"Zaytsev Ilya Vladimirovich" - as the value of a property

Unique designation: Zaytsev Ilya Vladimirovich (12 August 1973)
Designation: Zaytsev Ilya Vladimirovich
% D0% B4% D0% B5% D0% B9% D1% 81% D1% 82% D0% B2% D0% B8% D0% B5% D0% BF% D0% BE% D0% BA% D0% B0% D0 % B7% D0% B0% D1% 82% D1% 8C% D0% BA% D0% BB% D0% B8% D0% B5% D0% BD% D1% 82% D0% BA% D0% B0% D1% 82 % D0% B0% D0% BB% D0% BE% D0% B3% D0% BA% D0% BB% D0% B0% D1% 81% D1% 81% 5B> (>% D0% A1% D1% 83% D1% 89% D0% BD% D0% BE% D1% 81% D1% 82% D1% 8C% D0% BF% D0% B5% D1% 80% D1% 81% D0% BE% D0% BD% D0% B0 Entity ⇔ person
Description:

Ilya Vladimirovich Zaitsev(born August 12, Moscow) - Russian historian-orientalist, Doctor of Historical Sciences, since 2016 Acting director.

Biography

Born in Moscow in the family of Vladimir Sergeevich Zaitsev (born 1942), professor of the Moscow Mining Institute, candidate of technical sciences, and Zaitseva Zoya Aleksandrovna (born 1936).

• Candidate of Historical Sciences (1999, dissertation "Documentary Sources on the History of Relations between the Post-Horde Turkic state entities with Russia and the Ottoman Empire. XV- first half. XVI century "). Defended in 1998 at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
• Doctoral dissertation "Crimean historiographic tradition of the 15th-19th centuries: manuscripts, texts and their sources" (2011). Defended on December 6, 2011 at the Russian Academy of Public Administration.

Zaitsev's wife Elizaveta Pavlovna, psychologist. Two daughters of Alexander and Vasilisa, son of Plato.

Scientific activity

In 1998 he began his career as a junior researcher at the Department of Oriental History, from 2000 to 2005 research worker / senior researcher at the Department of Oriental History of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

• 2005-2009 - Deputy Director under the leadership of R.B. Rybakov
• 2009-2011 - Head of the Scientific and Publishing Department of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
• Since 2007 - Head of the Center for Oriental Cultures, VGBIL im. M.I. Rudomino;
• 2012-2016 - Scientific advisor to the General Director of the Library of Foreign Literature named after V.I. M.I. Rudomino. Worked under the guidance of E.Yu. Genieva
• June 9 - December 2014 - Deputy General Director of the Bakhchisaray Historical and Cultural Reserve (BIKZ).
• Since 2014 - Associate Professor of the Department of Central Asia and the Caucasus, Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov.

Main works

Monographs

• Between Moscow and Istanbul: Juchid states, Moscow and the Ottoman Empire (early 15th - first half of the 16th centuries). M .: "Rudomino", 2004.216 p.
• Astrakhan Khanate. M .: Publishing company "Vostochnaya Literatura", 2004. 303 p.
• Arabic, Persian and Turkic manuscripts of the Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts Scientific Library Moscow state university... M .: "Rudomino", 2006.157 p.
• Astrakhan Khanate. 2nd ed., Revised. M .: Publishing company "Vostochnaya Literatura", 2006. 303 p.
• Arabic, Persian and Turkic manuscripts and documents in the Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Catalog. Moscow, Institute of Oriental Studies, 2008.43 p.
• Crimean historiographic tradition of the 15th-19th centuries. Development ways. Manuscripts, texts and sources. M .: Publishing company "Vostochnaya literatura", 2009. 304 p., Ill.

Articles

• Crimean khans: portraits and plots // Eastern collection. Spring 2003.S. 86-93.
• Sheikh-Ahmad - the last khan of the Golden Horde (Horde, Crimean Khanate, Ottoman Empire and Polish-Lithuanian state at the beginning of the 16th century. // From Istanbul to Moscow. Collection of articles in honor of the 100th anniversary of Professor AF Miller. M., 2003.S. 31-52.
• “Forgetting God and our salary, and our soul” (The Adventures of Prince Semyon Fedorovich Belsky) // Ad Fontem / At the source. Collection of articles in honor of Sergei Mikhailovich Kashtanov. M., 2005. S. 298-317.
• Zajcev Il'ja. Notes on the Golden Horde Diplomatic Ceremonial: The Origin of the Word Koreš in Russian Slang // Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. Vol. 58 (2005). No. 3. P. 295-298.
• Zaytsev I. The Structure of the Giray Dinasty (15th-16th centuries): Matrimonial and Kinship Relations of the Crimean Khans // Kinship in the Altaic World. Proceedings of the 48th Permanent International Altaistic Conference. Moscow. 10-15 July, 2005. Edited by Elena V. Boikova and Rostislav B. Rybakov. Wiesbaden, 2006. P. 342-353.
• Written culture of the Crimean Khanate // Eastern Archives, 2006, no. 14-15. S. 87-93.
• Ode to Bakhchisaray (Crimean Tatar Turks from the anonymous Ottoman junk) // Basileus. Collection of articles dedicated to the 60th anniversary of D.D. Vasilyeva. M., 2007. S. 157-163.
• Arab, Persian and Turkic manuscripts and documents of the Moscow collections: results and prospects of study (the experience of the reference and bibliographic index) // Written monuments of the East. No. 2 (7). 2007.S. 252-278.
• The family of Haji-Giray // Altaica XII. M., 2007. S. 64-71.
• Crimean Khanate in the XV-XVI centuries // Essays on the history of Islamic civilization. T. 2. Under the general editorship of Yu.M. Kobishanov. M., 2008. S. 143-146.
• Polish-Lithuanian Tatars // Essays on the history of Islamic civilization. T. 2. Under the general editorship of Yu.M. Kobishanov. M., 2008. S. 146-148.
• Crimean khans in exile in Rhodes // Eastern collection. Summer 2009. No 2 (37). S. 96-101.
• Collection of Ottoman manuscripts in Moscow // Science in Russia. July-August, No. 4, 2009. S. 63-67.
• Mamai's father // Mamai. The experience of a historiographic anthology. Kazan, 2010.S. 198-205.
• Crimean Khanate: Vassalage or Independence? // Ottoman World and Ottoman Studies. Collection of articles dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the birth of A.S. Tveritinova (1910-1973). M., 2010.S. 288-298.
• Zaytsev Ilya. The Crimean Khanate between Empires: Independence or Submission // Empires and Peninsulas. Southeastern Europe between Karlowitz and the Peace of Adrianople, 1699-1829. P. Mitev, M. Baramova, V. Racheva (eds.). Münster, Lit Verlag, 2010. P. 25-27.
• Zaitsev I. “The history of the Tatar khans, Dagestan, Moscow and the peoples of Desht-i Kipchak” Ibrahim b. Ali Kefevi. Compilation or fake? // Falsification of historical sources and construction of ethnocratic myths. M., 2011.S. 198-207.
• Zaytsev İlya, Demiroğlu Hasan. Rusya İlimler Akademisi Arşivi'nde Bulunan Türk ve Türk Halklarıyla İlgili Bazı Arşiv Belgelerinin Tanıtılması // Trakya Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi. Cilt 1, Sayı 1. Ocak 2011. Edirne. S. 74-87.

Documentary film

Education: Institute of History and Archives, Russian State University for the Humanities (1995), postgraduate studies at the Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences (1998).

What he studies: oriental manuscripts, documents from the times of the Golden Horde, the history of the Crimea.

Special features: speaks Turkish and Farsi, author of many books, one of the last - "Crimean Historiographic Tradition", traveled to Iran, Egypt, Turkey, Japan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Crimea, was on an expedition in Bulgaria.

I work at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, where I completed my postgraduate studies and wrote a dissertation on diplomatic documents that remained after the Golden Horde. These are agreements between the Ottoman and Russian empires. Many papers have survived, something had to be investigated from the annals. All of this is handwritten, difficult to disassemble, but often our only sources. After all, the printing press came to the East very late - 150-200 years later than to Russia. There were entire corporations, shops of copyists and binders. In general, I am extremely interested in manuscripts in Arabic script. I was lucky: I managed to work in many large collections of the world: in Germany, France, Great Britain, Egypt, Iran, Turkey, in Central Asia. I researched them in the national library of Cyril and Methodius in Sofia, there are many valuable documents. Moreover, these documents were once bought by the Bulgarian side from Turkey as waste paper! Some were even deliberately torn apart - they wanted to send them to a paper mill!

Our institute is almost 200 years old. It is believed to be the successor to the Asian Museum in St. Petersburg. In St. Petersburg we had a branch, and now it is an independent institution - the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts, there is a colossal collection. The task of the head Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Soviet times was associated primarily with the study of modernity, and classical philology, source study - this was irrelevant. Therefore, in Moscow, and in our country in particular, there is a collection of manuscripts that has not yet been described, has not been introduced into scientific circulation. And this is despite the fact that in the best years a huge staff worked here - 900 people. Primakov and Kapitsa worked for us.

I don't like teaching. It is very time consuming, cheap and not very rewarding. Once I lectured on the Golden Horde to historians in my third year. They struck me with their denseness, honestly. No, well, they know the most basic thing: in what century Catherine lived, they will say. But not deeper. Our science is not so much a problem with money as with people and ideas. Money can be found if desired - there are a large number of funds, private and public.

Now I am actively working on the topic of the Crimean Khanate. I am very interested in the connections between Crimea and Moscow, with the Ottoman Empire. A fairly large number of sources have remained from this period of history, including in Moscow. For the last hundred years in Russian science - I mean serious source study - there have been no big works about Crimea. Those that were used only Russian sources. And I work with documents from three countries: Russia, the Ottoman Empire (in Old Ottoman), the Polish-Lithuanian state (in Old Belarusian, the clerical language of that era). Before the revolution there was such a scientist Vasily Smirnov, a famous Turkologist, he used only Ottoman historical writings. Drew the history of Crimea, looking from Istanbul. You can write from Moscow. But best of all - from Bakhchisarai itself.

In the funds of the National Library of Cyril and Methodius in Sofia there are more than 1,800 handwritten and early printed books, including the first Bulgarian printed book "Abagar", the first Bulgarian encyclopedic reference book - "Fish Primer", so named because its cover depicts a big fish.

You need to compare sources to get a complete picture. In addition, it is common knowledge that there are many falsifications in history. Fake documents come across. Often they are created for ideological reasons in order to prove the primacy of a particular people in a certain territory. There are many excesses: for example, purely Turkic theories of the origin of the Russian state.

I cannot say that these authors always deliberately manipulate the facts. Sometimes there are simply enthusiastic people who think that Slavs lived everywhere or Turks lived everywhere. You can remember early XIX century, when some Shishkov was looking for the Slavs even in Africa. Like, Lake Chad is because of the smoke. There are a lot of such examples, and this has nothing to do with science. It is foolish to trace the name Razin to Persian roots or describe the Moscow Borovitsky Hill as a Turkic toponym. As a rule, in addition to Slavic roots, Moscow names are etymologized based on Finno-Ugric material. Crimea is a good example of the idea of ​​multiculturalism, which many believe has failed. It is very important to rely on this experience - we live in the era of the great migration of peoples. The ethnic image of the regions is changing. Engagement is always bad. It is necessary to write as the conscience dictates, and not some nationalistic ideas. If a person uses the methods of classical source study, he can avoid distortions and come closer to objectivity.

Historian Ilya Zaitsev - on the prosaic reasons for religious tolerance in the Golden Horde and the relevance of Eurasian ideas in modern Russia

At the end of last week in Kazan, an international conference dedicated to the 200th anniversary of Shigabutdin Mardzhani, a well-known Russian orientalist, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences Ilya Zaitsev was invited. " Real time”Talked with a Turkologist on a variety of topics - from the vaunted religious tolerance in the Golden Horde to the historical predetermination of the fall of the Kazan Khanate. For the attention of the readers - the first part of the interview with the historian.

"The Crimean Khan burst into tears when he heard about the desire of St. Petersburg to resettle its Christian subjects"

Ilya Vladimirovich, first, a question for you as the author of an article entitled "On the Rights of Christians in the Crimean Khanate." There is a widespread opinion in Tatarstan that Golden Horde was a very tolerant state. Firstly, do you agree with this, and secondly, what was the situation with religious tolerance in the states-heirs of the Golden Horde?

Indeed, it makes sense to divide this issue into two, because the legal status of Christians in the Golden Horde and in the heir to the states was different. First of all, because the Golden Horde was not a Muslim state for a long time. It became such only in the XIV century, it was then that the Sharia began to be used as a source of law, and then until the XV century it was not everywhere. The customary law, adat, was still used there, and, in addition, there were a lot of people in the Golden Horde who did not profess Islam.

As for the successor states, the situation here is also different. We do not have a very good idea of ​​the situation in the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates, simply because there is no necessary array of sources for this, and those that do exist are not so representative in this sense. But there are a lot of sources in Crimea. We have preserved Kazyasker books (registers of the Sharia court), where there are a lot of points related to jurisprudence Muslims and non-Muslims in the Crimean Khanate. Chronicles have survived, in which this issue is somehow reflected, documents that came out directly from the pen of Crimean Christians, Russian documents that described this situation. Preserved interstate treaties Russian Empire and the Crimean Khanate, in which there were special articles where the rights of Christians were discussed. And, besides, in Crimea, unlike the Golden Horde, Islamic law was already the basis of legislation.

At the same time, not only Christians lived there among non-Muslims. And Christians were different, which is also very important. A fairly large number of Armenians have lived there from time immemorial. There were Greeks who professed Orthodoxy, which is identical to what the Orthodox in Russia now profess. There were a large number of different kinds of infidels, for example, there were Karaites. The legal status of these people was determined by the Sharia norms, that is, by the payment of the poll tax and land tax.

“Not only Christians lived among non-Muslims in Crimea. And Christians were different, which is also very important. " Photo: russian7.ru

In the Crimean Khanate, there were also isolated facts of violence against other religions. For example, this is partly confirmed by the Armenian chronicles. But it is still impossible to say that the Gentiles in this state were severely oppressed. On the contrary, we can always find examples of a fairly peaceful coexistence in this state, otherwise these Christians would not have survived there for a very long time. I would like to remind you that the Christians (Greek-Urums) were withdrawn from the Crimea by Suvorov at the direction of the Russian imperial authorities in the late 70s of the 18th century. That is, they did not leave Crimea on their own, they, in general, were forced to do it almost by force. Yes, the Greek clergy contributed to the conclusion, but it cannot be said that this was the universal desire of the entire people. They were taken to the Azov region, to the territory of modern Ukraine. Now they are practically gone, but once there were quite a few. This is generally a tragic page in the history of the Orthodox population of Crimea, because many then simply died. The eviction was not organized quite correctly, Suvorov did not have the appropriate experience, and people were dying of hunger and from the fact that they had nowhere to settle, they were actually taken out into the bare steppe.

But the most important thing is that this eviction did not find understanding among the khan. When the permanent representative of the Russian Empire at the khan's court Nikiforov announced Shahin Girey about the desire of St. Petersburg to bring Christians out, he, according to Nikiforov's report, wept. It is quite possible that he also had some kind of selfish interest, after all, he was losing his subjects, and this is a financial resource. But Muslims in general did not like this eviction. They were accustomed to living within the framework of coexistence - when there are Muslims and other "people of scripture" who are allowed to perform the rituals of their religion. Let it not be so, perhaps, openly, as Muslims do, but nevertheless. The khan's government also allowed churches to be repaired (although new ones were not allowed to be built). And thanks to this we can now see medieval Orthodox churches and monasteries, say, in the vicinity of Bakhchisarai.

“The bulk of the Horde's population did not know monotheism. And for a pagan, the problem of religious tolerance does not exist "

- So, the withdrawal of the Christians was justified by considerations of their own safety?

From the point of view of imperial power, yes.

- But isn't it strange? It seems that at the end of the 18th century Crimea already was recaptured from the Ottomans?

It is impossible to say "recaptured", there were no hostilities there. It was just Catherine's manifesto. The Empress, realizing that the khan's power was so weakened that she could no longer resist militarily, stationed Russian troops there. It was actually an act of her will, she simply took and annexed Crimea with one movement of her hand.

Catherine II, traveling in her state in 1787. Allegory. Drawing by F. de Meiss. Reproduction lavanda.life

- But wouldn't it be logical from her side, on the contrary, to populate this territory with her “agents”?

Yes, later it was, the resettlement movement followed in the opposite direction. But, by the way, those people who were evicted by Suvorov, for the most part, did not go back. Many have already settled, acquired a household, then, they remembered the hardships of resettlement. Only a few returned, so it cannot be said that it was a powerful reverse Greek movement. These were already immigrants from other regions and countries, they were specially attracted by all kinds of benefits, especially foreigners. That is, it cannot be said that the Orthodox tradition in Crimea is continuous, the Christian population there was changing.

That is, if the Golden Horde was a religiously tolerant state, it was only because it did not have a rigid monotheistic religion and, accordingly, did not have these traditional medieval religious atrocities?

Quite right. The bulk of the population did not know monotheism, they were pagans. And for a pagan, as you know, the problem of religious tolerance does not exist at all. He admits the existence of any God. Therefore, in the Golden Horde there was loyalty not religious, but state. If you serve this state, it doesn't matter who you are by religion. Take even the notorious labels for the Russian metropolitans: the imperial Golden Horde government gave the Russian Church economic benefits that had a specific monetary value. Why did she do it? Because in the Horde this church was, as it were, recognized as their own, it was not an opponent or competitor. In the Crimean Khanate, we also observe religious tolerance, but already relative, within the framework of Islamic law. This is completely different.

"It's too early to bury Eurasianism"

You had another article on which I would like to talk - "Cultural and Religious Aspects of the Integration of the Peoples of Eurasia." It was published in a Eurasian collection dedicated to the 20th anniversary of the speech of Nursultan Nazarbayev, a famous Eurasianist. Don't you think that the peak of popularity of Eurasian ideas in Russia was passed in the 2000s?

It depends on what we mean by Eurasianism. This is a very amorphous term that means different things. Someone here means the original Eurasianism, formed under the influence of Nikolai Danilevsky and Konstantin Leontiev. For example, these are Russian emigrants of the 20-30s of the last century, for whom the main question was: "How to justify the Russian revolution?" Why did they actually start asking them? They lived outside their homeland, they understood that there had been some kind of colossal shift, some kind of catastrophe, but at the same time the empire, nevertheless, had risen. They were looking for an answer to why this happened, and from their point of view, it was done by some kind of unifying force that allowed the imperial power to be realized in the new conditions.

“Lev Gumilyov is also called a Eurasian, and he may have taken something from the ideas of the classics, but he had a different message. Gumilyov did not look for excuses for the existence of Soviet power. In general, he tried to explain the entire course of Russian history by a kind of symbiosis of two or three principles. " Photo: russian7.ru

Lev Gumilyov already had a completely different idea. He is also called a Eurasian, and he may have taken something from the ideas of the classics, but he had a different message. Gumilyov did not look for excuses for the existence of Soviet power. In general, he tried to explain the entire course of Russian history by a kind of symbiosis of two or three principles (he also attributed Buddhists there). And it cannot be said that this is something absolutely unique, these ideas were in the air then. It is no coincidence that at about the same time Olzhas Suleimenov wrote his book "Az and Ya".

Alexander Dugin is already neo-Eurasianism, which in fact is designed to justify something completely different, namely the existence Russian Federation and her current geopolitical aspirations. For Nazarbayev, to be honest, this is an attempt to preserve Kazakhstan in its current two-part coexistence of the Turkic and Slavic parts.

But I do not think that this idea has lost its relevance today. On the contrary, for Russia, it is quite possible that it will still be updated. Simply because the existing non-state concepts, for example, the Russian national state, do not provide an answer to the challenges of our time, which include demography, the growing role of religion in society, and so on. Accordingly, we need to come up with something that can justify the existence of the Russian Federation within its present borders and its present national, cultural and religious composition. The idea of ​​Eurasianism gives answers to these questions at the very least. Therefore, I would not be in a hurry to bury her.

The ending follows

Rustem Shakirov, Anastasia Mikhailova

Ilya Vladimirovich Zaitsev(born August 12, 1973, Moscow) - Russian historian-orientalist, Doctor of Historical Sciences, since 2016 and. O. Director of INION RAS.

Biography

Born in Moscow in the family of Vladimir Sergeevich Zaitsev (born 1942), professor of the Moscow Mining Institute, candidate of technical sciences, and Zaitseva Zoya Aleksandrovna (born 1936).

Graduated from the Historical Archives Institute of the Russian State University for the Humanities (1995) and postgraduate studies at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (1998).

• Candidate of Historical Sciences (1999, dissertation "Documentary sources on the history of relations of post-Horde Turkic state formations with Russia and the Ottoman Empire. 15th - first half of the 16th centuries"). Defended in 1998 at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
• Doctoral dissertation "Crimean historiographic tradition of the 15th-19th centuries: manuscripts, texts and their sources" (2011). Defended on December 6, 2011 at the Russian Academy of Public Administration.

Zaitsev's wife Elizaveta Pavlovna, psychologist. Two daughters Alexander and Vasilisa

Scientific activity

In 1998 he began his career as a junior researcher at the Department of Oriental History of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, from 2000 to 2005 a researcher / senior researcher at the Department of Oriental History of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

• 2005-2009 - Deputy Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences under the leadership of R.B. Rybakov
• 2009-2011 - Head of the Scientific and Publishing Department of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
• Since 2007 - Head of the Center for Oriental Cultures, VGBIL im. M.I. Rudomino;
• 2012-2016 - Scientific advisor to the General Director of the Library of Foreign Literature named after V.I. M.I. Rudomino. Worked under the guidance of E.Yu. Genieva
• June 9 - December 2014 - Deputy General Director of the Bakhchisaray Historical and Cultural Reserve (BIKZ).
• Since 2014 - Associate Professor of the Department of Central Asia and the Caucasus, Institute of Asian and African Countries, Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov.

Main works

Monographs

• Between Moscow and Istanbul: Juchid states, Moscow and the Ottoman Empire (early 15th - first half of the 16th centuries). M .: "Rudomino", 2004.216 p.
• Astrakhan Khanate. M .: Publishing company "Vostochnaya Literatura", 2004. 303 p.
• Arabic, Persian and Turkic manuscripts of the Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts of the Scientific Library of Moscow State University. M .: "Rudomino", 2006.157 p.
• Astrakhan Khanate. 2nd ed., Revised. M .: Publishing company "Vostochnaya Literatura", 2006. 303 p.
• Arabic, Persian and Turkic manuscripts and documents in the Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Catalog. Moscow, Institute of Oriental Studies, 2008.43 p.
• Crimean historiographic tradition of the 15th-19th centuries. Development ways. Manuscripts, texts and sources. M .: Publishing company "Vostochnaya literatura", 2009. 304 p., Ill.

Articles

• Crimean khans: portraits and plots // Eastern collection. Spring 2003.S. 86-93.
• Sheikh-Ahmad - the last khan of the Golden Horde (Horde, Crimean Khanate, Ottoman Empire and Polish-Lithuanian state at the beginning of the 16th century. // From Istanbul to Moscow. Collection of articles in honor of the 100th anniversary of Professor AF Miller. M., 2003.S. 31-52.
• “Forgetting God and our salary, and our soul” (The Adventures of Prince Semyon Fedorovich Belsky) // Ad Fontem / At the source. Collection of articles in honor of Sergei Mikhailovich Kashtanov. M., 2005. S. 298-317.
• Zajcev Il'ja. Notes on the Golden Horde Diplomatic Ceremonial: The Origin of the Word Kore in Russian Slang // Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. Vol. 58 (2005). No. 3. P. 295-298.
• Zaytsev I. The Structure of the Giray Dinasty (15th-16th centuries): Matrimonial and Kinship Relations of the Crimean Khans // Kinship in the Altaic World. Proceedings of the 48th Permanent International Altaistic Conference. Moscow. 10-15 July, 2005. Edited by Elena V. Boikova and Rostislav B. Rybakov. Wiesbaden, 2006. P. 342-353.
• Written culture of the Crimean Khanate // Eastern Archives, 2006, no. 14-15. S. 87-93.
• Ode to Bakhchisaray (Crimean Tatar Turks from the anonymous Ottoman junk) // Basileus. Collection of articles dedicated to the 60th anniversary of D.D. Vasilyeva. M., 2007. S. 157-163.
• Arab, Persian and Turkic manuscripts and documents of the Moscow collections: results and prospects of study (the experience of the reference and bibliographic index) // Written monuments of the East. No. 2 (7). 2007.S. 252-278.
• The family of Haji-Giray // Altaica XII. M., 2007. S. 64-71.
• Crimean Khanate in the XV-XVI centuries // Essays on the history of Islamic civilization. T. 2. Under the general editorship of Yu.M. Kobishanov. M., 2008. S. 143-146.
• Polish-Lithuanian Tatars // Essays on the history of Islamic civilization. T. 2. Under the general editorship of Yu.M. Kobishanov. M., 2008. S. 146-148.
• Crimean khans in exile in Rhodes // Eastern collection. Summer 2009. No 2 (37). S. 96-101.
• Collection of Ottoman manuscripts in Moscow // Science in Russia. July-August, No. 4, 2009. S. 63-67.
• Mamai's father // Mamai. The experience of a historiographic anthology. Kazan, 2010.S. 198-205.
• Crimean Khanate: Vassalage or Independence? // Ottoman World and Ottoman Studies. Collection of articles dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the birth of A.S. Tveritinova (1910-1973). M., 2010.S. 288-298.
• Zaytsev Ilya. The Crimean Khanate between Empires: Independence or Submission // Empires and Peninsulas. Southeastern Europe between Karlowitz and the Peace of Adrianople, 1699-1829. P. Mitev, M. Baramova, V. Racheva (eds.). Mnster, Lit Verlag, 2010. P. 25-27.
• Zaitsev I. “The history of the Tatar khans, Dagestan, Moscow and the peoples of Desht-i Kipchak” Ibrahim b. Ali Kefevi. Compilation or fake? // Falsification of historical sources and construction of ethnocratic myths. M., 2011.S. 198-207.
• Zaytsev lya, Demirolu Hasan. Rusya limler Akademisi Arivi'nde Bulunan Trk ve Trk Halklaryla lgili Baz Ariv Belgelerinin Tantlmas // Trakya niversitesi Edebiyat Fakltesi Dergisi. Cilt 1, Say 1. Ocak 2011. Edirne. S. 74-87.

Documentary film

• One of the authors of the film "Ancient Türks"

Education and degrees: Graduated from the Moscow State Historical and Archival Institute of the Russian State University for the Humanities (1995).

Candidate of Historical Sciences. Thesis topic: "Documentary sources on the history of diplomatic relations of the post-Golden Horde states with Russia and the Ottoman Empire (15th - lane half of the 16th century)." Defended at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IO RAS) in 1998.

Doctor of Historical Sciences. Thesis topic: “Crimean historiographic tradition of the 15th-19th centuries. Development ways. Manuscripts, texts and sources ”. Defended on December 6, 2011 at the Russian Academy of Public Administration.

Labor activity: 1998-2000 - Junior Researcher of the Department of Oriental History of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

2000-2002 - Researcher of the Department of Oriental History of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

2002-2005 - Senior Researcher of the Department of Oriental History of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

2005-2009 - Deputy Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

2009-2011 - Head of the Scientific and Publishing Department of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

2012-2016 - Scientific advisor to the Director General of the Library of Foreign Literature named after V.I. M. I. Rudomino.

2013 - Visiting Professor at the Center for Eurasian and Slavic Studies, Hokkaido University (Sapporo, Japan).

In 2014 - Deputy Director of the Bakhchisaray Historical and Cultural Reserve.

Associate Professor of the Department of Central Asia and the Caucasus, ISAA, Moscow State University (since 2012); leading researcher of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Senior Researcher, IRI RAS (since 2012).

From 2016 to 2018, he held the position of Acting Director of the INION RAS.

Region scientific interests: Turkic studies, eastern archeography, history of the Golden Horde, the Crimean and Kazan khanates, Russia and the East.

Selected publications

Zaitsev I.V. Astrakhan Khanate. 2nd ed., Rev. Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura, 2006. (PDF, 63.4 Mb).

Zaitsev I.V. M., 2009. (PDF, 9.8 MB).

Zaitsev I.V. Between Moscow and Istanbul: Juchid states, Moscow and the Ottoman Empire (early 15th - lane half of the 16th centuries): Essays. M., 2004. (PDF, 6.87 MB).

Featured videos

See also:

• Seminar IV Zaitsev "Methodology for describing arabographic manuscripts and early printed books"
• I.V. Zaitsev received gratitude from the Ambassador of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Dr. Ilya Zaytsev

Ilya Zaytsev graduated from the Russian State University for the Humanities in 1995. He received his Ph.D. ( kandidat nauk) in history at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1998 and his Sc.D. ( doktor nauk), also in history, at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration in 2011.

He was a researcher at the Institute of Oriental Studies in 1998–2000, a senior researcher in 2002–2005, a deputy director in 2005–2009, and a head of the publications department in 2009–11. In 2012–16 he worked at the Margarita Rudomino All-Russia State Library for Foreign Literature as an advisor of the director on research work. At the same time he was a visiting professor at Hokkaido University (Sapporo, Japan) in 2013. Since 2012 he is an associate professor of the Moscow State University, a leading researcher at the Institute of Oriental Studies and a senior researcher at the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Ilya Zaytsev is an author of several monographs and more than 300 articles in Russian, Turkish, English, French etc. His research interests are Turkology, Oriental archeorgraphy, Russia and the East, history of the Golden Horde, of the Crimean Khanate, and of the Khanate of Kazan.