuated with his grandmother, Elizaveta Ivanovna Dernova, from besieged Leningrad, went to the front as a thirteen-year-old boy. (The mother considered the flight to the front to be the cause of her grandmother's death, she could not forgive him and refused to meet with her son). Vladimir was the “son of a regiment” in a tank brigade, a cabin boy on the boat “Sea Hunter”, was awarded orders and medals, including the Order Patriotic War II degree. About his fate, Valentin Multatuli wrote the story “Bobrishchev - Pushkin. A boy from besieged Leningrad.
Used sources.
1. RGIA. F. 1343, op. 20, d. 2701. About the nobility of the Dalmatov family
2. RGIA. F. 1405, op. 545, d. 14950, 1869, Composition of the Vyatka region. court.
3. RGIA. F. 1405, op. 545, d. 15995, 1880, Composition of the Vyatka region. court.
4. RGIA. F. 1412, op. 5, d. 39,1883, on petitions filed in the name of the EIV.
5. RGVIA. F. 1720, op. 4, d. 59, 1903, about the track record of Ivan Reiman.
6. Address - a calendar of persons serving in the Vyatka province, on ..., Vyatka, 1857 - 1880.
7. Address - calendar. General painting of commanding and other officials ... in the Russian Empire on ..., St. Petersburg, 1846 - 1888
8. Biographies. Ed. "Russian Encyclopedia", M., 1993, v.4, p. 503.
9. All Leningrad on .... L. 1932 - 1934.
10. All Petersburg on ..., St. Petersburg, 1892 - 1913,
11. All Petrograd is on ..., Pgr, 1914 - 1917.
12. All Moscow on ..., M., 1903 - 1910.
13. "Vyatka provincial sheets", 1877, No. 16.
14. Grigoriev V.V. Imperial St. Petersburg University during the first fifty years of its existence. St. Petersburg, 1870.
15. "They tell at home." Compiled by Lisaevich I., Lenizdat, 1991, p. 164.
16. Magazine "Army and Navy", St. Petersburg - Pgr. 1914, Nos. 1 - 12.
17. Magazine "Istochnik", 1988, No. 1, p. 83.
18. Illustrated magazine "Niva", 1876, No. 43, p. 729.
18a. Historical cemeteries of St. Petersburg. St. Petersburg, 1993, pp. 205, 249, 403.
19. Kartsov G. Belovezhskaya Pushcha. St. Petersburg, 1903, p. 59, 85, 153, 154, 220.
20. Kovalkov M.P., Balyuk S.S., Budnichenko R.I. Bialowieza Forest. Annotated bibliographic index of domestic literature (1835 -1983), Minsk, ed. "Urajay", 1985, ann. 458 - 467, 882, 1421.
21. "Forest Journal", St. Petersburg. 1877, No. 1, p.157.
22. Leningradskaya Pravda, August 24, 1963, p. 3.
23. Multatuli V.M. "Bobrishchev - Pushkin, a boy from besieged Leningrad." Literary - artistic. almanac "Sphinx", St. Petersburg, no. 8 - 10.
24. Murzanov N. A. List of judicial figures of the first call. (To the fiftieth anniversary of judicial reforms) Pgr., 1914, p.82
25. "Father and son." Orenburg sheet, 1877, No. 10.
26. Commemorative book of the Petrokovskaya province for 1890. Petrokov, 1890, p.86, 104
26a. RNB. Department of Manuscripts. F.608, op.1, No. 2358.
27. Report from the St. Petersburg Prosecutor's Office, February 1994, family archive.
28. Message from the information center of the Main Department of Internal Affairs of St. Petersburg, March, 1995, family archive.
29. Oral communication by N. A. Dalmatova.
30. Oral communication by N. K. Senyavin.
