Libmonster ID: EE-1274
Author(s) of the publication: M. Ya. VOLKOV

Moscow, Nauka Publishing House, 1969, 440 p. The print run is 2700. Price 2 rubles 6 kopecks.

The monograph of V. I. Buganov, senior researcher at the Institute of History of the USSR of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, "Moscow Uprisings of the late 17th century" is the result of a long study of the author of the history of Moscow uprisings of the second half of the 17th century .1 Determining its scientific significance, we should take into account the presence in our historiography of deep discrepancies in the characterization of the uprisings of 1682 and 1698. A number of researchers assess them as reactionary revolts directed against overdue progressive transformations. This point of view is expressed, in particular, in "Essays on the History of the USSR", as well as in educational and reference literature 2 . V. I. Buganov believes that these uprisings were popular, anti-feudal movements in their social essence, "in which positive and negative features characteristic of all movements of Russia during the feudalism period are intertwined in an intricate tangle" (p. 421). In our opinion, the author comes to such a correct conclusion as a result of a thorough review of the arguments of supporters of a different assessment of the movement and an analysis of all the sources known to him (some of them were identified and put into scientific circulation by him). Historians who considered the uprisings of 1682 and 1689 as reactionary riots, although they recognize the proximity of the Streltsy in terms of occupation and property status to the townspeople, do not consider them, however, part of the people. These historians saw the growing claims of the Streltsy as one of the main reasons for the uprising of 1682, and the abuse of superiors (first of all, the Streltsy colonels), the social nature of which they did not take into account, was considered only a reason for the performance 3. V. I. Buganov, considering the situation of service people "according to the device "(pp. 68-81), establishes their proximity by property status, occupation, and often by origin, or to

1 V. I. Buganov. The Moscow Uprising of 1682, Moscow, 1964; "The Uprising of 1682 in Moscow". Collection of Documents, Moscow, 1964 (compiled by I. Buganov, author of the introduction, source study review and comments).

2 " Essays on the history of the USSR. The period of feudalism. Moscow, 1955, pp. 325-336; " Essays on the history of the USSR. The period of feudalism. Russia in the first quarter of the 18th century Transformations of Peter I". Moscow, 1954, pp. 412-420; "Bolshaya Sovetskaya entsiklopediya". 2nd ed. Vol. 41, 1956 (articles "Streltsy" and "Streletsky riots").

3 " Essays on the history of the USSR. The period of feudalism. XVII century", pp. 325-328.

page 156

posadsky people, or to the peasants. He notes the existence of privileges among the Streltsy, especially among the Muscovites, but does not exaggerate their significance (p.72). It shows the Streltsy as people who experienced increasing serfdom oppression. All of them suffered from the oppression of feudal serfs, who were their superiors, and from the actions of the government, which consisted of the same feudal serfs (p. 77 - 78, 87 - 92, 363 - 367 etc.). The growth of serfdom was the main reason for the actions of the Streltsy and soldiers in 1682 and the Streltsy in 1698.

The facts presented by the author in support of the stated provisions are very convincing. However, his thesis about the belonging of service people "according to the device of the XVII century (including the Moscow Streltsy) to the oppressed people still needs a more detailed argument. In particular, the question of the place and role of permanent military police forces in feudal-feudal Russia should be considered. The appearance of various categories of service people "on the device", and since the XVIII century-the regular army and police was a consequence of the complication of the functions of the feudal state. Since the 17th century, the functions of suppressing the people and waging wars have fallen on a separate part of the people, united in military-corporate organizations of service people "on the device", primarily on archers and soldiers. They formed a permanent military-police force, which was subordinated to feudal serfs and was an obedient tool in the hands of the government. This isolation determined their behavior. The latter was determined by their belonging to military-corporate organizations, that is, their official position. However, people included in such organizations did not become part of the ruling class. In terms of their socio-economic status, the service people "on the device" remained part of the oppressed people and had their own interests, qualitatively different from the interests of the ruling class. The Archers and soldiers of the second half of the 17th century were crushed and oppressed by feudal serfs. In the course of the anti-government protests in which they took part, the similarity of the interests of the service people "on the device" and other oppressed categories of the people was revealed, as well as the opposition of their interests to the interests of the entire ruling class.

Such a definition of the place of the permanent military police forces in Russian society would allow the author to more convincingly substantiate the correct thesis about the dual behavior of the Streltsy (in some uprisings they are stranglers, in others they are participants).

True, history knows examples when anti-government actions of soldiers did not reveal the opposite of their interests to the interests of the ruling class. They were those performances in which the soldiers remained the executors of the will of any party of the ruling class. The uprisings of 1682 and 1698 were classified by the authors of "Essays on the History of the USSR"as precisely such actions. 4 V. I. Buganov, refuting these constructions (pp. 87-144, 367-377), shows that the uprising of 1682 began during the lifetime of Tsar Fyodor (a few days before his death), when the ruling class and its ruling camp did not have not only parties, but also individuals interested in the revolution. anti-government speeches of streltsy and soldiers of the capital. The latter acted independently, " proceeding from their own needs and aspirations "(p.370), and at the beginning of the uprising of 1698. But perhaps the Streltsy became a tool in the hands of the boyar aristocracy during the development of the movement? Considering this possibility, V. I. Buganov studied the influence of certain groups and individuals of the ruling camp on the participants of the uprising of 1682. Recreating the picture of its development between April 30 and May 15, he proved that at that time the rebels, without the participation of Sofya, Miloslavsky, Khovansky and others like them, were preparing a new and more decisive action. The most convincing refutation of the versions that the rebels of 1682 in one way or another served as a tool in the hands of the boyar aristocracy is the analysis given in the monograph of the actions of the rebels and the government after May 15-17. Buganov shows that the government of Sofia, which replaced the Naryshkin government that fell on May 15-17, sought to end the uprising. Moreover, all his actions were supported by both the boyars and the capital's nobles. The actions of the Khovanskys did not and could not lead to the transformation of the rebels into an obedient tool of any party of the ruling class, that is, they did not change the character of the movement. On the contrary, as the author, I. A. Khovansky, has established, zapugi-

4 Ibid., pp. 327-328.

page 157

the government was attracted by the new appearance of streltsy and soldiers, and at the same time was afraid of it, was often the executor of the will of the rebels, who remained masters of the situation in the capital (pp. 246-260). For the uprising of 1698, however, it is generally uncharacteristic for the rebels to come into contact with people from the ruling camp. The latter acted only as traffic stranglers.

Of primary importance for assessing the nature of the movements of 1682 and 1698 is the question of the goals and demands of the rebels, which is discussed in detail in the monograph. The literature has long drawn attention to the fact that the Streltsy, both before and during the uprisings, sought to preserve and strengthen their military-corporate organization, and that this goal was conservative in nature when the need to create a regular army was brewing. V. I. Buganov also admits this, and rightly notes that the class narrowness of goals was inherent in the actions of the most diverse categories of the oppressed masses of Russia (p. 239). According to the author, other demands of the Streltsy and soldiers were of a different nature: to protect them both by legislation and by the actions of "good" rulers from deductions from wages, unfair harassment, and attempts to force them to work "for all elementary people and their friends" on an equal basis with serfs. Already in May 1682, the rebels formulated more general requirements, including that "no promises should be made in all orders by the initial people, clerks and sub-clerks from all ranks of people, and all non-commissioned and serf affairs should be performed without any strings attached" (pp. 237-238). Similar goals were pursued by the Streltsy in the uprising of 1698 (pp. 384-386). These facts show that the Streltsy and soldiers, along with the conservative ones, also put forward demands that were aimed at limiting the arbitrariness of the feudal rulers and mitigating serf oppression. It should be noted that the same demands about the "court" were constantly made by the townspeople.

For the first time in Soviet historiography, V. I. Buganov shows in detail that in the summer months of 1682, other categories of the oppressed population of the capital joined the movement of archers and soldiers. This happened, however, in peculiar ways. For example, the author notes that on May 26, Streltsy and soldiers did not support the serfs who submitted a petition "so that they could be free from their homes..." (pp. 198-199). But later, thanks to the actions of the rebels, many serfs of the capital received free leave. Some of these serfs took part in the uprising, but already as archers, in which they were enlisted at will (pp. 200-202). In the same way, as shown in the book, the peasants who found themselves in the capital were also involved in the movement (they were also enrolled in the Streltsy). In some cases, the peasants who opposed their feudal serfs in 1682 received direct support from the Streltsy and soldiers (p. 209-210).V. I. Buganov cites the facts of direct participation in the uprising and the townspeople of the capital (p. 208).

At the same time, he writes, the difference between the interests of the insurgents and the ruling class was revealed. Despite the fact that the April-May demands of the rebels were met by the charter of June 6, 1682, the Streltsy began new actions in order to achieve one of their main goals - to strengthen the rights and privileges of the military-corporate organization. You can only learn about them from the writings and documents compiled by people who were hostile to the rebels. But even these testimonies, when critically analyzed, allow us to note that the Streltsy and the forces that supported them were no longer opposed to individuals from the ruling camp, but against all feudal serfs. V. I. Buganov cites a number of such testimonies (p. 249 - 250, 265 - 266, 269), limiting ourselves to finding out only the degree of their reliability. But, having established that the rebels had a plan for a new anti-government action, he did not appreciate its significance in a broad sense.

V. I. Buganov considers the performance of 1682 in the capital in connection with the performances of service people "on the device" in Smolensk, residents of the city of Dobrogo, monastic and landowner peasants of separate villages and villages of Belgorod, Vladimir, Pereslavl-Zalessky, Rostov, Yaroslavl and other counties. The reason for all these protests was information about a fierce struggle in government circles and a certain instability of the central government. 5 V. I. Buganov shows that the real impetus for the peasants was the news that " a riot was committed in Moscow... pobi-

5 Ibid., p. 334.

page 158

whether the boyars", " great jams in Moscow and boyar houses are being destroyed "(p. 322, 342). This is another important indicator that, in general, the actions of the capital's archers and soldiers in 1682 were objectively progressive.

V. I. Buganov's research is not without its drawbacks. Some of them have already been mentioned above. In addition, you should pay attention to the disparity of the sections devoted to each of the uprisings. Thus, the movement of 1698 is presented in the book poorer both in terms of factual material and in terms of the level of its analysis. The author's attitude to the question of the origin of the list of persons who were scheduled to be dealt with on May 15, 1682, is uncertain. V. I. Buganov's predecessors considered either I. M. Miloslavsky or I. A. Khovansky to be the authors of the list. Without completely rejecting these hypotheses (especially about the authorship of I. A. Khovansky-p. 142), V. I. Buganov also does not exclude the possibility of compiling a list by the rebels themselves (p. 138), but does not confirm his opinion with any facts, although there are grounds for this (it is enough to recall the presence of such lists in all urban uprisings of the middle and the second half of the 17th century). It is hardly legitimate to include Streltsy, including Muscovites, in the "lower classes of the people" without reservations (p. 421). I would also like to draw attention to the excessive repetition in the monograph of the same, although correct, propositions.

page 158


© library.ee

Permanent link to this publication:

https://library.ee/m/articles/view/V-I-BUGANOV-MOSCOW-UPRISINGS-OF-THE-LATE-17TH-CENTURY

Similar publications: LEstonia LWorld Y G


Publisher:

Edvin KoppelContacts and other materials (articles, photo, files etc)

Author's official page at Libmonster: https://library.ee/Koppel

Find other author's materials at: Libmonster (all the World)GoogleYandex

Permanent link for scientific papers (for citations):

M. Ya. VOLKOV, V. I. BUGANOV. MOSCOW UPRISINGS OF THE LATE 17TH CENTURY // Tallinn: Library of Estonia (LIBRARY.EE). Updated: 12.01.2025. URL: https://library.ee/m/articles/view/V-I-BUGANOV-MOSCOW-UPRISINGS-OF-THE-LATE-17TH-CENTURY (date of access: 17.02.2025).

Found source (search robot):


Publication author(s) - M. Ya. VOLKOV:

M. Ya. VOLKOV → other publications, search: Libmonster EstoniaLibmonster WorldGoogleYandex

Comments:



Reviews of professional authors
Order by: 
Per page: 
 
  • There are no comments yet
Related topics
Publisher
Edvin Koppel
Таллин, Estonia
66 views rating
12.01.2025 (35 days ago)
0 subscribers
Rating
0 votes
Related Articles
ATTITUDE OF THE WORKING PEOPLE OF THE NATIONAL REGIONS OF RUSSIA TO THE QUESTION OF POWER ON THE EVE OF OCTOBER
17 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
V. O. KLYUCHEVSKY. UNPUBLISHED WORKS
17 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
BELARUSIAN-LITHUANIAN CHRONICLE
18 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
NOVGOROD ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPEDITION: RESULTS OF THE FIRST FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY. ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDY OF NOVGOROD ; NOVGOROD COLLECTION. 50 YEARS OF EXCAVATIONS IN NOVGOROD
18 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
MOROZOV STRIKE
19 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
STARITSKY MUTINY
Catalog: История 
19 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
G. Z. IOFFE. KOLCHAK ADVENTURE AND ITS COLLAPSE
20 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
SHLISSELBURG PRISON IN 1884-1906
Catalog: История 
23 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
BORIS GEORGIEVICH WEBER
23 days ago · From Anna Kostabi
INTERNAL TROOPS AT THE FINAL STAGE OF THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR
23 days ago · From Anna Kostabi

New publications:

Popular with readers:

News from other countries:

LIBRARY.EE - Digital Library of Estonia

Create your author's collection of articles, books, author's works, biographies, photographic documents, files. Save forever your author's legacy in digital form. Click here to register as an author.
Library Partners

V. I. BUGANOV. MOSCOW UPRISINGS OF THE LATE 17TH CENTURY
 

Editorial Contacts
Chat for Authors: EE LIVE: We are in social networks:

About · News · For Advertisers

Digital Library of Estonia ® All rights reserved.
2014-2025, LIBRARY.EE is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map)
Keeping the heritage of Estonia


LIBMONSTER NETWORK ONE WORLD - ONE LIBRARY

US-Great Britain Sweden Serbia
Russia Belarus Ukraine Kazakhstan Moldova Tajikistan Estonia Russia-2 Belarus-2

Create and store your author's collection at Libmonster: articles, books, studies. Libmonster will spread your heritage all over the world (through a network of affiliates, partner libraries, search engines, social networks). You will be able to share a link to your profile with colleagues, students, readers and other interested parties, in order to acquaint them with your copyright heritage. Once you register, you have more than 100 tools at your disposal to build your own author collection. It's free: it was, it is, and it always will be.

Download app for Android