INTRODUCTION
The Siberian industrialist (in Siberia, every hunter is called an industrialist, and every hunt is a trade) does not know that high hunting, in which a well-trained pointing dog plays the first role, marsh hunting - for snipes, harshneps, great snipes, young black grouse, and so on. . He does not even know how to shoot game on the fly; and if, especially in some backwater of remote Siberia, he sees someone beating a bird in flight, he considers this a devilish obsession, he will certainly spit, step aside, and, perhaps, will not even speak to him. And that he shrugged his shoulders, smacked his lips, tugged at the back of his head - that's probably. In a word, there will be no end to the surprise. The Siberian industrialist does not know all the charm of that moment when a well-trained dog makes a stand! Come real Siberian hunter in European Russia, go he with someone to swamp hunting, he will be completely lost man; he does not even know what a great snipe, snipe is, he does not know this beauty of the marsh kingdom. Unfortunate, many hunters will think, how can you not know the great snipe? how can you not know snipe? But if such a mocking hunter came across to us, to the East, and he went into the forest with a Siberian industrialist, he would show him his prowess; and it is unlikely that the swamp hunter will then envy the Siberian animal trader, the vigilance of his eye, his tirelessness, knowledge of his business, dexterity and accuracy. It is difficult for such a hunter to get used to real Siberian hunting, it takes a lot of time to learn all its secrets. All this applied to me, who had just arrived from Russia in Eastern Siberia and was familiar only with swamps and great snipes, lakes and ducks, forests and hazel grouses, fields and hares; for a long time I could not get acquainted with the local hunting and listened to a lot of sarcastic remarks and fair barbs from fur-catchers before I got used to the taiga and became a real hunter myself. At the present time, I myself look at the great snipe and the snipe with almost the same eyes that a Siberian sometimes looks at them. This is what the excess of other game means in our area. Not without reason, when I once, while hunting with the local animal trader, killed a snipe and brought it to a friend for show, he turned it in his hands, looked at me mockingly, shook the snipe in his palm and said: “Why are you beating such a stramid, don’t you feel sorry for charge? What's the use of it? You won't be full, there's no benefit, in the purse (pocket) loss. " Perhaps he is fair. After all, the same charge here could easily kill a steppe hen or a goat: here the dignity of game is weighed on priestly scales; it is valued for its size and considerable weight. However, I don’t think that even in Russia a hunter would chase a harchnep when there is an opportunity to kill a capercaillie or a goose ... So, a hunter is a retail hunter, both are good in their place, in their field. I don't know who to call a real hunter. Is it the one who accurately shoots at snipes, at snipes, but does not dare to go at a bear or a wild boar? Or the one who will spit on a snipe, and save a charge for big game, steal one bear in the wild and knock him down with one shot? It is rather difficult to decide, but it seems to me that a real hunter is one who is able to beat any game. In Eastern Siberia, it is rare to find such a house where there would be no gun, but there are also those where you will find several of them. Here rare person not an industrialist. Of course, there are no rules without exception; it happens that there are also Siberians who, having never been born, have never shot, but this is already a rarity. Everyone here knows the simple, ordinary hunting technique - old and young.
A. SHOTGUN
A gun in the general sense of the word is called any gun: single-barreled, double-barreled, rifle and fitting. But a Siberian hunter rarely pronounces the word gun: he calls a shotgun a shotgun, and a rifle or a fitting - a rifle or a squeaker. At present, it is not worth talking about the former, ancient and famous, guns, such as, for example, Starbus, Morgenrot, Lazaroni (Cuminacho), Kinlenz and others; why remember them when the current guns of famous masters far surpass them in finishing and are not inferior in battle! Especially in recent times, gunsmithing has advanced greatly, and former celebrities are extremely rare and are the decorations of the armories and offices of wealthy people. Today there are so many good gunsmiths that it is difficult to remember the names of all of them. You do not know which of them to give primacy - all are good; but still I cannot but point out the shotguns of Lepage, Mortimer, Colet and the Lebeda fitting. Of the Russians, I happened to see decent Goltyakov guns. I have two English shotguns, a Mortimer and a Richardson, and I confess I have rarely seen the like. What strength in work, dapperness in decoration, strength and strength of battle! Unions have lately made a lot of noise and alarm, not in one class of hunters, but in the whole world; what a revolution they made in the organization of the troops themselves! The systems of their device are extremely different, but these differences did not have great influence hunting, because the main reason is range, and in the hunting world it does not play such important role like in the military. Why, for example, would a hunter have a military fitting that hits 1600 paces? After all, a game hunter will never have to shoot at such a distance, and if he doesn’t aim well at such a distance, he won’t take his eyes.
If the choke hits 100 or 150 fathoms well, the hunter doesn't need anything else; With this rifle you can shoot at anything. What will you see in the forest, not to mention more often, further a hundred sazhens, especially in the uncleared Siberian forests - in a word, in the taiga? Try to tell the local industrialist that you have killed a goat or a wolf for 200 or more sazhens - he will tear his tummies over you and, perhaps, will say without ceremony: "What a slob you are," that is, a liar. Indeed, it is impossible to target a goat or a wolf with the naked eye at such a distance. No matter how small the rear sight on a rifle or fitting is, after 200 or even 150 fathoms it should completely cover a small animal, a wolf or a goat. The hunter, looking through the cut (slit on the sight) and aiming the end pillar at the object, will not see the latter until he takes the end of the barrel a little to one side or the other or below the target animal. The question is, what is the fidelity of the shot? And why shoot at such a distance, when every beast almost always let the hunter to a much closer distance. Wouldn't bustards or steppe chickens, frightened by the shots of hunters, walk around the wide steppe, let them get closer to this distance? But, in my opinion, then it is better not to shoot at all and not to frighten them even more, because such a shot will be fired in vain, or a whim. Of course, out of a thousand such wind shots, it may happen only once or twice to kill the fatal bustard.
We have few shotguns in Eastern Siberia; it is loaded with rifles. Why Siberians don't respect shotguns is very clear if we just look into their position and understand Siberian hunting. Namely, because lead and gunpowder are quite difficult and expensive to get here, and it is known that a shotgun requires a much larger charge than a rifle. But this is not enough. It is much more profitable for a Siberian to hunt with a rifle than with a shotgun: with a rifle he hits everything that gets in his eyes: a bear, a hazel grouse, and a duck, and with a shotgun he does not dare to go at a predatory beast. In addition, the Siberian has been accustomed to a rifle since childhood; shotgun is already a whim. On this basis, merchants extremely rarely bring shotguns to us for sale, and therefore almost all of them ended up in Transbaikalia only with those people who brought them not at all for sale, but out of their own need - people who serve, immigrants. For the most part, among the local commoners, note hunters, almost all shotguns are made from the barrels of soldiers' rifles and some, it should be noted, hit no worse than the former Lazaroni and Starbuses; there is no need that the barrel and trigger are sometimes tied to the bed with various straps and ropes. The Siberian does not pursue the beauty and finish of a gun - he needs a good, strong fight in it, and not the elegance of work; look at how he treats his hunting companion rudely - he deliberately wets him with water and never cleans the outside so that the gun, covered with rust, will never flash in the sun during the hunt and thus will not frighten the game; but for the inside of the trunk, he looks vigilantly and keeps it very clean. First I'll talk about shotguns, and then I'll deal with rifle and carbine. Many hunters, especially people from a simple rank, think that the longer and more executing a shotgun, the farther and more accurately it hits, but this cannot be taken as a constant norm, because this rule is not always true. I have known many guns with extremely short barrels, but with excellent action; it also happened a lot to see guns of excellent dapper finish, with rather long barrels that hit very unenviably; on the other hand, it was possible to shoot from those that were tied in several places with washcloths and ropes, but excellently hit with any shot, both large and small. However, this truth, I believe, is known to many hunters.
Author's preface to the first edition (1867)
I am writing this preface for the sole purpose of enabling the reader to get to know me in advance and not to look in my notes for something that is not in them, or to judge them too harshly. Of course, if the reader is a passionate hunter, like me, he will not pay attention to weak sides of my work in literary terms, but will only look for what interests him or what he still does not know. But the literary reader will forgive me my awkward handling of the pen. The passion for hunting and the desire to convey many truths and secrets known only to the hunters of Eastern Siberia overcame my doubts about my literary ability, and I decided to write what my hunting experience gave me. I am sure of one thing, that my work will be useful to many, many hunters, and I don’t need anything else.
If possible, I will try to present my notes in the simplest, most understandable language, but, excuse me, with a Siberian tinge.
The reader may well rely on my notes; I did not write unfounded, but always from the facts. What I have not seen, I have not experienced myself, I do not claim that. If something is taken from the words of other hunters, then this is just as true as what is written from the facts. Do not think that these notes belong to a hunter who loves a red word (it is a pity that hunters have such an unenviable reputation), but take them for notes of a passionate Siberian industrialist and at the same time an observer.
My descriptions are sometimes too detailed, sometimes too short. What to do? What is rich, so happy!
At first I thought to describe absolutely everything that can be related to hunting; but when he took up the pen, he saw that it would be a huge work. So, about one technical part of the hunt, analyzing it on purpose, you can write entire volumes. But where would that lead?.. To describe the forging and preparation of barrels, etc., is the business of special special manuals. Therefore, regarding the technical part of the hunt, I only talk about what every Siberian hunter needs to know. I am silent about the well-known breeds of dogs, such as: pointers, hounds, greyhounds, about their training, coaching, keeping, and the like, but I am talking about dogs that are not yet known to many hunters - about Siberian dogs. In addition, I do not know well hunting with greyhounds and hounds, because from a young age I came to Eastern Siberia, where there are almost no such dogs. I also almost never mention pointing dogs, because Siberians do not use them at all in animal trade.
In order to acquaint readers with the Siberian local dialect, with Siberian technical expressions, where it happens, I will purposely use them, of course, only with explanations, because there are some of them that are not at all understandable to a non-Siberian.
My work is divided into two parts: in the first I talk briefly about the technical part of hunting (mainly Siberian), about guns in general, about dogs, and so on, and in the second I talk about animals living in Eastern Siberia, their life, customs, getting and so on, on occasion I try to acquaint the reader with the Siberian industrialist (hunter), with his way of life, habits, and superstitions. I do not describe hunting for birds, because in Eastern Siberia it is negligible compared to animal hunting. Of the birds, the Siberian beats only capercaillie, kosach, hazel grouse, partridge, swan (many foreigners do not beat swans), goose, ducks, steppe chicken (drokhva) - that's all; he is unfamiliar with the rest, they are not created for him.
Preface to the second edition
Upon the release of the first edition of the Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia in 1867, modern journalism of that time announced so many flattering reviews that I, as an author, could not help but rejoice at the favorable reception of my work by the press, and even more glad that my hunting notes produced pleasant impression not only for hunters, but also for people who have a vague idea of \u200b\u200bhunting. It is clear that pleasant reviews touched my heart, then still young, hunting soul. That is why at the same time I decided at the first opportunity to supplement Zapiski somewhat and publish it in a second edition. But ... Oh, this is a "but"! Not everything is done the way you want, the way you think. Almost 14 years have passed since 1867, and I still have not had a chance to fulfill my desire; I contented myself only with the fact that from time to time I supplemented the Notes with new information, new observations and borrowings from other works. Although the latter are very few, they still exist, and they exist because in some cases other people's observations came in very handy as characterizing the subject being described and replenishing what was either omitted or not noticed by oneself, but in essence there is on really. Since 1867, a lot of water has flowed under the bridge, a lot has changed in many ways, a lot has changed in hunting technology, but technology, so to speak, is intelligent. The native technique of the Siberian animal-breeding industrialist remained almost untouchable, and modern culture did not touch her; even now it breathes the same naive simplicity, the same primitiveness and is unfamiliar with the applications of the wise West. Our Siberia, in the sense of the hunting industry, has remained, really, almost the same Siberian Siberia as it has been since the time of Ermak Timofeevich. It is clear that the animals I have described are in the same stagnation, for the 14-year period is too short for those creations of nature that are still outside the will and culture of human progress. But, perhaps, this is partly good, otherwise our boundless Siberia, with its vast wilds and impenetrable taiga, would be enough for a while! and more accessible and not so terrible, and the endless wilds thin out almost every hour, and the unfortunate animals noticeably decrease in number or wander into the still untouched hiding places of the Siberian slums. All this, of course, is sad for the hunter, but time takes its toll, and there's nothing to be done, you have to put up willy-nilly, and it's useless to sigh, remembering the old hunting space. Sigh, don’t sigh, but be content with the fact that Siberia will still be enough for our lifetime, and, perhaps, something will remain for the grandchildren ... Well, I’ve been talking like a hunter, forgive me, reader; as well as excuse me for the fact that in the second edition of the book I am silent about the modern hunting weapon educated world. Those who need it will get to know him even without me, the “yellow-mouthed” Siberian. In fact, so much has already been written and rewritten about the guns of new systems that one involuntarily becomes stumped - which system and factory should be preferred? The magazine "Hunting and Nature" is filled with all kinds of opinions and bickering of modern hunters, and we can only read about daily innovations and often wonder how modern technology, and the price that appears in any price list of hunting depots, not only for guns of famous masters, but also for hunting fads. I sincerely sympathize with those brothers in arms who, with a clenched heart, can only look at such fabulous price lists, and once again I dare to think that the Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia will be at least somewhat useful to them.
For the second edition, I put new article"Capercaillie", which was written several years ago and was supposed to be published in a journal, but ... and again this "but" prevented here too, so my unfortunate "Capercaillie" rested in the trash of papers and notes until the opportunity presented itself to print notes in the second edition . In my book "Capercaillie", perhaps, it is inopportune, for which I ask for indulgence, but I place it only because this bird is highly respected in the world of Siberian industrialists and is exterminated by them in in large numbers. Once upon a time I had a desire to write notes about the birds of Eastern Siberia, both settled and migratory in the mass that fills the Daurian forests, fields, steppes and waters, but this is such an enormous work that it frightened me, and it occurred to me that self-justification that writing "Birds" is not worth it, especially because they are excellently described by S. T. Aksakov.
Current page: 1 (total book has 46 pages) [accessible reading excerpt: 31 pages]
Alexander Alexandrovich Cherkasov
Notes of a hunter of Eastern Siberia
Author's preface to the first edition (1867)
I am writing this preface for the sole purpose of enabling the reader to get to know me in advance and not to look in my notes for something that is not in them, or to judge them too harshly. Of course, if the reader is a passionate hunter, like me, he will not pay attention to the weaknesses of my work in terms of literature, but will only look for what interests him or what he does not yet know. But the literary reader will forgive me my awkward handling of the pen. The passion for hunting and the desire to convey many truths and secrets known only to the hunters of Eastern Siberia overcame my doubts about my literary abilities, and I decided to write what my hunting experience gave me. I am sure of one thing, that my work will be useful to many, many hunters, and I don’t need anything else.
If possible, I will try to present my notes in the simplest, most understandable language, but, excuse me, with a Siberian tinge.
The reader may well rely on my notes; I did not write unfounded, but always from the facts. What I have not seen, I have not experienced myself, I do not claim that. If something is taken from the words of other hunters, then this is just as true as what is written from the facts. Do not think that these notes belong to a hunter who loves a red word (it is a pity that hunters have such an unenviable reputation), but take them for notes of a passionate Siberian industrialist and at the same time an observer.
My descriptions are sometimes too detailed, sometimes too short. What to do? What is rich, so happy!
At first I thought to describe absolutely everything that can be related to hunting; but when he took up the pen, he saw that it would be a huge work. So, about one technical part of the hunt, analyzing it on purpose, you can write entire volumes. But where would that lead?.. To describe the forging and preparation of barrels, etc., is the business of special special manuals. Therefore, regarding the technical part of the hunt, I only talk about what every Siberian hunter needs to know. I am silent about the well-known breeds of dogs, such as: pointers, hounds, greyhounds, about their training, coaching, keeping, and the like, but I am talking about dogs that are not yet known to many hunters - about Siberian dogs. In addition, I do not know well hunting with greyhounds and hounds, because from a young age I came to Eastern Siberia, where there are almost no such dogs. I also almost never mention pointing dogs, because Siberians do not use them at all in animal trade.
In order to acquaint readers with the Siberian local dialect, with Siberian technical expressions, where it happens, I will purposely use them, of course, only with explanations, because there are some of them that are not at all understandable to a non-Siberian.
My work is divided into two parts: in the first I talk briefly about the technical part of hunting (mainly Siberian), about guns in general, about dogs, and so on, and in the second I talk about animals living in Eastern Siberia, their life, customs, getting and so on, on occasion I try to acquaint the reader with the Siberian industrialist (hunter), with his way of life, habits, and superstitions. I do not describe hunting for birds, because in Eastern Siberia it is negligible compared to animal hunting. Of the birds, the Siberian beats only capercaillie, kosach, hazel grouse, partridge, swan (many foreigners do not beat swans), goose, ducks, steppe chicken (drokhva) - that's all; he is unfamiliar with the rest, they are not created for him.
Preface to the second edition
Upon the release of the first edition of Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia in 1867, modern journalism of that time received so many flattering reviews that I, as an author, could not help but rejoice at the favorable reception of my work by the press, and even more glad that my hunting notes made a good impression not only for hunters, but also for people who have a vague idea of \u200b\u200bhunting. It is clear that pleasant reviews touched my heart, then still young, hunting soul. That is why at the same time I decided at the first opportunity to supplement Zapiski somewhat and publish it in a second edition. But ... Oh, this is a "but"! Not everything is done the way you want, the way you think. Almost 14 years have passed since 1867, and I still have not had a chance to fulfill my desire; I contented myself only with the fact that from time to time I supplemented the Notes with new information, new observations and borrowings from other works. Although the latter are very few, they still exist, and they exist because in some cases other people's observations came in very handy as characterizing the subject being described and replenishing what was either omitted or not noticed by oneself, but in essence there is on really. Since 1867, a lot of water has flowed under the bridge, a lot has changed in many ways, a lot has changed in hunting technology, but technology, so to speak, is intelligent. The native technique of the Siberian animal-breeding industrialist remained almost untouchable, and modern culture has not touched it; even now it breathes the same naive simplicity, the same primitiveness and is unfamiliar with the applications of the wise West. Our Siberia, in the sense of the hunting industry, has remained, really, almost the same Siberian Siberia as it has been since the time of Ermak Timofeevich. It is clear that the animals I have described are in the same stagnation, for the 14-year period is too short for those creations of nature that are still outside the will and culture of human progress. But, perhaps, this is partly good, otherwise our boundless Siberia, with its vast wilds and impenetrable taiga, would be enough for a while! and more accessible and not so terrible, and the endless wilds thin out almost every hour, and the unfortunate animals noticeably decrease in number or wander into the still untouched hiding places of the Siberian slums. All this, of course, is sad for the hunter, but time takes its toll, and there's nothing to be done, you have to put up willy-nilly, and it's useless to sigh, remembering the old hunting space. Sigh, don’t sigh, but be content with the fact that Siberia will still be enough for our lifetime, and, perhaps, something will remain for the grandchildren ... Well, I’ve been talking like a hunter, forgive me, reader; as well as excuse me for the fact that in the second edition of the book I am silent about the modern hunting weapons of the educated world. Those who need it will get to know him even without me, the “yellow-mouthed” Siberian. In fact, so much has already been written and rewritten about the guns of new systems that one involuntarily becomes stumped - which system and factory should be preferred? Magazine "Hunting and Nature" 1
... The magazine "Hunting and Nature" ... - The magazine of L.P. Sabaneev was called "Nature and Hunting".
It is filled with all sorts of opinions and bickerings of modern hunters, and we can only read about daily innovations and often be surprised both by modern technology and the price that appears in any price list of hunting depots, not only for guns of famous masters, but also for hunting fads. I sincerely sympathize with those brothers in arms who, with a clenched heart, can only look at such fabulous price lists, and once again I dare to think that the Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia will be at least somewhat useful to them.
In the second edition, I am publishing a new article, "Capercaillie", which was written several years ago and was supposed to be published in the journal, but ... and again this "but" got in the way here too, so that my unfortunate "Capercaillie" rested in the trash of papers and notes until the opportunity presents itself to print the notes in the second edition. In my book "Capercaillie", perhaps, it is inopportune, for which I ask for indulgence, but I place it only because this bird is highly respected in the world of Siberian industrialists and is exterminated by them in large numbers. Once upon a time I had a desire to write notes about the birds of Eastern Siberia, both settled and migratory in the mass that fills the Daurian forests, fields, steppes and waters, but this is such an enormous work that it frightened me, and it occurred to me that self-justification that writing "Birds" is not worth it, especially because they are excellently described by S. T. Aksakov.
Part one
The technical part of the hunt
Introduction
The Siberian industrialist (in Siberia, every hunter is called an industrialist, and every hunt is a trade) does not know that high hunting, in which a well-trained pointing dog plays the first role, marsh hunting - for snipes, harps, great snipes, young black grouse, and so on. . He does not even know how to shoot game on the fly; and if, especially in some backwater of remote Siberia, he sees someone beating a bird in flight, he considers this a devilish obsession, he will certainly spit, step aside, and, perhaps, will not even speak to him. And that he shrugged his shoulders, smacked his lips, tugged at the back of his head - that's probably. In a word, there will be no end to the surprise. The Siberian industrialist does not know all the charm of that moment when a well-trained dog makes a stand! Come a real Siberian hunter to European Russia, go hunting with someone in the swamp, there will be a completely lost person; he does not even know what a great snipe, snipe is, he does not know this beauty of the marsh kingdom. Unfortunate, many hunters will think, how can you not know the great snipe? how can you not know snipe? But if such a mocking hunter came across to us, to the East, and he went into the forest with a Siberian industrialist, he would show him his prowess; and it is unlikely that the swamp hunter will then envy the Siberian animal trader, the vigilance of his eye, his tirelessness, knowledge of his business, dexterity and accuracy. It is difficult for such a hunter to get used to real Siberian hunting, it takes a lot of time to learn all its secrets. All this applied to me, who had just arrived from Russia in Eastern Siberia and was familiar only with swamps and great snipes, lakes and ducks, forests and hazel grouses, fields and hares; for a long time I could not get acquainted with the local hunting and listened to a lot of sarcastic remarks and fair barbs from fur-catchers before I got used to the taiga and became a real hunter myself. At the present time, I myself look at the great snipe and the snipe with almost the same eyes that a Siberian sometimes looks at them. This is what the excess of other game means in our area. Not without reason, when I once, while hunting with the local animal trader, killed a snipe and brought it to a comrade for show, he turned it in his hands, looked at me mockingly, shook the snipe in his palm and said: “Why are you beating such a stramid, don’t you feel sorry for charge? What's the use of it? You won’t be full, there’s no benefit, there’s a loss in the pocket (pocket). Perhaps he is fair. After all, the same charge here could easily kill a steppe hen or a goat: here the dignity of game is weighed on priestly scales; it is valued for its size and considerable weight. However, I don’t think that even in Russia a hunter would chase a harchnep when there is an opportunity to kill a capercaillie or a goose ... So, a hunter is a retail hunter, both are good in their place, in their field. I don't know who to call a real hunter. Is it the one who accurately shoots at snipes, at snipes, but does not dare to go at a bear or a wild boar? Or the one who will spit on a snipe, and save a charge for big game, steal one bear in the wild and knock him down with one shot? It is rather difficult to decide, but it seems to me that a real hunter is one who is able to beat any game. In Eastern Siberia, it is rare to find such a house where there would be no gun, but there are also those where you will find several of them. Here a rare person is not an industrialist. Of course, there are no rules without exception; it happens that there are also Siberians who, having never been born, have never shot, but this is already a rarity. Everyone here knows the simple, ordinary hunting technique - old and small.
A. Rougier 2
At present, gunsmithing has gone so far ahead that I, as a Siberian, have little knowledge of rapid-fire weapons. various systems, I am silent about them and leave my story only about ordinary guns, the old system.
A gun in the general sense of the word is called any gun: single-barreled, double-barreled, rifle and fitting. But a Siberian hunter rarely utters the word gun: he calls a shotgun a shotgun, and a rifle or a carbine a rifle or a squeaker. At present, it is not worth talking about the former, ancient and famous, guns, such as, for example, Starbus, Morgenrot, Lazaroni (Cuminacho), Kinlenz and others; why remember them when the current guns of famous masters far surpass them in finishing and are not inferior in battle! Especially in recent times, gunsmithing has advanced greatly, and former celebrities are extremely rare and are the decorations of the armories and offices of wealthy people. Today there are so many good gunsmiths that it is difficult to remember the names of all of them. You don’t know which of them to give primacy to - they are all good; but still I cannot but point out the shotguns of Lepage, Mortimer, Colet and the Lebeda fitting. Of the Russians, I happened to see decent Goltyakov guns. I have two English shotguns, a Mortimer and a Richardson, and I confess I have rarely seen the like. What strength in work, dapperness in decoration, strength and strength of battle! Unions have lately made a lot of noise and alarm, not in one class of hunters, but in the whole world; what a revolution they made in the organization of the troops themselves! The systems of their device are extremely different, but these differences did not have much effect on hunting, because the main reason is long-range, and in the hunting world it does not play such an important role as in the military. Why, for example, would a hunter have a military fitting that hits 1600 paces? After all, a game hunter will never have to shoot at such a distance, and if he doesn’t aim well at such a distance, he won’t take his eyes.
If the choke hits 100 or 150 fathoms well, the hunter doesn't need anything else; With this rifle you can shoot at anything. What will you see in the forest, not to mention more often, further a hundred sazhens, especially in the uncleared Siberian forests - in a word, in the taiga? Try to tell the local industrialist that you killed a goat or a wolf for 200 or more sazhens - he will tear his tummies over you and, perhaps, he will say without ceremony: “What a slob you are,” that is, a liar. Indeed, it is impossible to target a goat or a wolf with the naked eye at such a distance. No matter how small the rear sight on a rifle or fitting is, after 200 or even 150 fathoms it should completely cover a small animal, a wolf or a goat. The hunter, looking through the cut (slit on the sight) and aiming the end pillar at the object, will not see the latter until he takes the end of the barrel a little to one side or the other or below the target animal. The question is, what is the fidelity of the shot? And why shoot at such a distance, when every beast almost always let the hunter to a much closer distance. Wouldn't bustards or steppe chickens, frightened by the shots of hunters, walk around the wide steppe, let them get closer to this distance? But, in my opinion, then it is better not to shoot at all and not to frighten them even more, because such a shot will be fired in vain, or a whim. Of course, out of a thousand such wind shots, it may happen only once or twice to kill the fatal bustard.
We have few shotguns in Eastern Siberia; it is loaded with rifles. Why Siberians don't respect shotguns is very clear if we just look into their position and understand Siberian hunting. Namely, because lead and gunpowder are quite difficult and expensive to get here. 3
Before, when the silver-smelting Nerchinsk factories were still operating, then there was plenty of lead everywhere. But at the present time, when the factories are not operating, there is extreme poverty in lead, and local industrialists often pay up to 50 kopecks per pound of lead. ser.
And it is known that a shotgun requires a much larger charge than a rifle. But this is not enough. It is much more profitable for a Siberian to hunt with a rifle than with a shotgun: with a rifle he hits everything that gets in his eyes: a bear, a hazel grouse, and a duck, and with a shotgun he does not dare to go at a predatory beast. In addition, the Siberian has been accustomed to a rifle since childhood; shotgun is already a whim. On this basis, merchants extremely rarely bring shotguns to us for sale, and therefore almost all of them ended up in Transbaikalia only with those people who brought them not at all for sale, but out of their own need - people who serve, immigrants. For the most part, among the local commoners, note hunters, almost all shotguns are made from the barrels of soldiers' rifles and some, it should be noted, hit no worse than the former Lazaroni and Starbuses; there is no need that the barrel and trigger are sometimes tied to the bed with various straps and ropes. The Siberian does not pursue the beauty and finish of a gun - he needs a good, strong fight in it, and not the elegance of work; look at how he treats his hunting companion rudely - he purposely wets him with water and never cleans the outside so that the gun, covered with rust, will never flash in the sun during the hunt and thus will not frighten the game; but for the inside of the trunk, he looks vigilantly and keeps it very clean. First I'll talk about shotguns, and then I'll deal with rifle and carbine. Many hunters, especially people from a simple rank, think that the longer and more executing a shotgun, the farther and more accurately it hits, but this cannot be taken as a constant norm, because this rule is not always true. I have known many guns with extremely short barrels, but with excellent action; it also happened a lot to see guns of excellent dapper finish, with rather long barrels that hit very unenviably; on the other hand, it was possible to shoot from those that were tied in several places with washcloths and ropes, but excellently hit with any shot, both large and small. However, this truth, I believe, is known to many hunters.
Without deviating from my convictions, based on experience, I still have to admit and, as it were, agree with the common people that from simple guns (our work) they hit further, harder and harder, in which the trunks are long and executing. Your will, and it's true. I don’t know if the way of drilling shotguns and fitting them to the target is done differently by ordinary craftsmen than in factories.
For this reason, absolutely no advice can be given when buying guns from shops or from masters. And what could be better than a test in this regard? Shooting at the target and, even better, at the game will show the dignity and disadvantages. But here is a strange way of choosing guns, used by simple hunters; on what it is based - I can not explain. When choosing, the hunter takes a gun, puts it vertically on the butt (on the stock), puts it with his hand (with the pulp of the palm of thumb) on the muzzle and firmly presses. Then he looks - the stronger the impression left on the hand from the edges of the muzzle and the darker the middle, equal to its inside, the better the gun is considered. Such guns, they say, hit far and hard. Out of curiosity, I tested this method many times on all kinds of guns - the result was correct.
Here, shotguns are usually tried in this way: they put some kind of wooden target and begin to shoot at it with full real charges with small shot at 50 and 60 steps, and with large shot at 70 and even 80. If the gun hits accurately and hard at such a distance, it is approved; if it scatters and the grains do not enter the tree deeply, it is rejected. But here is a good test of a gun (shotgun), which I have repeatedly tested: load the gun with an average shot and shoot in the winter in the big cold at a crow at 50 or 60 paces, and if you kill him on the spot, boldly take such a gun. The strength of a raven to a wound is amazing: once I shot him, sitting on a stump at a distance of 30 fathoms, with a conical bullet from a fitting; The raven rose as if healthy, but, having flown 50 sazhens to the side, fell as if struck by thunder. Lifting it up, I saw that the bullet had passed through the very middle of the side, under the wing near the humerus.
I consider it superfluous to speak of the degree of caution with which the local Iroquois treat their loaded guns. But I cannot fail to cite here one incident that happened to me, which every time I speak of it makes me shudder. There he is. I once went in the winter for goats through the forest; I didn’t see anything, I was tired and, seeing the icy scum raised up like a mountain on the spring, I went to him to get drunk. He climbed to the very top and looked for water, but on smooth ice slipped and fell on his right side. The fitting fell out of my hand and rolled downhill with scum on the ice, constantly touching the bumps and bouncing, down with the butt, and towards me with the barrel; I had not yet had time to jump to my feet, when suddenly I was doused with fine ice dust. The fitting, flying down, hit something with the trigger and fired, the conical bullet hit the ice not more than a half inch away from me; I shuddered, took off my hat and involuntarily crossed myself...
Instead of talking about how decent guns should be maintained, which, of course, is well known to every hunter, I will say a few words, as a Siberian industrialist washes his self-propelled guns. First of all, it should be noted that, due to his laziness, he does this very rarely and carelessly, especially with a shotgun. With a rifle, he is somewhat more delicate. In fact, the Siberian, as soon as the turn comes to wash the gun, almost every time he unscrews the breech screw from him, or just the breech, and then he already rinses the barrel in the usual way. If it is impossible or too lazy to turn off the breech, he closes the seed with something, pours water into the barrel and lets it stand for several minutes so that all the dirt has time to get wet, as they say. Then he opens the seed, releases through it dirty water, rinses the barrel clean water and wipes dry with hemp on a ramrod. And then slightly dries the barrel on the stove; if this happens on the hunt, then in the fire. By the way, I also note that some of the local industrialists, just like rifles, lubricate the inside with some kind of fat or oil after each shot. I often asked the local hunters why they unscrew or, better, beat off (with a hammer, an ax butt, even a stone) the breech in order to flush the gun. To this, some said that they were doing it out of curiosity to look at the inside of the trunk - if there were any faults in it, that is, shells, zanathrin, gibin, scratches, etc. Others said that they act so simply out of habit, unconsciously, seeing that other industrialists, old people, more experienced than them, are doing the same.
Many hunters live in places where there are not only gunsmiths, but even decent locksmiths, which happens very often with us, in Siberia, but meanwhile you can’t protect yourself from damage to your guns. It often happens that you fall with guns on stones, fallen trees, especially when walking in the forest, over mountains and ravines, which makes it possible to bend the trunks or make pits and depressions on them. Such things in our region are often easily corrected by the hunters themselves, although more or less understanding the matter, and especially only slightly familiar with locksmith skills. One has only to disassemble the gun, to estimate the barrels on the string, why any depression, elevation or depression will be immediately visible, as a result of which they are knocked out with light blows of soft lead (a piece in 5 and 8 cf.), But by no means with an iron hammer, until they will not correct errors by constantly applying to a stretched string. If you take your time and do it carefully, then all the depressions and elevations are knocked out completely, so that the trunks will take the former present, correct position. That is why a rare local industrialist does not have one or two files, a hammer, tongs, even a vise, and so on. necessary accessories. They simply beat off a breech screw with a hammer or lay it in some strong slot, for example, in a groove between logs in a wall or in a floor, and in this way they unscrew the breech screws, which are usually weak and often screwed with rags or thin skin. On this occasion, some of them received significant scars on their heads and faces for their negligence. The Russian “maybe” is also incorrect here, in Siberia!.. But, not protecting the Siberians, this word sometimes acts here out of necessity, even from an extreme, especially in relation to the above case, because the noticeable lack of artisan hands not only in this respect makes the Siberian, as it were, reluctantly hopes for "maybe".
The rifle is a friend and comrade of the Siberian industrialist! Everyone knows how accurately the local hunters shoot from their plain-looking rifles. Without having seen the rifles of the local cut, it is difficult to imagine her figure, why I will try to depict her in the drawing.
But even a drawing without explanation, I think, will be incomprehensible to many, why I will introduce this one: a - b - rifle barrel; c - d - her bed; b - e - trigger with flint; e - naragdn, i.e., a bone, iron or even wooden bow, through which the trigger is pulled, replacing the dog in the piston gun; d - shoulder strap, a simple belt on which industrialists carry rifles, putting it over their shoulders; h - bipod; two wooden sticks connected to each other by a transverse block and freely, somewhat strained, rotating on an iron screw (i), which passes through the bipod and stock; m - iron supports, or the so-called flasks, through which the i screw also passes, so that the bipod does not rub from the screw and holds on tighter. The very same bipods serve to ensure that rifles are usually heavier than shotguns and difficult to keep on weight with your hands, without bipods serving as support for the barrel; especially when shooting a bullet, where such fidelity of sight is needed, bipods are a necessity. Many bipods at the lower ends are fettered with iron, which is inconvenient when shooting animals, because the fettered bipods clang on the ground and frighten the beast; therefore, the furriers only burn their wooden tips, and the Orochones (some) tie small hoops to the ends of the bipods, into which they thread straps instead of knitting needles. Bipods on such recumbent wheels are convenient in that they do not knock and do not pierce into weak ground, for example, on the shore of a swamp, lake, j - cutting (vizier); k - a hollowed-out room with a valve or a lid, into which grease or oil lubricants are placed in order to lubricate the inside of the rifle barrel after each shot. These lubricants are usually made from hemp or from the hair of a horse's mane and are saturated with some fatty substance, such as: Russian oil, various fats, hemp (lean) oil, etc .; l - ramrod, iron, which is very rare, but more wooden from wild peach, meadowsweet and friend, strong, but not brittle twigs, and sometimes copper; o - the pillar that is being done for the most part from yellow or red copper, and sometimes silver.
Rifles here are divided into three main categories, namely: 1) the most ordinary, with round smooth barrels: they are cheaper than all the others; 2) faceted, such rifles are respected by industrialists and valued above the first; there are usually 6 and 8 faces on them. They are more respected because it is more dexterous to aim an object from such rifles, especially at dusk and even at night, because top face the barrel, like a tape stretched along the barrel, gives the eye some special correctness of sight and is more visible than the round surface of the barrel in the dark; in addition, garnet rifles are more beautiful than round ones, and 3) Turks are so-called, that is, with twisted barrels; these are the most expensive; they are bordered and round. However, the high cost of a rifle depends on its dignity, if only the buyer takes it not in a shop, but from one of the industrialists, because here a good rifle is known in the whole neighborhood in the class of animal manufacturers, as well as a thin one, and rifles of excellent combat often rattle with its glory for several hundred versts. Despite this, rifles (not from the shop) without a test are never bought. A good rifle is considered to be one that accurately hits 100 or more fathoms, this is a first-class rifle; at 70 and 80 fathoms - is considered a good or mediocre rifle. If she takes such a distance, then she is called diarrhoea. 4
In Transbaikalia, the range of any gun is generally called diarrhea, from the word it carries (a bullet is far away).
Rifle; if it hits hard and angrily, that is, it is heavy on the wound, then it is already called porn. Probably, this word comes from the word to wound or drop, that is, as soon as the bullet hits the beast, it will now drop to the ground. If diarrhea and sometimes, are combined, then such rifles are valued quite expensively, they reach 40, 50 and even more silver rubles on the spot. Wealthy industrialists sometimes pay several heads of cattle or horses for such rifles, and dozens of rams are given for them. If the rifle hits constantly accurately, then it is called a one-piece rifle.
In the shops, the local industrialists buy rifles at random, because the shopkeepers sell them without testing, that is, they do not allow them to shoot; they are usually valued from 3, 5, 8 and up to 15 rubles. silver, depending on the finish and size of the rifle. This is done on the grounds that merchants, getting them in bulk from fairs, do not themselves know their dignity and therefore do not dare to try, so that thin rifles do not lie around in the shop, especially since there are much more thin rifles brought in than good ones. The barrels of small rifles are a arshin long, and large ones reach up to 7½ quarters; in the same way, their caliber ranges from a small pea to almost the caliber of an ordinary soldier's gun; however, the latter are not respected here, they are kept by more real animal merchants, actually for hunting large animals: bears, elk, wild boars, etc .; and low-bullet ones are used mainly by protein workers (protein will be discussed in its place). At some industrialists, I saw homemade double-shot single-barreled rifles with two triggers on both sides. They charge charge upon charge; a soft wax wad is placed between the charges, which closes up the rifle edges inside the barrel, the so-called screws, and thus prevents the lower charge from igniting when the upper one is fired. I myself had such a homemade product, it beat excellently. Such rifles are highly valued here, because they replace double-barreled rifles and therefore give the hunter more spirit and self-confidence when hunting animals.
“I am writing this preface for the sole purpose - so that the reader can partially get to know me first and not begin to look in my notes for what is not in them, or judge them too strictly. Of course, if the reader is a passionate hunter, like me, he will not pay attention to the weaknesses of my work in terms of literature, but will only look for what interests him or what he still does not know. But the literary reader will forgive me my awkward handling of the pen. The passion for hunting and the desire to convey many truths and secrets known only to the hunters of Eastern Siberia overcame my doubts about my literary abilities, and I decided to write what my hunting experience gave me. I am sure of one thing, that my work will be useful to many, many hunters, and I don’t need anything else.
If possible, I will try to present my notes in the simplest, most understandable language, but, excuse me, with a Siberian tinge.
The reader may well rely on my notes; I did not write unfounded, but always from the facts. What I have not seen, I have not experienced myself, I do not claim that. If something is taken from the words of other hunters, then this is just as true as what is written from the facts. Do not think that these notes belong to a hunter who loves a red word (it is a pity that hunters have such an unenviable reputation), but take them for notes of a passionate Siberian industrialist and at the same time an observer.
My descriptions are sometimes too detailed, sometimes too short. What to do? The richer, the more glad!
The book of the famous Russian hunting writer of the 19th century tells about hunting animals and hunting techniques for them. Written in a lively original language, the book is not only a monument of literature of the last century, but also contains a lot of useful information for an amateur hunter.
For a wide range hunting lovers.
Book the author Cherkasov Alexander Aleksandrovich was rated by the visitors of KnigoGuide, and her reader rating was 6.10 out of 5.
For free viewing are provided: annotation, publication, reviews, as well as files for download.
In our online library Notes of a hunter of Eastern Siberia can be downloaded in epub formats, fb2, pdf, txt, html or read online.
Work Cherkasov Alexander Alexandrovich "Notes of a hunter of Eastern Siberia" belongs to the genre "Nature".
The online library BookGuide will certainly please readers with texts of foreign and Russian writers, as well as a gigantic selection of classic and contemporary works. All you need is to find a book that meets your preferences by annotation, title or author and download it in a convenient format or read it online.
A. A. Cherkasov
Notes of a hunter of Eastern Siberia
Alexander Alexandrovich Cherkasov (1834–1895)
Editorial
"Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia" by A. A. Cherkasov are known to many hunters and lovers of hunting literature, but it is unlikely that many of them are familiar with the full and original text of this book.
The first edition of the Notes was published in 1867 and was highly appreciated by contemporaries. After 17 years, in 1884, the second edition was published, revised and supplemented by the author. It is the most complete and most accurate, reflects last will author and therefore served as a source of text for this edition. The circulation of the book of 1884, quite large for that time (2 thousand copies), made this book unique at the present time, since subsequent editions (already in Soviet time) came out with significant distortions and exceptions.
In 1950, the Irkutsk regional publishing house published this book by A. A. Cherkasov in a greatly reduced form, with a circulation of 10 thousand copies. The introductory article was written by the Siberian hunter I.P. Kopylov. The assessment of this publication in the press was negative, both because of unjustified withdrawals and the quality of printing.
In 1958 Chita book publishing house introduced readers to its own version of Cherkasov’s book (circulation 15,000): again, numerous abbreviations were made in the book within the sections and the chapters on the wolverine, badger, marten, otter, wild cat, ferret, curne, ermine, weasel, chipmunk, flying squirrel were completely removed, jerboa, raccoon, babra, red deer, deer, argali, kulan, hare. There were no illustrations in the book related to the text. However, this edition also had its merits: an interesting introductory article by E. D. Petryaev, a bibliography of Cherkasov’s works and literature prepared by him. The book contained a portrait of the author and engravings from his book dedicated to hunting. But in general, the publication did not give a complete picture of this wonderful work hunting literature XIX century.
The following re-edition of Cherkasov's book, undertaken in 1962 by the reputable publishing house of the USSR Academy of Sciences (editor E. E. Syroechkovsky; he also wrote a short but very useful commentary on the text and a preface), also caused bewilderment. Breaking all the rules scientific publication texts, the academic publishing house "worked fruitfully" on the text, not only throwing out solid pieces, but also directly rewriting other phrases, which largely erased individual style author, the originality of his writing style. In addition, only some of the drawings included in the lifetime edition by the author himself were preserved in the book, but they were supplemented with drawings and headpieces that were completely out of character for A. Cherkasov's book. In the end, it came to the point that they changed the name of the book: it became known as "Notes of a hunter-naturalist." Thus, Cherkasov became the author of another book that was never on his list of authors (by the way, this was not the only case in the then practice of this publishing house: in 1964, L.P. Sabaneev’s “Hunting Calendar” was published under the title “Calendar of Nature” - the words "hunting", "hunting", "hunter" were eradicated consistently and methodically).
Thus, the present edition of A. A. Cherkasov’s book “Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia” is the first and so far the only complete reproduction of the text and all the illustrations from the 1884 edition in Soviet times.
The editors have preserved the style of the writer's speech and the peculiarities of his word usage, bringing it in line with modern requirements only grammar (primarily punctuation). Obvious typos have been corrected in the text, and the few words added by the editor (obvious omissions when typing) are enclosed in angular (< >) parentheses.
Comments on the text of a purely biological and hunting content (here partially used materials from E. E. Syroechkovsky from the book of 1962) are indicated in the text by remote numbers ("2, etc.); footnotes (footnotes) belong to A. A. Cherkasov.
The reference apparatus is placed at the end of the volume. To dictionary obsolete words and expressions, local sayings are almost not included, since their author gives explanations in the text.
As for purely hunting texts (constructions different kind traps, hunting techniques, etc.), the editors believe that practicing hunters are well aware that the book by A. A. Cherkasov, written more than a century ago, is not a document for the use of certain techniques and devices; the only guiding document is modern rules hunting.
Felix Shtilmark
ALEXANDER ALEKSANDROVICH CHERKASOV - NATURALIST, HUNTING CAREER, WRITER
Among bibliophiles, the expression "golden shelf" is widely known, on which the most cherished books not subject to the influence of time and the vagaries of book fashion. This is a high classic! It is to this category, along with the works of Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev and Sergei Timofeevich Aksakov, that the famous, although not so well-known, book by Alexander Alexandrovich Cherkasov "Notes of a hunter of Eastern Siberia", with full text which is first introduced to the Soviet reader.
The work of A. A. Cherkasov is remarkable in many respects and has long deserved wide recognition. First of all, this is truly an encyclopedia of the Siberian hunting of the last century, which even today is necessary for a local historian, hunter, even a scientist who studies the Transbaikalian fauna. Of no less, if not more, importance are the Notes for connoisseurs and lovers of the Russian language, Siberian dialects, and the old dialect. It is not for nothing that this book became one of the main sources of the dictionary of Vladimir Ivanovich Dahl and even the Dictionary of Modern Russian literary language”, published by the Academy of Sciences of the USSR in 1959–1965.
As for the book-loving hunter, for him the meeting with complete edition"Notes" by A. A. Cherkasov is a true holiday. This book can be read by opening it on any page, getting real pleasure from only one specific Cherkasov style - unhurried, truthful, saturated with reliable facts, seasoned with folk humor, vividly conveying the specifics of the place and time. Bribes first of all the author's conscientiousness, sincerity and truthfulness, accompanying all the work of Cherkasov. “What I haven’t seen, I haven’t experienced myself, I don’t affirm that,” he remarked more than once, emphasizing his devotion to the truth, the absence of bias and light judgments, which are so characteristic of many hunting authors. A. A. Cherkasov happily combined in his work scientific pedantry with fiction, the accuracy of descriptions with their colorfulness, and most importantly, he had some kind of special impressionability, he knew how to see vigilantly and share what he saw with others. Truly, it would not be an exaggeration to say that in this man, in an incomprehensible way, the most different qualities: masculine firmness of the hand that did not know a miss (Cherkasov was an excellent shooter and a true master of animal hunting), female kindness, which bribed his most severe taiga comrades, and the naive impressionability of a child, that is, precisely those properties that are so necessary for any true artist. The very personality of the author of "Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia" involuntarily arouses the deepest sympathy in the reader. According to the surviving (unfortunately, very few) memoirs, as well as judging by his other works, we see an energetic, active and at the same time very kind-hearted, sympathetic, benevolent person, who was distinguished by his special democracy, enjoyed the disposition of his superiors and the genuine love of his subordinates, a bright person. and passionate nature, and his main passion was, of course, hunting.
“This is a force,” A. A. Cherkasov wrote about hunting, “and such a force that sometimes it is impossible to stop anything. It seems to me that only pure, sincere and heartfelt love can be compared with it in many manifestations of human life.
Note that not all love, namely heartfelt, sincere and pure! The author sees in hunting not a blind passion, not a way of existence, not a profession, but the highest and brightest human feeling...
The life path of the author of "Notes of a Hunter of Eastern Siberia" is familiar to us from a few publications, among which the most detailed and reliable information is contained in the works of the famous Soviet bibliophile and local historian Evgeny Dmitrievich Petryaev. We will mainly use them in this essay. E. D. Petryaev worked a lot in Siberian archives, searched for relatives of the “Siberian Aksakov” (as he called A. A. Cherkasov), published the most complete bibliography of his works.
