Abstract

An unknown anti-encyclical essay of the 1890s is introduced into scientific circulation, which is attributed to the authoritative Belaya Krinitsa public figure M.I. Brilliantov. One of the copies of this work, which is part of a collection obtained at one time as a result of field research by Siberian archaeographers, is used. The main range of sources for this work has been identified. The internal causes of a major conflict in the Belaya Krinitsa Consent, provoked by the release of the “Okruzhnoe Poslanie” (Encyclical Letter) in February 1862, and the main lines of argumentation of the apologist from Belaya Krinitsa are explored. It is shown that the essay sums up the many years of polemics between the okruzhnik (encyclical) and neokruzhnik (nonencyclical) groupings.

中文翻译：

---

19-20世纪之交白克里尼察老信徒为俄罗斯皇帝祈祷的问题

摘要

一篇 1890 年代不为人知的反通谕文章被引入科学界，这篇文章的作者是权威公众人物 Belaya Krinitsa MI Brilliantov。使用的是该作品的一份副本，该副本是西伯利亚考古学家实地研究时获得的收藏品的一部分。这项工作的主要来源范围已经确定。探讨了 1862 年 2 月《 Okruzhnoe Poslanie 》（通谕）的发布引发的《Belaya Krinitsa 同意书》中重大冲突的内部原因，以及 Belaya Krinitsa 辩护者的论点主线。文章显示，这篇文章总结了okruzhnik（通谕）和neokruzhnik（非通谕）派系之间多年来的争论。