The fleeting Copper Riot was another evidence of the country's crisis state. The pinnacle of his expression was the movement led by the Don Cossack S. T. Razin. Since that time, representatives of the Don Cossacks acted as leaders of large movements.

The Don freemen have long attracted fugitives from the southern and central counties. Russian state. The government, in need of the services of the Don Cossacks, avoided conflicts with them and put up with the unwritten law: "There is no extradition from the Don", i.e. fugitive peasants were not returned to their owners. The government also put up with the right of the Don Cossacks for external relations with their closest neighbors - the Crimeans and Kalmyks. The government was forced to put up with the campaigns of the Cossacks for "zipuns", which complicated Russia's relations with the Crimeans and the Ottoman Empire.

Thus, the Cossacks differed from the peasants both in terms of occupation, and in that they did not bear duties in favor of the landowner and the state, but, on the contrary, received a salary from the latter, and, finally, in that they were soldiers.

In the second half of the XVII century. there were significantly fewer opportunities for a campaign "for zipuns": after the Cossacks left Azov, which they owned for five years (1637-1642), the Ottomans fortified it so much that they practically deprived them of access to the Azov and Black Seas.

Having failed in an attempt to break into the Sea of Azov through the Ottoman barrier in Azov, Razin in May 1667, at the head of a detachment of a thousand people, went to the Volga, where he first attacked caravans of ships, and then in June, passing Astrakhan, went to sea, rose along the river Yaik to the Yaitsky town and took possession of it. After wintering there, the differences, taking artillery with them, moved on plows to the western shores of the Caspian Sea, where they made successful raids on the possessions of the Iranian Shah.

Winter 1668-1669 Razintsy spent on Pig Island near Gilan. Here they defeated the fleet equipped against them by the Shah of Iran, but had to leave the island and keep on their way to their native shores. In August 1669, Razin landed in Astrakhan with the Cossacks.

The appearance of the Razintsy in Astrakhan made an indelible impression on its inhabitants. Razin himself appeared as a successful ataman who arrived with rich booty. Ordinary Cossacks flaunted around the city in velvet, silk clothes, plows were equipped with ropes twisted from silk and silk sails. Razin generously distributed gold coins to the population.

September 4, 1669 Razin went to the Don, where he was greeted with triumph. Here he set about preparing a new campaign, this time not for the zipuns, but against the "traitors of the boyars." The path of a hundred was also to pass along the Volga, but not to the south, but to the north. In the campaign of Razin in 1670, along with the Cossacks, Russian peasants, the peoples of the Volga region participated: Mordovians, Tatars, Chuvashs, etc.

During their stay in Tsaritsyn, the differences won two important victories that raised their prestige: first over the archers sent by the government from Moscow, and then over the archers moving under the command of Prince Semyon Lvov from Astrakhan. Astrakhan archers went over to Razin.

Razin continued to move towards Astrakhan and on June 22 launched an attack. The powerful walls of the Kremlin with 400 cannons placed on them could have been impregnable, but the Astrakhan people opened the gates. Only a small group of initial people, led by the voivode Prince Ivan Prozorovsky, took refuge in the cathedral, resisted, but was killed.

From Astrakhan, a huge army of Razin again arrived in Paritsyn, where it was decided to move up the Volga. Saratov and Samara voluntarily went over to the side of the rebels. Razin addressed the population of the Volga region with "charming letters", in which he called for joining the uprising and "bringing out" the traitors, i.e. boyars, nobles, governor and clerks. On September 4, Razin approached Simbirsk and stubbornly besieged it for almost a month.

The raging drunken crowds of raziptsy led a wild life, accompanied by abundant shedding of blood: they took the lives of governors, service people in the fatherland, clerks, archers' heads, as well as archers who did not want to join the movement. The government troops did not show mercy either - they put to death all those who survived on the battlefield; the same fate befell almost all Razintsy who were captured: they were hanged without trial, chopped with sabers. Mutual cruelty, the manifestation of bestial instincts, abuse of wives and daughters undermined the moral foundations of society, violated the main Christian commandment - do not kill. An example of a ferocious reprisal against the vanquished is the burning of the old woman Alena at the stake.

Razin's campaigns for zipuns, his robbery of the population of the coast of the Caspian Sea, undoubtedly, were of a robbery nature and had nothing to do with social protest. It was the movement of the Cossack freemen. At the next stage, perhaps not very clearly, but still, the social aspect of the movement is traced, although its robbery character has not disappeared: the Razintsy robbed nobles, governors and primary people, merchant and government caravans that followed the Volga, the treasury of monasteries, landowners estates and even peasant households. Robbery caused enormous damage to the economy of the country, the confrontation claimed tens of thousands of human lives.

For the sake of what did all this happen, what goals did the peasants and peoples of the Middle Volga region who participated in the movement pursue? They, of course, had grounds for speeches - serfdom, the power of the landowner and government administration intensified in the country. But the surviving documents do not give a proper answer to the question posed above, just as neither Razin nor his associates answer it.

The frightened government announced the mobilization of the metropolitan and provincial nobility. On August 28, 1670, the tsar admonished 60,000 servicemen around the fatherland, who were on their way to the Middle Volga region.

Meanwhile, military men, led by the voevoda Prince Ivan Miloslavsky, settled in the Simbirsk Kremlin and withstood four assaults by the rebels. On October 3, government troops under the command of Yuri Baryatinsky approached Simbirsk from Kazan and, after the defeat inflicted on Razin, joined with military people Miloslavsky. Razin went to the Don to gather a new army, but was captured by the homely Cossacks and handed over to the government.

The ultimate goal of Razin's campaign was to capture Moscow, where the Razintsy intended to beat the boyars, nobles and boyar children. What's next? Judging by the practical actions, Razin and his associates considered the establishment of the Cossack way of life ideal. But it was a utopia, because who was supposed to cultivate the arable land, provide the Cossacks with grain and cash salaries, who was supposed to compensate for the income received by the Cossacks from campaigns for zipuns? The same peasants. Therefore, Razin's movement could have ended not with a change in social relations, but with a change of faces in the privileged stratum of society, its composition.

The uprising failed. The reason for this was the spontaneity and poor organization of the movement, the lack of clear goals of the struggle. Crowds of poorly armed people could not withstand military-trained government troops.

The movement had a tsarist character - in the eyes of the rebels, the "good" tsar was associated not with the name of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, but with his son Alexei, who had died shortly before. This did not prevent them from having two plows in their flotilla: in one of them, upholstered in red velvet, as if there was Tsarevich Alexei Alekseevich, and in the other, upholstered in black velvet, the former Patriarch Nikon, who was in exile.

On June 4, 1671, Razin was taken to Moscow and two days later he was executed on Red Square. The church anathematized him. The government triumphed. At the same time, the name of the successful ataman Razin turned into a legend - the people's memory preserved many songs and epics about him.

17. Church reforms of the middle of the 17th century and the “case of Nikon”. Church schism and its social content.

Even during the development of the reform, a circle of its most active supporters formed around Nikon. Arseniy Grek, a well-known adventurer in the East, acquired great influence on the cause of the future reform. He received his theological education at the Uniate College of St. Athanasius. Upon arrival in Greece, he was ordained a priest and began to seek the episcopal rank. After a series of failures, Arseniy the Greek agrees to be circumcised and converts to Islam. Having moved to Wallachia, he again goes into Uniatism. When Arseny appeared in Moscow, he was sent to the Solovetsky Monastery as a dangerous heretic. From here, Nikon took him to himself, making him in 1652 the head of the Greek-Latin school and the director of the Printing Yard. It is noteworthy that after Arseny completed the "correction" of the Russian liturgical books, he was again sent to prison in Solovki. Another close associate of Nikon was a Kyiv monk, a graduate of the Jesuit College, Epiphanius Slavinetsky. One of the favorite activities of the "graceful didascal" was the invention of new words. With them he tried to fill both his writings and liturgical books. However, the Eastern Patriarch Athanasius Patelarius acted as the main inspirer of the beginning reform. In his numerous letters, he convinced Nikon that the Russian Church, having become independent and independent from the Greeks, had lost piety. Modern historians have established that Athanasius was a clear protégé of the Vatican. He was dethroned three times from the throne of Constantinople and three times with the help of money and intrigues he regained this post. In the East, Afanachy Patelarius was well known as "a good Catholic, favored by the Propaganda."

Relying on such assistants and inspirers, taking advantage of the royal friendship, Nikon set about the church reform decisively and boldly.

He began by strengthening his own power. While still a simple monk, he could not get along in any monastery. The period of his stay in the Anzersky Skete of the Solovetsky Archipelago is well known. There he was known as a self-willed and rude monk. The rector of the skete, the Monk Eleazar of Anzersk, foresightedly predicted Nikon's future fate: “Oh, what a troublemaker and rebel Russia harbors in itself. This will confuse that limits and fill many shakings and troubles. Angry at the saint, Nikon left Solovki. High conceit and pride had sad consequences for the future patriarch. Lacking developed spiritual gifts, he quickly became a victim of a spiritual illness known in patristic literature as "charm". In one of his letters to the king, he reported that God had given him an invisible golden crown: “I saw the royal golden crown in the air ... From that time on, I began to expect myself to be visited.” "Visions" haunted Nikon until the end of his life.

Becoming a patriarch, Nikon believed even more in his exclusivity and hardened. According to contemporaries, Nikon had a cruel and stubborn character, kept himself proud and inaccessible, calling himself, following the example of the Pope, "extreme saint", was titled "great sovereign". From the first days of his archpastoral career, Nikon began to use anathemas, beatings, torture and imprisonment. According to N. Kapterev, "Nikon's actions completely lacked the spirit of true Christian archpastorship." Among other things, the new patriarch was distinguished by greed. In terms of income, Nikon could argue with the autocrat himself. Every year the patriarchal treasury increased by 700,000 rubles. He treated the bishops arrogantly, did not want to call them his brothers, humiliated and persecuted the rest of the clergy in every possible way. Historian V.O. Klyuchevsky called Nikon a church dictator.

The reform undertaken by the patriarch affected all aspects of church life. Its main directions were the "correction" of books, the abolition of ancient forms of worship, liturgical and canonical innovations. The reform began with the so-called "book right". The vast experience accumulated by the Church in publishing and correcting liturgical books was not used in the course of this "right". Thousands of ancient manuscripts collected in Russian and Greek monasteries turned out to be unclaimed. Instead, at the direction of Arseniy Grek, books from the Western, mostly Uniate, press were purchased. One of the main books on the right, the Greek Euchologion of the Venetian edition, is known to many researchers and was kept in the Moscow Synodal Library before the revolution. Feeling what was going on, the Orthodox workers of the Printing House began to slowly disperse. The learned monks Joseph and Savvaty flatly refused to continue their work. Faced with church rejection of their plans, Arseniy Grek and Epiphanius Slavinetsky decided to falsify. In the prefaces of the new books, they reported that the texts were "corrected according to the patterns of the old and charitable Slavic and Greek." The result of the "right" was a real damage to Russian liturgical books. They abounded with inserts from Catholic prayer books, theological errors and grammatical errors. Moreover, the "corrected" editions not only contradicted the ancient books, but also had no agreement among themselves. Professor A. Dmitrievsky, who thoroughly studied the “book right” of Patriarch Nikon, declares: “All these editions are textually very different from each other, and we observe differences between editions not only in a few lines, but sometimes in a page, two or more ".

Other ecclesiastical innovations followed the change in the books. The most notable of these were:

¾ instead of the two-fingered sign of the cross, which was adopted in Russia from the Byzantine Orthodox Church along with Christianity and which is part of the Holy Apostolic tradition, a three-fingered sign was introduced having latin origin;

¾ in old books, in accordance with the grammar of the Slavic language, the name of the Savior "Jesus" was always written and pronounced; in the new books, this name was changed to the Greek "Jesus";

¾ in old books it is established during baptism, wedding and consecration of the temple to make a walk around the sun as a sign that we are following the Sun-Christ. In the new books, circumambulation against the sun is introduced;

¾ in old books in the Creed (8th member) it reads: “And in the Holy Spirit of the True and Life-Giving Lord”; after corrections, the word "True" was excluded;

¾ instead of pure, i.e. the double alleluia, which the Russian Church has been creating since ancient times, the trilabial (that is, triple) alleluia was introduced;

¾ instead of the monodic znamenny church singing, at the personal request of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, a polyphonic Polish part was introduced.

Three-fourths of Catholics who had poured false baptism began to be accepted into the bosom of the Church without baptism.

Nikon and his assistants boldly encroached on changing the church institutions, customs, and even the apostolic traditions of the Russian Orthodox Church, adopted at the Baptism of Russia.

The church reform of Patriarch Nikon undermined the inviolability of Orthodox forms of worship, devalued the hitherto indisputable authority of Christian antiquity, discredited the history of Russian Orthodoxy, and opened the way for further church modernization and secularization of religious consciousness. Departing from the solid ground of the Orthodox confession, the dominant church subsequently continued to drift towards Western dogma and ritualism.

The introduction of new rites and worship according to the corrected books was perceived by many as the introduction of a new religious faith, different from the former, "truly Orthodox." A movement of supporters of the old faith arose - a split, the founders of which were provincial zealots of piety. They became the ideologists of this movement, the membership of which was heterogeneous. Among them were many low-income ministers of the church. Speaking for the "old faith", they expressed dissatisfaction with the increased oppression by the church authorities. Most of the supporters of the "old faith" were townspeople and peasants, dissatisfied with the strengthening of the feudal-serf regime and the deterioration of their position, which they associated with innovations, including in the religious and church sphere. Nikon's reform was not accepted by individual secular feudal lords, bishops and monks. Nikon's departure gave rise to the hopes of the adherents of the "old faith" that they would abandon innovations and return to the old church rites and rites. The investigations of the schismatics, carried out by the tsarist authorities, showed that already in the late 50s and early 60s of the 17th century. in some localities this movement has acquired a mass character. At the same time, among the found schismatics, along with supporters of the "old faith", there were many followers of the teachings of the monk Kapiton, that is, people who denied the need for professional clergy and church authorities. Under these conditions, the tsarist authorities became the head of the Orthodox Church in Russia, which after 1658 focused on solving two main tasks - consolidating the results of church reform and overcoming the crisis in church administration caused by Nikon leaving the patriarchal cathedra. The investigations of schismatics, the return from exile of Archpriest Avvakum, Daniil and other clergymen, ideologists of the schism, and the attempts of the government to persuade them to reconcile with the official church (Ivan Neronov reconciled with it back in 1656) were called upon to contribute to this. The solution of these problems dragged on for almost eight years, mainly due to Nikon's opposition.

The church council elected Archimandrite Joasaph of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery as the new patriarch. At the request of the eastern patriarchs, the convened council condemned the old rites and canceled the decision of the Stoglavy Council of 1551 on these rites as unfounded. Believers who adhered to and defended the old rites were condemned as heretics; it was ordered to excommunicate them from the church, and secular authorities - to judge them in a civil court as opponents of the church. The decisions of the council on the old rites contributed to the formalization and consolidation of the split of the Russian Orthodox Church into the official, dominating in society, church and the Old Believers. The latter in those conditions was hostile not only to the official church, but also to the state closely associated with it.

In the 1650s and 1660s, a movement of supporters of the "old faith" and a schism arose in the Russian Orthodox Church.

Entertaining artistic narratives, hysterical essays, including criticism of church orders, were in great demand.

Struggling with the desire for a secular education, the clergy insisted that only through the study of the Holy Scriptures and theological literature, believers can achieve true enlightenment, purification of the soul from sins and spiritual salvation - the main goal of a person's earthly life. They regarded Western influence as a source of penetration into Russia of harmful foreign customs, innovations and views of Catholicism, Lutheranism and Calvinism hostile to Orthodoxy. Therefore, they were supporters of the national isolation of Russia and opponents of its rapprochement with Western states.

Patriarch Joachim from 1674 to 1690 was a consistent spokesman and conductor of the policy of hostility and intolerance towards the Old Believers and other church opponents, heterodoxy, foreigners, their faith and customs, to secular knowledge. Opponents of the desire for secular knowledge, rapprochement with the West and the spread of foreign culture and customs were also the leaders of the schism, including Archpriest Avvakum, and those that developed in the last third of the 17th century. Old Believer religious communities.

The tsarist government actively supported the church in the fight against schism and heterodoxy and used the full power of the state apparatus in this. She also initiated new measures aimed at improving the church organization and its further centralization.

The split of the last third of the XVII century. is a complex socio-religious movement. It was attended by supporters of the "old faith" (they made up the majority of the participants in the movement), members of various sects and heretical movements who did not recognize the official church, hostile to it and the state, which is closely associated with this church. The hostility of the schism between the official church and the state was by no means determined by differences of a religious and ritual nature. It was determined by the progressive aspects of the ideology of this movement, its social composition and character. The ideology of the split reflected the aspirations of the peasantry and partly of the township class, and therefore it had both conservative and progressive features. The former include the idealization and defense of antiquity, isolation, and propaganda for the adoption of a martyr's crown in the name of the "old faith" as the only way to save the soul. These ideas left their mark on the schism movement, giving rise to conservative religious aspirations and the practice of "fire baptisms" (self-immolations). The progressive sides of the ideology of the schism include consecration, that is, the religious justification of various forms of resistance to the power of the official church and the feudal serf state, the struggle for the democratization of the church.

The complexity and inconsistency of the schism movement manifested itself in the uprising in the Solovetsky Monastery of 1668-1676, which began as an uprising of supporters of the "old faith". The aristocratic elite of the “elders” opposed Nikon’s church reform, the ordinary mass of monks - moreover, for the democratization of the church, and the “Balti”, that is, novices and monastic workers, opposed feudal oppression, and in particular against feudal orders in the monastery itself.

To suppress the movement, various means were used, including ideological ones, in particular, anti-schismatic polemical writings were published (“Rod of Government” by Simeon of Polotsk in 1667, “Spiritual Covenant” by Patriarch Joachim in 1682, etc.), and in order to increase the "education" of church services, the publication of books containing sermons began (for example, "The Lunch of the Soul" and "The Supper of the Soul" by Simeon of Polotsk).

But the main ones were the violent means of fighting the schism, which, at the request of the church leadership, were used by the secular authorities. A period of repression began with the exile of the ideologues of the schism, who refused to reconcile with the official church at a church council in April 1666; of these, Archpriests Avvakum and Lazar, deacon Fyodor, and the former monk Epiphanius were exiled and kept in the Pustozersk prison. Followed by links mass execution survivors of the Solovetsky uprising (executed more than 50 people). Patriarch Joachim insisted on such a severe punishment. Cruel punishments, including executions, were practiced more often under Fyodor Alekseevich (1676-1682). This caused a new performance of the schismatics in the days of the Moscow uprising of 1682. The failure of the "mutiny" of the adherents of the old faith led to the execution of their leaders. The hatred of the ruling class and the official church for schism and schismatics was expressed in legislation. According to the decree of 1684, the schismatics were to be tortured and further, if they did not submit to the official church, they were to be executed. Those of the schismatics who, wanting to be saved, submit to the church, and then return to schism again, were to be "executed by death without trial." This marked the beginning of mass persecution.

©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2017-06-11

Popular movement led by Stepan Razin

Causes:

1. The main reason, as in all movements of the 17th century, was the economic dissatisfaction of the population, the difference between the “razinshchina” was its scope.

2. In addition to economic reasons, there is dissatisfaction with the political system as a whole, i.e. Razintsy opposed their Cossack to the existing system. It was a clash of two indigenous ways Russian life: autocratic and specific veche;

3. With the accession of Little Russia, the influx of refugees to the Don increased, this territory could not feed everyone (there is no issue of the Don). On the other hand, trips for zipuns (robbery of carts with goods) are prohibited.

driving forces:

The main driving force was the Cossacks. Whereas before it was urban population. Other ethnic groups also joined the Cossacks.

Cossacks - unlike peasants and taxpayers, they do not pay any taxes to either the state or landowners, they receive salaries for guarding borders, they have their own foreign policy ties, they accept fugitives, raid neighboring countries (campaigns for zipuns)

May 1667. Razin, at the head of a detachment of a thousand people, broke through to the Volga, stopped the royal caravan and robbed it. Then, along the Yaik River, he approached the Yaitsky town. Stepan Razin seized the town of Yaik by cunning.

After wintering in the town of Yaik, Razin with a detachment of 2000 people went to the western coast of the Caspian Sea (Iran). In the summer, having defeated the Iranian fleet, he returned to Astrakhan. He lands in Astrakhan, he is greeted as a national hero, but for the authorities he is a criminal. Since 1670, the movement begins to have an anti-feudal character.

Razin addressed the population of the Volga region with "charming letters." At the same time, Stepan Razin uses imposture and hoaxes. Samara and Saratov surrender without a fight. The frightened government announces mobilization and a 60,000-strong army defeats Razin under the walls of Simbirsk.

Results:

1. Razin has become a legend.

2. The movement was of a tsarist nature, having a focus on a palace coup.

3. The movement was poorly organized. There was no clear program and regular army

4. Caused damage to the economy and led to colossal human casualties

5. Shattered the moral foundations of society, violating one of the main commandments: "Thou shalt not kill."

Russian empire in the 18th century

The era of Peter

1. Domestic politics Petra

a. Economic reforms

b. Social reforms

c. reforms government controlled

2. Peter's foreign policy

a. Azov and Prut campaign

b. North War

Peculiarities:

1. Peter does not have a pre-planned reform program;

2. He reformed the country in the most unfortunate periods of its history;

3. The main task of Peter's reforms is the construction of state absolutism.

By the time of Peter's reign, Russia faced the threat of turning into a raw material appendage of Sweden.

AT economic preparation for war was the first city reform, on which town halls and zemstvo huts (burmister huts) were created. The town halls were engaged in the affairs of merchants, the huts were engaged in the collection of taxes. The taxation system was changed poll tax. More than 40 indirect taxes were introduced. One of the most important economic reforms of Peter was creation of the Ural industrial region.

Why Ural:

1. Distance from the borders;

2. Availability of fuel base (charcoal);

3. Availability of hydro resources;

4. The presence of rich minerals.

In the period from 1701 to 1704, 4 large metallurgical plants were built, these plants helped us completely abandon the import of weapons.

1715 - an order forcing double the cultivated area flax and hemp.

1699 - recruitment sets begin, i.e. the principle of manning the army is changing. The army becomes regular. The size of the army increased from 40 to 120 thousand people; it was an army homogeneous in terms of weapons and national composition.

Social reforms:

1714 - decree of unanimity, according to which the father could transfer the estate to only one son / daughter.

1722 - ranking board, the whole service was divided into 14 steps, from the 8th step the nobility was given. The service was of 3 types: military, civil and court. These types of service were interchangeable. Thus, a person moved up the career ladder not by origin, but by ability.

The Don freemen have long attracted fugitives from the southern and central districts of the Russian state. The government, needing the services of the Don Cossacks, avoided conflicts with them and put up with the unwritten law: "There is no extradition from the Don," that is, fugitive peasants were not returned to their owners. The government also put up with the right of the Don Cossacks for external relations with their closest neighbors - the Crimeans and Kalmyks. The government was forced to put up with the campaigns of the Cossacks for "zipuns", which complicated Russia's relations with the Crimeans and the Ottoman Empire.

In the second half of the XVII century. there were significantly fewer opportunities for a campaign "for zipuns": after the Cossacks left Azov, which they owned for five years (1637 - 1642), the Ottomans fortified it so much that they practically deprived them of access to the Azov and Black Seas.

Having failed in an attempt to break into the Sea of Azov through the Ottoman barrier in Azov, Razin in May 1667, at the head of a detachment of a thousand people, went to the Volga, where he first attacked caravans of ships, and then in June, passing Astrakhan, went to sea, rose along the Yaik River to the Yaitsky town and took possession of it. After wintering there, the Razintsy, taking artillery with them, moved on plows to the western shores of the Caspian Sea, where they made successful raids on the possessions of the Iranian Shah.

Winter 1668 - 1669 Razintsy spent on Pig Island near Gilan. Here they defeated the fleet equipped against them by the Shah of Iran, but had to leave the island and keep on their way to their native shores. In August 1669, Razin landed in Astrakhan with the Cossacks.

September 4, 1669 Razin went to the Don, where he was greeted with triumph. Here he set about preparing a new campaign, this time not for the zipuns, but against the "traitors of the boyars." His path was also to pass along the Volga, but not to the south, but to the north. In the campaign of Razin in 1670, along with the Cossacks, Russian peasants, the peoples of the Volga region participated: Mordovians, Tatars, Chuvashs, etc.

During their stay in Tsaritsyn, the Razintsy won two important victories that raised their prestige: first over archers sent by the government from Moscow, and then over archers moving under the command of Prince. Seeds of Lvov from Astrakhan. Astrakhan archers went over to Razin.

Razin continued to move towards Astrakhan and on June 22 launched an attack. The powerful walls of the Kremlin with 400 cannons placed on them could have been impregnable, but the Astrakhan people opened the gates. Only a small group of initial people, headed by the governor Prince. Ivan Prozorovsky, hiding in the cathedral, resisted, but was killed.

From Astrakhan, a huge army of Razin again arrived in Tsaritsyn, where it was decided to move up the Volga. Saratov and Samara voluntarily went over to the side of the rebels. Razin addressed the population of the Volga region with "charming letters", in which he called for joining the uprising and "withdrawing" traitors, that is, boyars, nobles, governors and clerks. On September 4, Razin approached Simbirsk and stubbornly besieged it for almost a month.

The raging drunken crowds of Razintsy led a wild life, accompanied by copious shedding of blood: they took the lives of governors, service people in the fatherland, clerks, archers' heads, as well as archers who did not want to join the movement. The government troops did not show mercy either - they put to death all those who survived on the battlefield; the same fate befell almost all Razintsy who were captured: they were hanged without trial, chopped with sabers. Mutual cruelty, the manifestation of bestial instincts, abuse of wives and daughters undermined the moral foundations of society, violated the main Christian commandment - do not kill. An example of a ferocious reprisal against the vanquished is the burning of the old woman Alena at the stake.

Razin's campaigns for zipuns, his robbery of the population of the coast of the Caspian Sea, undoubtedly, were of a robbery nature and had nothing to do with social protest. It was the movement of the Cossack freemen. At the next stage, perhaps not very clearly, the social aspect of the movement is still traced, although its robbery character has not disappeared: the Razintsy robbed the nobles, governor and primary people, merchant and state caravans that followed along the Volga, the treasury of monasteries, landowners' estates and even peasant households. Robbery caused enormous damage to the economy of the country, the confrontation claimed tens of thousands of human lives.

Meanwhile, military men, led by the voivode, Prince. Ivan Miloslavsky settled in the Simbirsk Kremlin and withstood four assaults by the rebels. On October 3, government troops under the command of Yuri Baryatinsky approached Simbirsk from Kazan and, after the defeat inflicted on Razin, joined forces with Miloslavsky's military men. Razin went to the Don to gather a new army, but was captured by the homely Cossacks and handed over to the government.

In the 17th century in Russia there were mass phenomena. The Time of Troubles is over. All areas public life were completely destroyed: the economy, politics, social relations, culture, spiritual development. Naturally, it was necessary to restore the economy. Many reforms and innovations hurt the population of that time. Consequently - popular movements. Let's try to analyze this topic in more detail.

The subject of "history" (7 cl.): "People's movements"

The period of the "rebellious age" is included in the compulsory school minimum. The course "Patriotic History" (Grade 7, "People's Movements") highlights the following causes of social upheaval:

due to constant military conflicts.
Attempts by the authorities to limit the Cossack autonomy.
Strengthening the red tape.
Enslavement of the peasants.
Church reforms that led to a split among the clergy and the population.

The above reasons give reason to believe that the popular movements in the 17th century are associated not only with the peasantry, as it was before, but also with other social strata: the clergy, the Cossacks, the archers.

This means that powerful forces that know how to wield weapons begin to oppose the authorities. Cossacks and archers managed to gain combat experience in constant wars. Therefore, their participation in unrest in scale can be compared with civil wars.

salt riot

I would like to recall modern pensioners who actively monitor the prices of salt in stores. An increase of one or two rubles today is accompanied by various reproaches and criticism of the authorities. However, the rise in salt prices in the 17th century provoked a real riot.

On July 1, 1648, a powerful wave of protest broke out. The reason was the additional duty on salt, due to which the government decided to replenish the budget. The situation led to the fact that the protesters "intercepted" Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich when returning from prayer to the Kremlin. People complained to the "good tsar" about the actions of the "bad" boyar - the head of L. S. Pleshcheev. In the eyes of an ordinary man in the street, he alone was to blame for all the troubles of the state: red tape, embezzlement, raising prices not only for salt, but also for other food products.

The "bad" boyar had to be sacrificed. “On the sly” the tsar got rid of not only the “scoundrel” Pleshcheev, but also his relative, the boyar B. Morozov, his tutor. In fact, he was the "secret cardinal" in the country and solved almost all administrative issues. However, after this, the popular movements in the country did not end. Let's move on to the rest.

Popular Movements (Grade 7, History of Russia): Copper Riot

The salt situation has not taught the government to be cautious about reforms. There was a catastrophic lack of money in the country. And then the authorities carried out the most "killer" economic reform that could only be invented - the devaluation of the coin.

Instead of silver money, the government introduced copper coins into circulation, which cost 10-15 less. Of course, it was possible to come up with wooden (in the truest sense of the word) rubles, but the authorities did not dare to tempt fate so much. Naturally, merchants stopped selling their goods for copper.

In July 1662, pogroms and riots began. Now people did not believe in a "good king". The estates of almost all the royal entourage were subjected to pogroms. The crowd even wanted to destroy the residence of the "anointed of God" in the village of Kolomenskoye. However, the troops arrived in time, and the king went out to negotiate.

After these events, the authorities dealt cruelly with the rebels. Many people were executed, arrested, some had their hands, feet, tongues cut off. Those who were lucky were sent into exile.

Rebellion of Stepan Razin

If the previous popular movements were organized by the peaceful unarmed population, then armed Cossacks with combat experience took part in it. And this turned out to be a more serious problem for the state.

The Cathedral Code of 1649 was to blame for everything. This document finally established serfdom. Of course, it began to form since the time of Ivan III, with the introduction of St. George's Day and the attachment of workers to the lands of feudal lords. However, it established a life-long search for fugitive peasants and their return to their former owners. This norm was contrary to the Cossack liberties. There was a centuries-old rule “no extradition from the Don”, which meant protecting everyone who got there.

By the mid-60s of the 17th century, a huge number of fugitive peasants had accumulated on the Don. This led to the following consequences:

The impoverishment of the Cossacks, as there was simply not enough free land. In addition, there were no wars, which traditionally reduce the population of the Cossacks and serve as a source of wealth.
The concentration of a huge combat-ready army in one place.

All this, of course, could not but result in popular movements.

"Zipun Campaign"

The first stage of the uprising of peasants and Cossacks led by S. Razin went down in history as a "campaign for zipuns", that is, for prey (1667-1669). The purpose of the campaign was to plunder merchant ships and caravans carrying cargo from Russia to Persia. In fact, Razin's detachment was a pirate gang that blocked the main trading artery on the Volga, captured the Yaitsky town, defeated the Persian fleet, and then returned in 1669 with rich booty to the Don.

This successful and unpunished campaign inspired many other Cossacks and peasants who were suffocating from poverty. They massively reached out to S. Razin. Now the idea of making a revolution in the country has already arisen. S. Razin announced a campaign against Moscow.

Second stage (1670 - 1671)

In fact, S. Razin's speech resembles a future peasant war under the leadership of E. Pugachev. Wide large numbers, participation in the conflict of local national tribes speak of a full-scale civil war. Generally National history(popular movements in particular) had never seen such mass demonstrations of their own people before that time.

The course of the uprising

The rebels immediately took the city of Tsaritsyn. We approached the well-fortified fortress of Astrakhan, which then surrendered without a fight. All governors and nobles were executed.

Success provoked a massive transition to the side of Razin in such large cities as Samara, Saratov, Penza, which indicates a serious political crisis within Russian society. In addition to the Russian population, the peoples of the Volga region also reached out to him: Chuvash, Tatars, Mordovians, Mari, etc.

Reasons for the large number of rebels

The total number of rebels reached 200 thousand people. There are several reasons why thousands were drawn to Razin: some were tired of poverty, taxes, others were attracted by the status of “free Cossacks”, and still others were criminals. Many national communities wanted autonomy and even independence after the victory of the revolution.

End of the uprising, massacres

However, the goals of the rebels were not destined to come true. Lacking organizational unity and common goals, the army was uncontrollable. In September 1670, she tried to take Simbirsk (modern Ulyanovsk), but failed, after which she began to disintegrate.

The main number, led by S. Razin, went to the Don, many fled to the interior regions. Against the rebels, the punitive expedition was led by the governor, Prince Yu. Baryatinsky, which in fact means the use of all available military forces. Fearing for their lives, the rebels betrayed their leader, who was then quartered.

Up to 100 thousand people were killed and tortured by the official authorities. Russia had never known such mass repressions before that time.

The uprising of Ivan Bolotnikov is a movement for the rights of peasants in Russia at the beginning of the 17th century, led by Ivan Isaevich Bolotnikov.

Background of the uprising

By the end of the 16th century, a new state economic system, feudalism, was finally formed and consolidated in Russia. The feudal lords (landowners) completely owned the peasants, could sell them and transfer them to each other, which led to a gradual, inevitable increase in the oppression of the feudal lords over the peasantry. Of course, the peasants did not like this situation, and they began to resent and gradually start small skirmishes with the feudal lords in defense of their own rights. So, in 1603 there was a rather large uprising of peasants and serfs under the command of Khlopko Kosolap.

In addition, after the death of False Dmitry 1, rumors spread that it was not the real king who was killed, but someone else. These rumors greatly weakened the political influence of Vasily Shuisky, who became king. The accusations that it was not the real tsar who had been killed gave "legitimacy" to any uprisings and skirmishes with the new tsar and the boyars. The situation became more and more difficult.

The uprising of the peasants led by Ivan Bolotnikov took place in 1606-1607 and became one of the main stages in the struggle of the peasantry against the boyars and serfdom.

Causes of the uprising

The oppression of the feudal lords, the strengthening of serfdom;
Political instability in the country;
Growing hunger;
Dissatisfaction with the activities of the boyars and the sovereign.

The composition of the participants in the uprising of Ivan Bolotnikov

Peasants;
Serfs;
Cossacks from Tver, Zaporozhye and from the Volga;
Part of the nobility;
Mercenary troops.

Brief biography of Ivan Bolotnikov

The identity of the leader of the uprising, Ivan Isaevich Bolotnikov, is shrouded in secrets. To date, there is no unified theory about early years life of Bolotnikov, however, historians are of the opinion that Bolotnikov was a serf of Prince Telyatevsky. As a young man, he fled from his master, was captured, after which he was sold to the Turks. During the battle, he was released and fled to Germany, from where he heard about the events taking place in Russia. Bolotnikov decided to take an active part in them and returned to his homeland.

The beginning of the uprising of Ivan Bolotnikov

The uprising originated in the South-West of the country, where the participants in the previous major uprising under the leadership of Khlopok, as well as opponents of Boris Godunov's reforms and serfdom, lived. Gradually, Tatars, Chuvashs, Maris and Mordovians began to join the rebellious Russian peasantry.

The uprising began in 1606 when Bolotnikov returned to Russia and led the disgruntled peasants. Having gathered an army, they began a military campaign against Moscow in order to remove the current sovereign from the throne and achieve the abolition of serfdom. The first clash with the sovereign's army took place in August near Kromy. The rebels were victorious and moved towards Orel.

On September 23, 1606, a battle took place near Kaluga, which Bolotnikov won. This made it possible for the rebels to freely move on to the capital. On the way to the capital, Bolotnikov and his associates managed to capture more than 70 cities.

In October 1606, the troops approached Moscow. Bolotnikov decided to raise an uprising in the city itself, for which he sent agitators. However, it was not possible to capture Moscow, Prince Shuisky gathered his army and defeated the rebels in November 1606. At the same time, a series of betrayals took place in the camp of Bolotnikov, which greatly weakened the army.

After the defeat, new centers of revolt broke out in Kaluga and Tula and the Volga region. Shuisky sent his troops to Kaluga, where Bolotnikov fled his troops and began the siege of the city, which lasted until May 1607, but ended in nothing.

On May 21, 1607, Shuisky again organizes a performance against Bolotnikov, which ends with the victory of government troops and the almost complete defeat of Bolotnikov.

The rebels take refuge in Tula, which is immediately besieged by Shuisky's army. The siege lasted 4 months, after which Shuisky offered the rebels a peace treaty. The exhausted troops of Bolotnikov agree, but Shuisky does not fulfill his promises and takes all the leaders of the uprising prisoner.

Reasons for the defeat of Bolotnikov

Lack of unity in the ranks of his troops. The uprising involved people from different walks of life and they all pursued their own goals;
Lack of a single ideology;
The betrayal of a part of the army. The nobility pretty soon went over to the side of Shuisky;
Underestimation of the strength of the enemy. Bolotnikov often forced events, not giving the army the opportunity to accumulate strength.

The results of Ivan Bolotnikov's speech

Despite the defeat, the rebels managed to ensure that the government finally began to take into account the needs of the lower strata of the population and paid attention to the needs of the peasants. The uprising of Ivan Bolotnikov was the first peasant uprising in the history of Russia.