Reasons: a) terror, with the help of which the Horde maintained power over Russia; b) tribute and taxes collected by the Mongols.

In order to register taxpayers, a population census was conducted. Started in the 40s. With Kievan Rus, then in Suzdal and Ryazan lands. People were divided into 10, 100, 1000, 10000. Novgorodians refused the census. They were led by the son of Alexander Nevsky, Vasily. But the boyars and Alexander Yaroslavovich himself were in favor of the census, because They believed that Rus' could not challenge the Horde. The rebels were brutally dealt with.

The uprisings that swept across North-Eastern Rus' in the 1260s became one of the reasons for the later abolition of the tax farming system and the transfer of tax collection into the hands of Russian princes. (The last Baskak in Rus' was Shchelkan, against whose actions there was an uprising in Tver in 1327).

Consequences of the yoke:

1. The population has decreased (at least 10% of the total population of 10 million people).

2. The number of cities decreased (14 were destroyed, 15 became villages).

3. Complex types of crafts have disappeared (making cloisonne enamel, niello, granulation, polychrome building ceramics, glass bracelets, carnelian beads, filigree, foundry, metal stamping).

4. The established routes of communication were disrupted (“from the Varangians to the Greeks” and “ silk road"), domestic trade decreased, almost completely stopped cash flow in Russian lands. Strengthening the naturalization of the economy.

5. Connections with the outside world have been severed.

6. The process of development of feudalism slowed down.

7. Feudal oppression is intensifying. The old social order - a free society - has been destroyed (nobility and nobles must serve, townspeople and peasants bear the burden).

8. The process of gradual political consolidation of Russian lands was disrupted.

9. Kievan Rus split into Lithuanian Rus' and Moscow Rus'. The united ancient Russian nation ceased to exist. Based on it in the XIV-XV centuries. Three new nationalities arose (Belarusian, Ukrainian on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russian in Muscovy).

10. The type of government has changed. The veche was liquidated. The sole unlimited power of the Moscow Prince is taking shape.

11. Cultural decline began.

The significance of the Tatar-Mongol invasion for the historical development of Russia

Karamzin, Kostomarov, “Eurasians”: The yoke made it possible to unite the fragmented principalities. After the invasion, Rus' developed into a special state in which the features of Europe and Asia were intertwined.

Soloviev, Klyuchevsky, Platonov, Pokrovsky: The yoke had little impact on the life and development of Russian society.

Pavlenko, Kobrin, Fedorov, Kuchkin: The yoke had a serious, but not decisive, influence on all spheres of life in Rus'. The consequences were negative and inhibitory.

Trepavlov: The estimates are mixed. On the one hand, devastation, on the other - Golden Horde became the ethnic cradle of the Turkic peoples; from there came toleration; The role of individual power in Rus' increased.

Darkevich: it was a global disaster, the catastrophic consequences of which were incalculable. Old Russian civilization was thrown back 150 years in economic, cultural and political development. The gene pool of the Russian people has been undermined. The craft fell into decline. There was no tolerance. Rus' found itself cut off from Europe, Byzantium, and the Muslim East. Political passivity, long-suffering, and fatalism are emerging.

Gorsky: The Mongol conquest led to a radical change in the type of state development. It is not for nothing that they say: “pre-Mongol period” - precisely because at that time Rus' was characterized by the traditionally European path of feudal development (with certain regional specifics). And in the conditions in which Russia found itself in the 13th-15th centuries, under the influence of the need for accelerated centralization, a type of development of the country was formed that was distinguished by significant originality.

Chapter two. The first popular uprisings in Suzdal land and in Novgorod in the 11th century (Speeches of the Magi)

The first major popular uprising broke out in Suzdal. It was directed against the local social elite - the “old children”. At the dawn of Russian history, almost the entire territory of Suzdal land was covered with dense forest. It stretched as a continuous massif, containing numerous rivers, streams, lakes, and swamps. Only here and there along the Oka and in Opole ( The region lying between Vladimir, Yuryev Polsky and Pereyaslavl Zalessky) lay treeless spaces - fields, spurs of distant steppes.

Oak, maple, linden, rowan, hazel, the further to the north, the more often they interspersed with pine and spruce forests, and in the north and northeast from a line running from the mouths of the Neva to Ilmen, and from there to the upper reaches of the Volga and The lower reaches of the Oka River stretches the southern border of the Eastern European taiga. Taiga spruce, pine, fir, and juniper were combined with birch, aspen, and alder. And finally, even further, in the north of Suzdal land, lay gloomy spruce forests, endless moss swamps and swampy lowlands, harsh but light pine forests, cut by cold, clear-cut northern rivers. The Volga, Oka, Sheksna, Moskva River flowed through Suzdal land and there were lakes: Nero, Kleshchino, Beloozero.

In ancient times, the forested Suzdal region was inhabited by the Eastern Slavs. Ancient population the region - Merya, in the region of Rostov the Great, and all that lived near Beloozero, had long since entered into relations with the Eastern Slavs and, having fallen under the influence of their more high culture, gradually became Russified and dissolved among the Russians who inhabited the region.

From the northwest, from the Ilmen and Novgorod lands, the Slovenes moved into the Suzdal land, the Krivichi moved from the upper reaches of the Volga, and finally, in the southwest, the settlements of the Vyatichi, the oldest Slavic inhabitants of the Moscow River basin, extended.

The Russian and Finno-Ugric population of the region was engaged in agriculture and cattle breeding, but fishing, hunting and beekeeping played a very significant role. Crafts and trade developed, cities arose and grew. The most ancient cities of the region were Suzdal and Rostov, where the “old” boyars sat.

It was here, in Suzdal land, that the first major popular uprising known to us from sources took place in ancient Rus'. The reason for it was the famine that gripped the Suzdal land in 1024 and caused a “great rebellion” in it. The ancient Russian chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years" reports that the common people began to beat the "old children", that is, the local rich nobility who had hidden reserves of grain, and that this uprising of the rural people was led by the Magi - the priests of the old, pre-Christian religion.

Obviously, the famine was only the immediate cause of the uprising, which had a pronounced anti-feudal character. The fact is that the famine itself was caused not only by crop failure. In the chronicles, especially in Novgorod, we more than once encounter indications of starvation of the population. Famine was usually a consequence of “immense rains,” droughts, untimely frosts, dry winds, etc. But it should be noted that such hunger strikes caused by climatic conditions became common only in the period from the end of the 13th to the beginning of the 17th century, when a certain deterioration was observed climate. As for the period before the 11th century, then, judging by the chronicle, as well as by the data of paleobotany, paleozoology, archeology and geology, the climate of ancient Rus' was warmer, milder and more constant than in later times. Of course, the famine of 1024 could have been the result of some natural disaster, which befell the Suzdal land. But we must not forget that peasant farm in those days it was extremely unstable: the slightest crop failure caused famine, but the popular uprising is associated only with the famine of 1024.

What's the matter? The chronicle says that this year the famine did not reach all segments of the population of Suzdal. The “old child” did not starve; she held in her hands supplies of bread - “gobinot”. IN Old Russian language the word "gobino" meant the harvest of cereals and fruits in general, but most often this term was applied to the harvest of grain bread. The chronicler emphasizes the fact that only the “simple children” suffered from the famine that befell the Suzdal land in 1024. The "old child" obviously took advantage of the people's disaster - hunger: having taken bread into her hands and lending it to the starving, she enslaved the surrounding people, subjugated them to herself, forced them to work for herself in her feudal economy. It was this feudal exploitation that was the main reason for the “great rebellion and famine throughout that country,” as stated in the “Tale of Bygone Years” in 1024. The famine stopped (people, in the words of the chronicler, “zhisha,” that is, came to life) only when the starving Suzdal residents along the Volga went to the land of the Kama Bulgarians and brought bread from there (“zhito”).

The uprising of the smerds of the Suzdal land against the “old child” alarmed the dominant feudal elite. It was not hunger, but precisely the “great rebellion” that forced Prince Yaroslav the Wise, who was then in Novgorod, to pay all his attention to the events in Suzdal land. That is why Yaroslav and his army are heading not to Chernigov, where at that time his rival and competitor Mstislav sat on the princely table, but to the Suzdal land, where “lying magicians” appeared, who raised an uprising of “simple children” in the villages.

Arriving in the Suzdal region, Yaroslav captured the magicians, executed some, and sent others into exile ( See "The Tale of Bygone Years", part 1, pp. 99-100, 299). The Novgorod Chronicle contains some additional information about the uprising of 1024. It says that part of the rebels against the “old child” were killed, apparently during a clash with the prince’s warriors, the property of the executed and exiled participants in the uprising was plundered ( See "Novgorod IV Chronicle", St. Petersburg, 1915, p. 112). Thus ended the first major peasant uprising in Rus'. Unfortunately, the chronicles did not preserve its details.

The uniqueness of this popular movement lay in the fact that at the head of the Smerds who rebelled against the “old child” were the Magi, who sought to use the anti-feudal uprising of the people to return to the previous pre-Christian cults.

This was not the only attempt of the Magi to regain their former influence. In the "Tale of Bygone Years" under 1071 there follows a story about the performances of the Magi in Kyiv, Novgorod and the Suzdal land, in particular in Belozerye.

It should be noted that the chronicle date - 1071 - is incorrect. Famous Researchers Russian chronicles - A. A. Shakhmatov and M. D. Priselkov convincingly proved that these uprisings took place in different times between 1066 and 1069

They were placed under 1071 by the chronicler who compiled this part of the Tale of Bygone Years, who recorded the story of the uprising in the Suzdal land from the words of Yan Vyshatich, a rich and influential boyar, a prominent warrior of the Chernigov prince Svyatoslav Yaroslavich (son of Yaroslav the Wise).

Jan Vyshatić was an eyewitness to this uprising; It was he who suppressed the movement of the Smerds in the Suzdal land and dealt with their leaders - the Magi. The chronicler included in the chronicle under one year both the story of Jan Vyshatich and all the speeches of the Magi known to him. He could not date them accurately, and therefore in his story the following expressions always appear: “at the same time,” “once,” “under Prince Gleb.”

The first time was the performance of the sorcerer in Kyiv. A. A. Shakhmatov believes that it may have taken place in 1064. The Magus appeared in Kyiv and began to prophesy that in the fifth year the Dnieper would flow in the opposite direction, and the lands would begin to move - Greek land would take the place of Russian, and Russian - Greek; Other lands will also change their location.

The chronicler reports that the “ignorant” (i.e., the ignorant, by which one should mean the Kyivans who had not yet renounced their usual, so-called pagan beliefs) listened to his sermon, and the baptized Kievans, i.e., those who had accepted Christianity, laughed at him .

We must not forget that Christianity in Rus' became the official state dominant religion only at the end of the 10th century, 80 years before the events we are describing, and at the same time, acting as a force strengthening the feudal social order and a feudal state, it naturally encountered resistance and hostile attitude from the working people of the cities and villages of ancient Rus'. And the failure of the sorcerer, who, as the Tale of Bygone Years says, went missing one night, is explained by the fact that in the Middle Dnieper region, in Kyiv, feudal statehood had long been established, the princely military-squad organization was strengthened, and the Christian church became a powerful force. Therefore, the sermon of the sorcerer in Kyiv could not be successful, although it posed a certain danger to the Kyiv feudal lords. And, obviously, not without their participation Kyiv sorcerer suddenly disappeared, and disappeared at night, when the Kyiv “ignorant people” from the “simple children” could not stand up for him ( "The Tale of Bygone Years", part 1, pp. 116-117, 317).

A similar situation developed at the other end of Rus', on the banks of the Volkhov, in Novgorod. Here, under Prince Gleb, the son of Svyatoslav Yaroslavich, a sorcerer also once spoke.

Novgorod is the second largest city of ancient Rus' after Kyiv - in to a greater extent retained old, pre-Christian beliefs. His numerous “simple children” resisted and christian church, and the Kyiv princes, who sought to subjugate Novgorod, put their warriors in a particularly privileged position and force the Novgorodians to pay tribute. Not by chance ancient legend, recorded, however, in a later chronicle, tells that the governors Prince of Kyiv Vladimir Svyatoslavich - Dobrynya and Putyata baptized the Novgorodians with fire and sword.

In the events of the beginning of the 11th century, in particular in the inter-princely strife between Yaroslav the Wise and Svyatopolk the Accursed, the Novgorod smerds and especially ordinary people from the townspeople played a big role. They helped Yaroslav defeat Svyatopolk, who was supported by the interventionists - the troops of the Polish king Boleslav, consisting of Poles ("Poles") and mercenaries - Germans and Hungarians ("Ugrians"). For this help, Yaroslav generously gave gifts to the Novgorodians: Novgorodians and elders, as written in the Novgorod Chronicle, received 10 hryvnia each, and smerdas - one hryvnia each. In addition, and even more important, Yaroslav gave the “Russian Truth” (the so-called “Ancient Truth”), in which the Novgorodians were equated with princely men, and some other charter that has not reached us.

All this gave a certain confidence to the actions of the sorcerer in Novgorod under Gleb Svyatoslavich. Talking with people, the sorcerer claimed that he could perform miracles, for example, in front of everyone, cross the Volkhov, that he knew in advance what would happen, and blasphemed Christian faith. The sorcerer’s speeches had an effect. The majority of Novgorodians sided with the sorcerer. They were already planning to kill the Novgorod bishop. Having put on his vestments, the bishop went out to the Novgorodians and addressed them with a speech: “Whoever wants to believe the sorcerer, let him follow him; whoever truly believes, let him go to the cross.” The result was unexpected for the bishop: “And the people were divided in two: Prince Gleb and his squad went and stood near the bishop, and the people all went and stood behind the sorcerer. And a great rebellion began among the people,” reports “The Tale of Bygone Years.”

Prince Gleb was not at a loss. Hiding the ax under his cloak, he approached the sorcerer and, after a brief verbal altercation, killed the sorcerer with a blow of the ax. Having lost their leader, “people dispersed” ( "The Tale of Bygone Years", part 1, pp. 120-121, 321).

Thus ended the performance of the Novgorodians. The most significant of the uprisings of the Smerds, led by the Magi, known to us from sources, was the uprising in the Suzdal land, dated by the chronicle of 1071. Yan Vyshatich told the chronicler how once, when for some time (after 1067) Belozerye belonged to his prince, Svyatoslav Yaroslavich, he went there, to the far North, to collect tribute, accompanied by twelve warriors ("youths") and a priest ("popina").

In those days there was such an order. The "prince's husband", who collected tribute ("tributer") or monetary fines - "virs" ("virnik"), together with his warriors and servants, was transferred to the maintenance of the population of the lands where he acted. At this time, the tributer considered the smerds from whom he collected tribute not only princely, but also his people, since part of the tribute collected from them went in his favor.

Arriving at Beloe Lake, Yan Vyshatich, from the words of the Belozersk residents, learned about the uprising of the Magi. This uprising began in the Rostov region, in the Suzdal land. The reason for it, as in 1024, was the shortage of food ("scarcity") and the subsequent famine. Two wise men came from Yaroslavl to the starving region and declared that they knew who held the food supplies (“abundance”) in their hands. An uprising broke out. Led by the Magi, the Smerds moved along the Volga and Sheksna. Arriving at one or another churchyard, where the “cart drivers” were sitting, bringing tribute, that is, the same “old child” mentioned in the “Tale of Bygone Years” in 1024, they pointed to the “best wives,” saying, that one holds livestock, another holds honey, the third holds fish, etc.

The chronicler talks about the consequences of the Magi’s exposure of the “best wives” who had accumulated large reserves of food. In the Tale of Bygone Years we read:

“And they began to bring their sisters, mothers and their wives to them. The Magi, in the flood, cut off their shoulders, took out either livestock or fish, and thus killed many women, and seized their property for themselves.” ("The Tale of Bygone Years", part 1 (translation by D. S. Likhachev and B. A. Romanov))

A little further we will explain this strange story in the chronicle about the massacre of the “best wives,” and now we will dwell first of all on the social content of the Smerd movement led by the Magi, which swept the Suzdal region, the outskirts of Sheksna and the Belozersky region.

M. N. Tikhomirov drew attention to the "Chronicle of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal", which reports a number of important details indicating that the story about the uprising in Suzdal land, placed in the "Chronicle", is more ancient and reliable than in the "Tale of Bygone Years" .

From the “Chronicle of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal” we learn that the Belozersk people who told Yan Vyshatich about the uprising of the Smerds who came to them from the Volga and Sheksna were not on the side of the rebels; they lamented that the Smerdas “killed many wives and killed their husbands,” and that as a result of this, “there is no one to take tribute from.”

It follows that the informants of the princely tribute Jan Vyshatich were those Belozersk people who were responsible for collecting tribute, took it to the graveyards, where the “princely men” arrived for tribute, acted as “carriers”, i.e. they were not close to the smerds, and to those who suffered from smerds “the best husbands” and “the best wives”.

In addition, “The Chronicler of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal” makes it possible to establish another feature of the Smerd uprising.

The Tale of Bygone Years reports that the victims of the rebel Smerds were women, “the best wives,” that is, mistresses of rich houses. The Novgorod chronicles also speak about this, and the Novgorod IV chronicle transfers the story about the actions of the rebels who beat the “old child of the woman” (i.e., the women of the “old child”), placed under 1071, to the events of 1024. All this gave a reason to express the idea of ​​preserving the maternal clan, matriarchy, in the north-east of Rus', when the head of the family was not a man, but a woman, who was also the distributor of all property that belonged to the clan or family.

"The Chronicler of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal" in contrast to "The Tale of Bygone Years" and Novgorod chronicles reports that during the uprising, not only wives were killed, but also “many ... husbands were killed,” that is, among those who died at the hands of the rebel Smerds there were not only women, but also men.

And this is quite understandable, since, of course, there can be no talk of any maternal clan in Rus' in the 11th century. The point is, as we will see, that the products accumulated by rich families in certain cases were actually disposed of by the “best wives.”

The reprisal against the “best wives” and the “best husbands”, as a result of which the property of the rich local elite, the “old child”, went to the Smerds who suffered from hunger and bondage, led to the fact that when the rebel Smerds came to Beloozero, their detachment numbered 300 Human. This is where Jan Vyshatich met them. First of all, he asked whose smerds the leaders of the uprising - the Magi - were. Having learned that they were the death of his prince, Svyatoslav, Jan Vyshatich demanded that the Belozersk people hand them over.

“Give these magicians over here, because they stink to me and my prince,” he declared to the Belozersk people. The Belozero residents did not listen to him, apparently not daring to go into the forest where the rebels were. Then Jan Vyshatic decided to act on his own. At the beginning, he wanted to go to the rebel Smerds alone, without weapons, but his warriors ("youths") advised him against it, and soon the entire well-armed squad of Yan, numbering twelve people, moved towards the forest, and with it the priest ("popin"). The rebels, regarding whom the “Chronicle of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal” emphasizes that they were smerds (“... the smerd took up arms against”), came out of the forest and prepared for battle. Jan Vyshatic advanced towards them with an ax in his hand. Then three Smerdas separated from the rebel detachment, approached Yan and said: “You see for yourself that you are going to death, don’t go.” Yan ordered his warriors to kill them and moved further to the Smerds standing and waiting for him. Then the smerds rushed at Yan, and one of them swung an ax at him. Yan snatched the ax from the smerd’s hands, hit him with the butt and ordered his warriors to chop down the rebels. The Smerds retreated to the forest, managing to kill priest Jan on the way. Yan Vyshatich did not dare to enter the forest after the smerds and engage in battle with them. He preferred a different way of dealing with the rebels. Returning to the city of Beloozero, Yan told the Beloozero residents that if they did not capture the wise men who had come from the land of Suzdal (“unless you bring these scum”), then he would not leave them for at least a year. The prospect of feeding and watering Yan and his retinue and collecting tribute to them all year round did not smile much on the Belozersk people. They had to act on their own. The Belozersk people managed to capture the Magi and hand them over to Yan.

During the interrogation, the Magi remained steadfast. They explained the murder of so many people by the fact that those killed had large reserves ("abundance") and if they were destroyed, then everyone would have abundance ("gobino"). The Magi entered into a theological dispute with Jan, stubbornly refused to recognize Jan's right to judge them, declaring that only their prince, Svyatoslav, had jurisdiction over them. Apparently, they were well aware of the “Russian Truth”, which stated that it is impossible to “torment smerdas without the prince’s word,” that is, smerdas are under the jurisdiction only of the prince and no one except the prince can punish them. The Magi bravely withstood the torture to which Jan Vyshatic subjected them.

Having fun with the powerless magicians, Jan handed them over to the “carriers,” whose wives, mothers, sisters and daughters (“best wives”) died at their hands. The “drivers” dealt with the Magi according to the old custom of blood feud, according to which the relatives of the murdered man took revenge on the murderers. Here in the North, blood feud was still common and was even recognized by the princely court as something coming “from God in truth.” Taking revenge for the death of their relatives, the “carriages” killed the Magi, and their corpses were hanged on an oak tree at the mouth of the Sheksna ( "The Tale of Bygone Years", part 1, pp. 117-119, 317-319; "The Chronicler of Pereyaslavl Suzdal", M., 1851, pp. 47-48). That's how it is chronicle story about the uprising of the Magi in the Suzdal land, which covered the Rostov region, Yaroslavl, Sheksna, Beloozero.

Who rose up to the call of the Magi to exterminate the “best wives” in the graveyards, because they keep “gobino”, “abundance”, and “let hunger”? Who will “take away” “their property”? Obviously, those who did not have this “abundance”, from whom the “old child” - the support of the princely power - collected all kinds of products and “goods” in order to pay them as tribute to the prince or the “prince’s husband”, the same Jan Vyshatichu. These were the ones who were enslaved by the owners of the "gobine houses" various kinds“in rows” and “couples”, those who became feudally dependent and exploited people.

It was "farmland", simple stinkers. And Jan Vyshatic had full reason consider not only the three hundred rebels who came with the Magi to Beloozero, but also the Magi themselves as stinkers. That is why in the hands of the rebels the typical weapon of the peasants is an ax, which is why in the miniatures of the Radzivilov (Koenigsberg) Chronicle, the feudal lord Ian, depicted in long clothes, armed with a sword, is opposed by smerds dressed in shirts and trousers and armed with axes. The later chronicler was right when he illustrated the story of Jan Vyshatich as recorded by the chronicler. The “Chronicle of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal” is also right when he persistently emphasized that the Magi, and those who exterminated the “best” wives and husbands, and the three hundred rebels whom Yan Vyshatich encountered in the forests of Belozerye - they were all stinkers.

The uprising in Suzdal was on a large scale and this differed from the speech of the sorcerer in Kyiv. An explanation for this is not difficult to find in the specifics of social life in the far North. If for the south of Rus', for the Dnieper region, the time has already passed when vassals - boyars, warriors received from their master, the prince, grants in the form of part of the tribute collected by him, if there was a rapid "possession" of lands there, and with it the transformation of tribute into permanent feudal rent, then in the northeast the situation was different. Here, in the land of the ancient local population - Meri and Vesi and the Krivichi and Slovels who came from the west, fiefs (i.e., princely grants) only appeared, which consisted only of the right to collect tribute for themselves, for which the “princely men” scattered into the world; here, from the local “old children”, the rich, noble, influential and arrogant boyars of the “old cities” - Rostov and Suzdal - were just beginning to grow.

That is why the rebellious Magi so stubbornly defended their right to “stand before Svyatoslav.” They considered themselves tributaries (subjects in direct and figuratively) only the prince, recognized the right of the “princely husbands” - tributers to collect tribute from them, but they refused to consider themselves at the same time smerds, the “princely husband”, who, by the will of the prince, received tribute from their land.

Smerd cannot be “tormented” “without the prince’s word” - the rebel wise men knew this firmly and therefore boldly argued with Yan Vyshatich, calling on their gods and referring to the authority of the princely legislation - “Russian Truth”.

The uprising of the Magi, suppressed by Jan Vyshatich, was not the last in Suzdal. In 1091, again “the sorcerer appeared in Rostov, but soon died” ( "The Tale of Bygone Years", part 1, pp. 141, 342).

Although uprisings of the Smerds, led by the Magi, took place both in Kyiv and Novgorod, why is more information preserved about the uprisings that broke out in the Suzdal land, in the northeast of Rus'?

The fact is that on the territory of the Middle Dnieper they took place in more early times, when chronicle writing was not yet so developed. Therefore, they were not included in the chronicle. As for northeastern Rus', here is the time for this kind of social movements came somewhat later, in the 11th century, when chronicle writing had already reached a high level of development and important events, which took place even far from Kyiv, were reflected in the chronicles.

In addition, this peculiar nature of the movement of the Smerds is explained by the fact that the northeast, inhabited not only by Russians, but also by tribes of Finno-Ugric languages, in the 10th-11th centuries. lagged behind the Dnieper region in its development. The ethnic diversity of this region is more slow pace social development its population, the slower spread of the new class ideology, Christianity - all this contributed to the fact that the Smerd uprisings that took place here were more long time preserved the form of the movement of the Magi.

In fact, how to explain the incomprehensible passage from the chronicle, where it is said that the wise men inflicted wounds on the “best wives” and took out livestock, fish, and furs from the wounds?

Back in the middle of the last century, the Mordovians had a ritual reminiscent of the chronicle story about the strange actions of the Magi in the Suzdal land. This ritual consisted in the fact that special collectors walked around the courtyards and collected supplies for public sacrifices from women, who kept these supplies in special bags worn over their shoulders. After praying, the collector cut off the bag and at the same time lightly stabbed the woman in the shoulder or back several times with a special sacred knife.

Apparently, the chronicler connected the religious ritual, widespread at that time in the northeast, with the movement of the Magi.

Did the Magi really perform their ritual functions during the uprising, did the chronicler count the murdered wives" best husbands", seen by Jan Vyshatich, for the victims of the ritual, during which the Magi did not stab, but killed (for which, as we saw, there were reasons), it is difficult to determine.

If we take into account that the region where the uprising of the Magi unfolded had long been inhabited by a large population, among which similar customs were widespread, observed among the Mordovians eight centuries later, then some strange at first glance features of the uprisings of the Magi will become clear to us.

The half-Russian - half-Finno-Ugric, "Chud" North was very committed to primitive beliefs, to the wise men and magicians. It is no coincidence that under the same year 1071 the chronicler also placed the story of a certain Novgorodian who visited “chud,” that is, the region of the Komi-Zyryans, where he observed the scene of a real ritual of a magician who had fallen into a frenzy, who was lying in convulsions (“shibe im demon” ).

Christianity, which supplanted the cult of the old gods through the cult of saints, penetrated into the northeast of Rus' extremely slowly. was too far christian world from Sheksna and Sukhona; The Christian Church established itself earlier and more quickly on the banks of the Dnieper than in the distant desert forests of Belozerye.

We will try, based on the analysis of all the messages in the chronicle and drawing on ethnographic material, to characterize the Smerd uprisings. The “old children” were the local feudalizing elite, asserting their dominance on the fragments of the disintegrating primitive communal system. Judging by archaeological materials and ethnographic data, one part of it belonged to the Russified remnants of the ancient Eastern Finno-Ugric population of the region, and the other part consisted of Krivichi, Slovenian and Vyatichi settlers. Among the descendants of the original population of this region - the Meri - for a long time there were some customs that were different from the Russians and brought them closer to the neighboring and related Mordovians. This “old child” helped the princely tributaries collect tribute, drove the “cart”, delivered what was collected to special princely “places”, and was the support of the “princely men” during the “polyudye”.

At the same time, the local nobility, using their wealth, and perhaps relying on the remnants of tribal institutions, enriched themselves as a result of the exploitation of servants, enslaved their relatives. By establishing feudal forms of dependence and holding in her hands “gobino”, “abundance” and “zhito”, she became the arbiter of the destinies of her less wealthy neighbors. And she used every “glad” (hunger) to subjugate the surrounding population with loans and enslaving transactions. That is why she would be accused of keeping “gobino and zhito” and “hungry.” This was the reason for the uprising and extermination of the “old child”.

But how can we explain the fact that these uprisings appear to us as movements of the Magi? The long reign of primitive tribal cults, which stubbornly resisted, especially here in the northeast, the introduced Christianity by force of the sword, the spread of sorcery, so characteristic mainly of the northern lands of Rus', and, finally, the peculiarities of the very structure of the communal organization were the reason that the first uprisings of the dependent or semi-independent rural people against the feudal lords take the form of uprisings of the Magi. The Magus is a representative of the old, familiar religion, the religion of primitive communal times. He himself came from the community, he is close to the rural people, he himself often stinks. In the minds of rural people, the sorcerer is associated with a free state, with the absence of princely tributaries, virniks and other princely “husbands”. When the sorcerer was there, there were no tributes, no carts, no virs, the land was with the community members, their property was land, fields, fields, crops and forests. They celebrated old holidays, adhered to ancient customs, and prayed to the old gods. Now, not only in the princely upper rooms and gridnitsa, but throughout Rus', the sorcerer was replaced by the priest.

Tributes and exactions, taxes and carts, the appearance of new owners on the communal lands - boyars and monasteries, expropriation of communal lands and lands, enslavement by the local “old child”, the introduction of Christianity and the appearance of churches on the site of temples and sacred groves, and instead of the Magi - priests - all this, for quite understandable reasons, in the minds of the people of the distant north-eastern villages merged together, into something that would bring an end to their usual communal life. To take a swing at the “old child” meant to oppose the prince, to rebel led by the sorcerer, it meant to start a fight with the church, with the priest, that is, ultimately with the same prince. Therefore, at the head of the Smerd movements are the Magi, servants of the old gods, strict guardians of ancient customs, leaders of religious festivals celebrated from generation to generation, keepers of wonderful sacraments and supernatural knowledge, magicians and sorcerers who communicate with the gods, know how to appease them, and ask them for benefits. for people - "Dazhbod's grandchildren."

The movements of the smerds, led by the Magi, are complex. The goals of the rebel Smerds and Magi are different. The Smerds are fighting feudalization, which is inevitably approaching them. For them, the revolt against the “old child” and the prince with his “husbands” is nothing more than a struggle against the strengthening of feudalism. For the Magi, this is a struggle for the restoration of the old way of life, for the preservation of the old, pre-class religion, and with it the position that they previously occupied in society. The Magus is a fragment of a dying world, a supporter of the dying old orders. He calls back, his goals are reactionary. The Smerds still listen to the voice of the sorcerer. The authority of the sorcerer is still high. As later, religious motives play a big role in the struggle of rural people against feudal lords. When the sorcerer calls on the smerd to speak out against Christianity, the fight against the Christian Church develops into an attack against the prince, the boyars, and vice versa. The close alliance of the ruling class with the church creates a similar specificity of the first anti-feudal movements. Feudalization and Christianization coincided in time.

The feudal lords attacked the community member, ruined him, and turned the entire community as a whole into a dependent organization subordinate to the feudal lord. rural population and, robbing the stinker, they turned him into an enslaved person.

At the same time, Christianity, penetrating everywhere along with the “princely men,” supplanted the old communal gods, destroyed places of worship, places of prayer, gatherings and gatherings, expelled the nascent and, the further north, the more powerful and influential priesthood, smashing the ideology of the primitive communal system. The fight for the old ideology, the fight against Christianity, became a form of uprising of the Smerds. Not being able to resist the feudal lord in open struggle, the smerd sought to repel him, organizing around the old communal principles, communal life, customs, and beliefs. But this struggle of the rural people of Rus' had a different character, different from the aspirations of the Magi. The ultimate goals of the Magi and Smerds diverged. The Magi were thrown overboard by history. They looked back into the past and went into the past. The people, the rural people, could not become a thing of the past. His uprisings could not lead to the liquidation of the nascent and strengthening feudalism, but they were a link in the general stubborn struggle of the masses against feudalism, with the church and the Christian religion for communal order, for a land without boyars, for their original culture, colored by ancient beliefs.

What were the results of the Smerd uprisings?

The sources did not preserve any indications indicating that the performances of the Magi influenced at least to some extent the socio-political system of ancient Rus'. Of course, the defeat of the Smerd uprisings led to increased oppression, to the strengthening of feudal relations and princely power. However, the Smerd uprisings were progressive, popular movements because they were directed against feudalism. And although the Smerds looked back to the “golden age” of the primitive communal system, with its communal property, their struggle reflected the spontaneous discontent of the peasantry, which ultimately led feudalism to its death. The Smerd uprisings were the first link in the chain of peasant uprisings.

Along with the withering away of primitive communal relations, tribal life, the tribal system, along with the growth of feudal relations, a specific form of Smerd uprisings - performances of the Magi - disappears. They could have taken place in the world of communities, in the semi-triarchal-semi-feudal village of the first decades after the baptism of Rus', but they no longer had a place in the city, there was no place in Rus' for victorious feudalism and strengthened Christianity.

The Magi also disappear. In the "Chronicle of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal" there is one very interesting place. Narrating the reprisal of the Magi with their “wives,” the chronicler reports that they “dream” (i.e., symbolically), “like buffoons,” they performed their ritual action ( See "The Chronicler of Pereyaslavl Suzdal", page 47). In this way, the chronicler brings together the Magi with the buffoons and sorcery with the buffoon.

The buffoon, like the sorcerer with whom he becomes close and who, going into the past, bequeaths to him some of his functions, acts as an exposer of “untruth”, a system of oppression and violence. His "mockery" of singing and playing ( ancient meaning the term "gloom") degenerates into satire. He uses an ancient epic that idealizes the “golden age” of the primitive communal system, and plays on its contrast with the new, feudal society.

The buffoonish "buffoon" is dangerous for the authorities: "The dashing buffoon should run away laughing." Their “blessings” about a glorious time, long gone into the past, and therefore even more idealized, their “bad word”, their “desecration” of modern orders - all this is a reason for trying to return the old, patriarchal, communal times, sacred both for the buffoon and for the “people”. And this was already an “uprising”, a “rebellion”, from the point of view of the feudal nobility.

Thus ended the uprisings of the Smerds, which took place in the shell of the movement of the Magi, ended without making any significant changes in the social life of ancient Rus'.

Suzdal. 1024

In the Suzdal land, one of the first major popular uprisings in ancient Rus' known to us from sources took place. The reason for it was the famine that gripped the Suzdal land in 1024 and caused a “great rebellion” in it. The ancient Russian chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years" reports that the common people began to beat the "old children", i.e. the local secular and church nobility, who had hidden supplies of grain from the people, and that this popular uprising was led by the Magi - the priests of the old, pre-Christian religion of the Slavs . The "old child" obviously took advantage of the people's disaster - hunger, taking bread into her hands and selling it to the starving at an extortionate price on credit.
Thus, the church and the nobility enslaved the surrounding people, subjugated them, forced them to work for themselves in their feudal economy. Arriving in the Suzdal region, Prince Yaroslav captured the magicians, brutally executed some, and sent others into exile.

Rostov. 989

The princely authorities of Rostov decided to baptize the local population. All the townspeople were taken into the waters of Lake Nero and divided into groups of 10-15 people each. Specially invited Byzantine priests sailed boats between the groups and baptized the inhabitants, giving them one name per group. Obviously, the priests were paid by piecework, not hourly. The places of worship of the pagans were destroyed, books were destroyed and the wise men were burned.
At the same time, despite the outward obedience, for many years the population resisted innovations: they raised uprisings, restored their temples to Veles and Yarila. Thus, in 1071, the first bishop Leonty was killed in Rostov. But in 1073, Jan Vyshatich from Kyiv brutally suppressed the last of the Rostov uprisings. The pagans had to abandon the open expression of their faith, disguising their rituals in accordance with Christian teachings.

Novgorod.

Novgorod, the second largest city of ancient Rus' after Kyiv, has largely preserved its pagan religion. Its large local population resisted both the Christian Church and the Kyiv princes, who sought to subjugate Novgorod, place their warriors in a particularly privileged position and force the Novgorodians to pay tribute. It is no coincidence that ancient legend tells us that the governors of the Kyiv prince Vladimir, Dobrynya and Putyata, baptized the Novgorodians “with fire and sword.”
The 1070s are marked in the history of Novgorod and the whole Ancient Rus' as a period of outburst of pagan unrest. The most “rebellious” region was the northeast of Rus' - the lands around Rostov, Suzdal, Murom. Here Christian priests For a long time they felt themselves in a hostile environment of the local population, who adhered to the original Slavic religion. Control over the religious sentiments of the inhabitants of the territories of Rus' remote from the urban centers remained in the hands of the Magi - pagan priests, soothsayers and healers (the word “magic” comes from them).
In 1071 they made themselves known in Novgorod. One of the Magi gathered Novgorodians around him and on the wave popular sentiment staged an uprising. The overwhelming majority of the townspeople were on the side of the original Slavic faith. But the authorities had long been converted to Christianity and did not particularly take into account the opinions of local residents.
To the prince’s question, “What will the sorcerer be doing today?”, he, without feeling any trick, answered that he would perform “great miracles.” Prince Gleb took a hatchet from under his cloak and meanly hacked to death the Slavic sorcerer. After this, the Novgorodians, although they did not change their minds, were forced to disperse.

Reasons for the uprisings:

Christianity, which supplanted the cult of the old gods through the cult of Byzantine saints, penetrated into Rus' with extreme difficulty. At the same time, the local ecclesiastical and secular nobility, taking advantage of their wealth, enriched themselves as a result of the exploitation of the local population, enslaved their relatives.
Orthodoxy (from the words “to glorify Rule”) was the native faith of the Slavs; it successfully resisted the introduced Christianity by force of the sword.
Volkh is a representative of his native, familiar religion. He himself came from the community, he is close to the rural people. In the minds of rural people, the sorcerer is associated with a free state, with the absence of princely tributaries, virniks and other princely “husbands”. When the sorcerer was there, there were no tributes, no carts, no virs, the land was with the community members, their property was land, fields, fields, crops and forests. They celebrated old holidays, adhered to their native customs, and prayed to their native gods. Now, not only in the princely upper rooms and gridnitsa, but throughout all of Rus', the sorcerer was replaced by a priest and a princely danshik who had come from Byzantium.
Tributes and exactions, taxes and carts, the appearance of new owners on the communal lands - boyars and monasteries, expropriation of communal lands and lands, enslavement by the local “old child”, the introduction of Christianity and the appearance of churches on the site of temples and sacred groves - all this is understandable reasons caused the Russians to have a fierce hatred of power and imposed religion.

Peasant uprisings in Russia have always been one of the most massive and significant protests against the official government. This was largely due to the fact that the peasants, both before the revolution and during Soviet power there was an absolute majority. At the same time, they remained the most flawed and least protected social class.

One of the first peasant uprisings in Russia, which went down in history and forced the authorities to think about regulating this social class. This movement arose in 1606 in the southern regions of Russia. It was led by Ivan Bolotnikov.

The uprising began against the background of serfdom that was finally formed in the country. The peasants were very unhappy with the increased oppression. In the very early XVII centuries periodically there were mass escapes to the southern regions of the country. In addition, the supreme power in Russia was unstable. False Dmitry I was killed in Moscow, but evil tongues claimed that in reality the victim was someone else. All this made Shuisky’s position very precarious.

There were many dissatisfied with his rule. The situation was made unstable by famine, which for several years did not allow the peasants to reap a rich harvest.

All this led to the peasant uprising of Bolotnikov. It began in the town of Putivl, where the local governor Shakhovsky helped organize troops, and some historians call him one of the organizers of the uprising. In addition to the peasants, many noble families were also dissatisfied with Shuisky, who did not like the fact that the boyars came to power. The leader of the peasant uprising, Bolotnikov, called himself the commander of Tsarevich Dmitry, claiming that he remained alive.

March on Moscow

Peasant uprisings in Russia were often massive. Almost always their main goal was the capital. In this case, about 30,000 rebels took part in the campaign against Moscow.

Shuisky sends troops led by governors Trubetskoy and Vorotynsky to fight the rebels. In August Trubetskoy was defeated, and already in the Moscow region Vorotynsky was defeated. Bolotnikov successfully advances, defeating the main forces of Shuisky's army near Kaluga.

In October 1606, the outskirts of Kolomna were taken under control. A few days later, Bolotnikov’s army besieged Moscow. Soon the Cossacks join him, but Lyapunov’s Ryazan troops, who also sided with the rebels, go over to Shuisky’s side. On November 22, Bolotnikov’s army suffered its first significant defeat and was forced to retreat to Kaluga and Tula. Bolotnikov himself now finds himself in a blockade in Kaluga, but thanks to the help Zaporozhye Cossacks he manages to break through and connect with the remaining units in Tula.

In the summer of 1607, tsarist troops began the siege of Tula. By October the Tula Kremlin had fallen. During the siege, Shuisky caused a flood in the city, blocking the river flowing through the city with a dam.

The first mass peasant uprising in Russia ended in defeat. Its leader Bolotnikov was blinded and drowned. Voivode Shakhovsky, who helped him, was forcibly tonsured a monk.

Representatives of different segments of the population participated in this uprising, so it can be called a full-scale Civil War, but this was one of the reasons for the defeat. Each had their own goals, there was no single ideology.

Peasants' War

It is the Peasant War, or the uprising of Stepan Razin, that is called the confrontation between peasants and Cossacks with the tsarist troops, which began in 1667.

Speaking about its reasons, it should be noted that at that time the final enslavement of the peasants took place. The search for fugitives became indefinite, duties and taxes for the poorest strata turned out to be prohibitively high, the desire of the authorities to control and limit as much as possible Cossack freemen grew. Mass famine and pestilence played a role, as well as general crisis in the economy, which occurred as a result of the protracted war for Ukraine.

It is believed that the first stage of Stepan Razin’s uprising was the so-called “campaign for zipuns,” which lasted from 1667 to 1669. Then Razin's troops managed to block an important economic artery of Russia - the Volga, and capture many Persian and Russian merchant ships. Razin reached where he settled and began to gather troops. It was there that he announced the impending campaign against the capital.

The main stage of the famous peasant revolt of the 17th century began in 1670. The rebels took Tsaritsyn, Astrakhan surrendered without a fight. The voivode and nobles remaining in the city were executed. The battle for Kamyshin played an important role during the peasant uprising of Stepan Razin. Several dozen Cossacks disguised themselves as merchants and entered the city. They killed the guards near the city gates, letting in the main forces, which captured the city. Residents were ordered to leave, Kamyshin was looted and burned.

When the leader of the peasant uprising - Razin - took Astrakhan, she went over to his side most the population of the Middle Volga region, as well as representatives of the nationalities who lived in those places - Tatars, Chuvash, Mordovians. What was captivating was that Razin declared everyone who came under his banner to be a free person.

Resistance of the Tsarist troops

Government troops moved towards Razin under the leadership of Prince Dolgorukov. By that time the rebels had laid siege to Simbirsk, but were never able to take it. Tsarist army After a month-long siege, she finally defeated the rebel detachments, Razin was seriously wounded, and his comrades took him to the Don.

But he was betrayed by the Cossack elite, who decided to hand over the leader of the uprising to the official authorities. In the summer of 1671 he was quartered in Moscow.

At the same time, the rebel troops resisted until the end of 1670. On the territory of modern Mordovia, the most major battle, which involved approximately 20,000 rebels. They were defeated by the royal troops.

At the same time, the Razins continued to resist even after the execution of their leader, holding Astrakhan until the end of 1671.

The outcome of Razin's peasant uprising cannot be called comforting. Its participants failed to achieve their goal - the overthrow of the nobility and the abolition of serfdom. The uprising demonstrated the split in Russian society. The massacre was full-scale. In Arzamas alone, 11,000 people were executed.

Why is the uprising of Stepan Razin called the Peasant War? Answering this question, it should be noted that it was directed against the existing state system, which was perceived as the main oppressor of the peasantry.

Russian revolt

The largest uprising of the 18th century was Pugachev riot. Beginning as an uprising of the Cossacks on Yaik, it grew into a full-scale war of the Cossacks, peasants and peoples living in the Volga region and the Urals against the government of Catherine II.

The Cossack uprising in Yaitsky town broke out in 1772. He was quickly suppressed, but the Cossacks were not going to give up. They had a reason when a fugitive Cossack from the Don, Emelyan Pugachev, arrived on Yaik and declared himself Emperor Peter III.

In 1773, the Cossacks again opposed government troops. The uprising quickly covered almost the entire Urals, the Orenburg region, the Middle Volga region and Western Siberia. Participation in it took place in the Kama region and Bashkiria. Very quickly the Cossack rebellion grew into a peasant uprising under Pugachev. Its leaders carried out competent campaigning, promising the oppressed sections of society a solution to the most pressing problems.

As a result, Tatars, Bashkirs, Kazakhs, Chuvashs, Kalmyks, and Ural peasants went over to Pugachev’s side. Until March 1774, Pugachev's army won victory after victory. The rebel detachments were led by experienced Cossacks, and they were opposed by few and sometimes demoralized government troops. Ufa and Orenburg were besieged and captured large number small fortresses, cities and factories.

Suppression of the uprising

Only after realizing the seriousness of the situation, the government began to pull in the main troops from the outskirts of the empire in order to suppress the peasant uprising of Pugachev. Chief General Bibikov took over the leadership of the army.

In March 1774, government troops managed to win several important victories; some of Pugachev's associates were killed or captured. But in April Bibikov himself dies, and the Pugachev movement flares up with renewed vigor.

The leader manages to unite the detachments scattered throughout the Urals and by mid-summer take Kazan - one of the largest cities in the empire at that time. There are many peasants on Pugachev's side, but militarily his army is significantly inferior to government troops.

IN decisive battle near Kazan, which lasts three days, Pugachev is defeated. He moves to the right bank of the Volga, where he is again supported by numerous serfs.

In July, Catherine II sent new troops to suppress the uprising, which had just been released after the end of the war with Turkey. Pugachev in the Lower Volga does not receive support from the Don Cossacks, his army is defeated at Cherny Yar. Despite the defeat of the main forces, the resistance of individual units continued until mid-1775.

Pugachev himself and his closest associates were executed in Moscow in January 1775.

The peasant uprising in the Volga region covers several provinces in March 1919. This becomes one of the most massive uprisings of peasants against the Bolsheviks, also known as the Chapan uprising. This unusual name is associated with a winter sheepskin jacket, which was called a chapan. This was very popular clothing among the peasants of the region during cold weather.

The cause of this uprising was the policy of the Bolshevik government. The peasants were dissatisfied with the food and political dictatorship, the robbery of villages, and surplus appropriation.

By the beginning of 1919, about 3.5 thousand workers were sent to procure grain. By February, more than 3 million poods of grain were confiscated from local peasants, and at the same time they began to collect an emergency tax, which the government introduced in December last year. Many peasants sincerely believed that they were doomed to starvation.

You will learn the dates of the peasant uprising in the Volga region from this article. It began on March 3 in the village of Novodevichy. The last straw was the rude actions of the tax collection officers, who came to the village demanding that livestock and grain be given to the state. The peasants gathered near the church and sounded the alarm, this served as a signal for the start of the uprising. The communists and members of the executive committee were arrested, and the Red Army detachment was disarmed.

The Red Army soldiers, however, themselves went over to the side of the peasants, therefore, when a detachment of security officers from the district arrived in Novodevichye, they were resisted. Villages located in the district began to join the uprising.

The peasant uprising rapidly spread throughout Samara and Simbirsk province. In villages and cities, the Bolsheviks were overthrown, cracking down on communists and security officers. At the same time, the rebels had practically no weapons, so they had to use pitchforks, lances and axes.

The peasants moved to Stavropol, taking the city without a fight. The rebels' plans were to capture Samara and Syzran and unite with Kolchak's army, which was advancing from the east. Total quantity the rebels numbered from 100 to 150 thousand people.

Soviet troops decided to concentrate on striking the main enemy forces located in Stavropol.

The entire Middle Volga region has risen

The uprising reached its greatest extent on March 10. By this time, the Bolsheviks had already brought up units of the Red Army that had artillery and machine guns. Scattered and poorly equipped peasant detachments could not provide them with adequate resistance, but they fought for every village that the Red Army had to take by storm.

By the morning of March 14, Stavropol was captured. The last major battle took place on March 17, when a peasant detachment of 2,000 people was defeated near the city of Karsun. Frunze, who commanded the suppression of the uprising, reported that at least a thousand rebels were killed, and about 600 more people were shot.

Having defeated the main forces, the Bolsheviks began mass repression against the residents of rebellious villages and villages. They were sent to concentration camps, drowned, hanged, shot, and the villages themselves were burned. At the same time, individual detachments continued resistance until April 1919.

Another major uprising of the times Civil War occurred in the Tambov province, it is also called the Antonov rebellion, since the actual leader of the rebels was the Social Revolutionary, the chief of staff of the 2nd rebel army, Alexander Antonov.

The peasant uprising in the Tambov province of 1920-1921 began on August 15 in the village of Khitrovo. The food detachment was disarmed there. The reasons for the discontent were similar to those that provoked the riot in the Volga region a year earlier.

Peasants began to massively refuse to hand over grain and destroy communists and security officers, in which partisan detachments helped them. The uprising quickly spread, covering part of the Voronezh and Saratov provinces.

On August 31, a punitive detachment was formed, which was supposed to suppress the rebels, but was defeated. At the same time, by mid-November the rebels managed to create the United Partisan Army of the Tambov Territory. They based their program on democratic freedoms and called for the overthrow of the Bolshevik dictatorship and the convening of a Constituent Assembly.

Fight in Antonovschina

At the beginning of 1921, the number of rebels amounted to 50 thousand people. Almost the entire Tambov province was under their control, movement along railways was paralyzed, Soviet troops suffered heavy losses.

Then the Soviets take extreme measures - they cancel the surplus appropriation system and declare a complete amnesty for ordinary participants in the uprising. The turning point comes after the Red Army gets the opportunity to transfer additional forces freed up after the defeat of Wrangel and the end of the war with Poland. The number of Red Army soldiers by the summer of 1921 reached 43,000 people.

Meanwhile, the rebels organize a Provisional Democratic Republic, the head of which becomes the partisan leader Shendyapin. Kotovsky arrives in the Tambov province, who, at the head of a cavalry brigade, defeats two rebel regiments under the leadership of Selyansky. Selyansky himself is mortally wounded.

The fighting continues until June, units of the Red Army crush the rebels under the command of Antonov, Boguslavsky’s troops evade potentially pitched battle. After this, the final turning point comes, the initiative passes to the Bolsheviks.

Thus, about 55,000 Red Army soldiers are involved in suppressing the uprising, and the repressive measures that the Bolsheviks take against the rebels themselves, as well as their families, play a certain role.

Researchers claim that in suppressing this uprising, authorities used chemical weapons against the population for the first time in history. A special grade of chlorine was used to force rebel troops to leave the Tambov forests.

Three facts of application are reliably known chemical weapons. Some historians note that chemical shells led to the death not only of the rebels, but also civilian population, which was not involved in the uprising in any way.

In the summer of 1921, the main forces participating in the riot were defeated. The leadership issued an order to divide into small groups and switch to partisan actions. The rebels returned to guerrilla warfare tactics. Fighting in the Tambov province continued until the summer of 1922.

Vladimir Vasilievich Mavrodin

Popular uprisings in Ancient Rus' XI-XIII centuries.

Introduction

"The history of all hitherto existing societies was the history of the struggle of classes. Free and slave, patrician and plebeian, landowner and serf, master and apprentice, in short, the oppressor and the oppressed were in eternal antagonism towards each other, waged a continuous war, sometimes hidden, sometimes obvious a struggle that always ended in a revolutionary reorganization of the entire social edifice or the general death of the fighting classes" (K. Marx and F. Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, M., 1956, p. 32), as they wrote in " Communist Manifesto"The founders of the great teaching K. Marx and F. Engels.

The class struggle of the working masses also accompanies the emergence of feudal society in ancient Rus', the establishment of feudal forms of exploitation, which at the initial stages of the development of feudalism were not much different from slavery. Class struggle runs like a red thread through the entire history of Rus' period feudal fragmentation. It reflects the spontaneous discontent of the peasantry with the growing feudal oppression, developing and spreading in breadth feudal forms dependencies.

The class struggle of the peasants encourages the feudal lords to strive to create a powerful autocratic power capable of providing them with the “right” to the property and labor of the peasant, to himself. The class struggle takes on a threatening character for the ruling class during the period of the centralized Russian state, and especially in the 17th century, when the highest manifestation it becomes peasant wars, led by I. Bolotnikov and S. Razin.

The 18th century was marked by a new aggravation of class contradictions, a new scope peasant movement, resulting in the most grandiose and last in history feudal Russia peasant war - the uprising of Emelyan Pugachev. Created in Russia in 1859-1861. revolutionary situation, due to the gigantic scope of the peasant movement, forced the tsarist government to carry out peasant reform. In 1861, frightened peasant uprisings ruling class The nobility, in order to prevent the Russian peasantry from beginning to liberate itself “from below,” preferred to carry out the abolition of serfdom “from above.”

But the old, serf-like forms of exploitation in post-reform times were replaced by semi-feudal - semi-bourgeois and capitalist forms of exploitation of the countless peasantry of the Russian Empire.

V.I. Lenin attached great importance to the class struggle of the peasantry. He emphasized that among the Russian peasants, “centuries of serfdom and decades of forced post-reform ruin have accumulated mountains of hatred, anger and desperate determination” (V.I. Lenin, Soch., vol. 15, p. 183). But VI . Lenin, Soch., vol. 17, p. 96). In those distant times, the peasantry fought against the entire feudal system that oppressed them alone, opposing organized forces feudal state- his army, church, law, in fact, only his boundless hatred. “The peasants,” wrote V.I. Lenin, “could not unite, the peasants were then completely crushed by darkness, the peasants had no helpers and brothers among the city workers...” (V.I. Lenin, Complete collection of works. , vol. 7, p. 194).

Only urban workers, only the industrial proletariat, monolithic, united, organized, led by its revolutionary workers' party, could, by leading the nation-wide struggle, lead the peasants to liberation. The greatest in the history of mankind Oktyabrskaya socialist revolution won because the hegemon and leader in it was the most revolutionary proletariat of Russia in the world. Having accomplished a victorious revolution, the working class led the long-suffering working peasantry of Russia onto the path of freedom and happiness.

Speaking at the XXI Congress of the CPSU, N. S. Khrushchev said: “Our young generation has not passed that big school life and struggles that befell the older generation. Young people do not know the horrors and disasters of pre-revolutionary times and only from books can they have an idea of ​​​​the exploitation of workers. It is therefore very important that our young generation knows the history of the country, the struggle of the working people for their liberation..." (N. S. Khrushchev, On development milestones national economy USSR for births 1959-1965. Report and final word at the extraordinary XXI Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on January 27 and February 5, 1959, M., 1959, p. 63).

In this book we will talk about the first manifestations of class contradictions in Rus', about the uprisings of peasants - smerds, as the oldest Russian code of laws - "Russian Truth" calls them, about how simple rural and urban people fought against the oppressors at the Dawn of the history of the Russian people and states.

The class struggle in those days took various shapes. It manifested itself in flight, when peasants literally fled from feudalism to those places where it had not yet penetrated. It takes the form of scattered, spontaneous, local uprisings. The class struggle is also expressed in attempts villager restore communal property. The rural community member considered his everything that was cultivated with his hands, watered with sweat, that was mastered by him, his father and grandfather, everything that, as peasants in Rus' later said, “from time immemorial” gravitated towards his yard, to his community, everything , “where the ax, the plow, the scythe went,” but what has now become the property of the prince, his “husbands,” warriors.

Smerd went into the forest to collect honey for the same berm harvests where he, his father and grandfather had long since collected honey, despite the fact that the bead tree, on which he knew every knot, was already marked with a sign of princely property freshly cut out on the bark. Smerd plowed with his “maple bipod” that piece of land that he himself “torn out” from under the forest, burning forest giants and uprooting stumps, despite the fact that the boundary laid by some rural tiun-prince or boyar servant had already included this watered his field then leads to the vast estates of a prince or boyar. He drove his cattle to the field where he had grazed them from a young age, but this field was already a princely, boyar field.

The ruling feudal elite considered these attempts by the rural people to restore their ancient communal right to own lands and holdings based on the labor expended as a crime, a violation of their “legal” rights. "Russian Truth" will subsequently take these crimes into account and establish punishments for them; but this was a crime only from the point of view of the ruling nobility.

For the rural “people” of Rus', who appeared in the 9th-10th and early 11th centuries. Most often, they were still only tributaries of the prince and community members, co-owners of their lands and holdings; this was a fair struggle for the restoration of their violated rights, for the return of what had belonged to them from time immemorial, since it had been mastered by their labor and provided the means to live. It was not easy for the smell to get used to the new order; he defended the old communal property, considering it fair, and, on the contrary, fought against private feudal property, being sure of its illegality. "Russian Truth" pays so much attention to crimes against private feudal property precisely because at that time the struggle against it by ordinary rural and urban people was something ordinary and everyday. A lot of time will pass before the Russian peasant, robbed and downtrodden, learns to strictly distinguish between his own and his master's, forgetting about the times when his ancestors owned everything.

The ancestors - contemporaries of princes Igor and Vladimir, Yaroslav and Yaroslavich - could not recognize such a distinction. They still remembered well those times when not only their fathers and grandfathers, but they themselves owned lands and lands, and fought as best they could for the right to own them.

Such were the character and forms class struggle peasants against oppressors in ancient Rus'.

Chapter one. The formation of feudal relations in Rus'

In the IX-XI centuries. in ancient Rus' took shape feudal relations. Feudal land ownership arose, and on this basis, feudal dependence of the rural population was established, a dominant class of feudal lords emerged: princes, boyars, “best men,” “old children,” and a class of exploited: “simple children,” “people” of villages and cities. A feudal social system was formed.

But all this did not happen suddenly and not so quickly. Written sources preserved very little information about feudal land ownership. And this is quite natural: the landed property of the nobility was too an everyday thing, and the chroniclers, simply put, were not interested in her.

From the 9th century In general, no evidence of feudal land ownership has reached us. As for the 10th century, from this time there are already reports about “hails” that belonged to the princes: about Vyshgorod (“Olga’s “hail”), Belgorod (“Vladimir’s “hail”), Izyaslavl (“Rogneda’s “hail”) and others. In these princely cities, undoubtedly former centers The prince's farms were engaged not only in crafts. They were surrounded by villages - princely rural settlements, who were under the control and supervision of village and military elders, who were in charge of plowing, all kinds of servants and servants. The chronicler accidentally mentioned some of these villages, and therefore they became known to us by their names. This is the village of Olzhichi, which belonged to Princess Olga, the village of Prince Vladimir Berestovo. Sources also name the village of Budutino, which belonged to Malusha, Vladimir’s mother, the village of Rakoma near Novgorod, where Yaroslav went to his “court” in 1015. Around the villages lay “fields”, “traps”, “perevesishta” (Lovischas are places where animals hunt; outweighs - fishing nets, at the same time fishing places), “places” surrounded by “banners” with the princely tamga. The princes either appropriated free lands and land, or seized land from communities, turning rural people into servants, into the labor force of their farm. In the princely villages there were “mansions” where the prince himself lived. Princely tiuns, elders, various kinds of servants, who often occupied high positions in the palace hierarchy, were also stationed here, slaves, ordinary servants, and smerdas worked. The yard was filled with all sorts of outbuildings: cages, barns, threshing floors, grain pits, stables. There was also a barnyard and poultry house there. In the meadows, herds of cattle and herds of horses with a princely “spot” - a brand - grazed, under the supervision of grooms and village tiuns or elders. The prince's smerds, slaves and other servants who worked for the prince drove their cattle to these same pastures.