Invariably called the golden age. An empress reigned on the throne, similar in her main aspirations to the great reformer Peter, who, like him, wanted to make Russia part of civilized Europe. The empire is growing stronger, new lands are annexed through powerful military force, and sciences and arts are developing under the supervision of an educated queen.
But there was also “the horror of the 18th century” - that’s what Catherine the Great called Pugachev’s uprising. Its results, as well as its causes and course, revealed acute contradictions hidden behind the luxurious façade of the golden age.
Causes of the uprising
Catherine's first decrees after the dismissal of Peter III were manifestos on the exemption of nobles from compulsory military and public service. Landowners were given the opportunity to engage in their own farming, and in relation to the peasants they became slave owners. Serfs received only unbearable duties, and even the right to complain about their owners was taken away from them. The fate and life of the serf was in the hands of the owner.
The share of those peasants who were assigned to factories turned out to be no better. The assigned workers were mercilessly exploited by the miners. In terrible conditions, they worked in difficult and dangerous industries, and they had neither the strength nor the time to work on their own plots.
It was not for nothing that Pugachev’s uprising flared in the Urals and Volga region. The results of the repressive policy of the Russian Empire in relation to the national outskirts are the appearance of hundreds of thousands of Bashkirs, Tatars, Udmurts, Kazakhs, Kalmyks, and Chuvashs in the rebel army. The state drove them away from their ancestral lands, building new factories there, implanting a new faith for them, banning the old gods.
On the Yaike River
The fuse that ignited the flames of popular anger in the Urals and Volga was the performance of the Yaik Cossacks. They protested against the deprivation of their economic (state monopoly on salt) and political (concentration of power among elders and atamans supported by the authorities) freedoms and privileges. Their performances in 1771 were brutally suppressed, which forced the Cossacks to look for other methods of struggle and new leaders.
Some historians have expressed the version that Pugachev’s uprising, its causes, course, and results were largely determined by the top of the Yaik Cossacks. They managed to subjugate the charismatic Pugachev to their influence and make him their blind tool in achieving Cossack liberties. And when danger came, they betrayed him and tried to save their lives in exchange for his head.
The peasant "anpirator"
The tension in the socio-political atmosphere of that time was supported by rumors about the forcibly deposed royal wife of Catherine, Peter Fedorovich. It was said that Peter III prepared a decree “On Peasant Freedom,” but did not have time to proclaim it and was captured by the nobles - opponents of the emancipation of the peasants. He miraculously escaped and will soon appear before the people and raise them to fight for the return of the royal throne. The faith of the common people in the right king, the anointed one of God, who has special marks on his body, was often used in Rus' by various impostors to fight for power.
The miraculously saved Pyotr Fedorovich actually showed up. He showed obvious signs on his chest (which were traces of scrofula) and called the nobles the main enemies of the working people. He was strong and brave, had a clear mind and an iron will. His name at birth was
Don Cossack from the village of Zimoveyskaya
He was born in 1740 or 1742 in the same places where another legendary rebel, Stepan Razin, was born a hundred years before him. Pugachev’s uprising and the results of his campaigns along the Volga and Urals frightened the authorities so much that they tried to destroy the very memory of the “peasant king.” Very little reliable information has survived about his life.
From a young age, Emelyan Ivanovich Pugachev was distinguished by his lively mind and restless disposition. He took part in the war with Prussia and Turkey and received the rank of cornet. Due to illness, he returned to the Don, was unable to achieve official resignation from military service and began to hide from the authorities.
He visited Poland, the Kuban and the Caucasus. For some time he lived with the Old Believers on the banks of one of the tributaries of the Volga - There was an opinion that it was one of the prominent schismatics - Father Filaret - who gave Pugachev the idea of being miraculously saved by the true emperor. This is how the “anpirator” Pyotr Fedorovich appeared among the freedom-loving Yaik Cossacks.
Revolt or peasant war?
Events that began as a struggle for the return of Cossack freedoms acquired all the features of a large-scale war against the oppressors of the peasantry and working people.
The manifestos and decrees proclaimed on behalf of Peter III contained ideas that had enormous attractive power for the majority of the population of the empire: the liberation of the peasantry from serfdom and unbearable taxes, allotment of land to them, the elimination of the privileges of the nobility and officials, elements of self-government of the national outskirts, etc.
Such slogans on the banner of the rebel army ensured its rapid quantitative growth and had a decisive influence on the entire Pugachev uprising. The causes and results of the peasant war of 1773-75 were a direct result of these social problems.
The Yaik Cossacks, who became the core of the main military force of the uprising, were joined by workers and assigned peasants of the Ural factories, and landowner serfs. The cavalry of the rebel army consisted mainly of Bashkirs, Kazakhs, Kalmyks and other inhabitants of the steppes on the edge of the empire.
To control their motley army, the leaders of the Pugachev army formed a military collegium - the administrative and political center of the uprising. For the successful functioning of this rebel headquarters, there was not enough will and knowledge of the Pugachevo commanders, although the actions of the rebellious army sometimes surprised the career officers and generals who opposed them with their organization and common mind, although this was a rare occurrence.
Gradually, the confrontation acquired the features of a real civil war. But the beginnings of the ideological program, which could be seen in Emelyan’s “royal decrees,” could not withstand the predatory nature of his troops. The results of Pugachev's uprising subsequently showed that robberies and unprecedented cruelty in reprisals against oppressors turned the protest against the state system of oppression into that very senseless and merciless Russian rebellion.
Progress of the uprising
The fire of the uprising engulfed a gigantic space from the Volga to the Urals. At first, the performance of the Yaik Cossacks, led by their self-proclaimed husband, did not cause any concern to Catherine. Only when Pugachev’s army began to quickly replenish, when it became known that the “anpirator” was being greeted with bread and salt in small villages and large settlements, when many fortresses in the Orenburg steppes were captured - often without a fight - did the authorities become truly concerned. It was the unforgivable negligence of the authorities that Pushkin, who studied the results and significance of the uprising, explained the rapid increase in Cossack indignation. Pugachev led a powerful and dangerous army to the capital of the Urals - Orenburg, which defeated several regular military formations.
But the Pugachev freemen could not truly resist the punitive forces sent from the capital, and the first stage of the uprising ended with the victory of the tsarist troops at the Tatishchev Fortress in March 1774. It seemed that Pugachev’s uprising, the results of which was the flight of the impostor with a small detachment to the Urals, was suppressed. But this was only the first stage.
Kazan landowner
Just three months after the defeat near Orenburg, a 20,000-strong rebel army reached Kazan: the losses were made up for by an immediate influx of new forces from among those dissatisfied with their position. Hearing about the approach of “Emperor Peter III,” many peasants themselves dealt with their owners, greeted Pugachev with bread and salt and joined his army. Kazan almost submitted to the rebels. They were unable to storm only the Kremlin, where a small garrison remained.
Wanting to support the Volga nobility and landowners of the region affected by the uprising, the empress declared herself a “Kazan landowner” and sent a powerful military group to Kazan under the command of Colonel I. I. Mikhelson, who was ordered to finally suppress Pugachev’s uprising. The results of the Kazan battle were again unfavorable for the impostor, and he and the remnants of the army went to the right bank of the Volga.
The end of the Pugachev uprising
In the Volga region, which was a zone of complete serfdom, the fire of the uprising received new fuel - the peasants, freed from captivity by the manifesto of “Peter Fedorovich,” joined his army. Soon, in Moscow itself they began to prepare to repel the huge rebel army. But the results of Pugachev’s uprising in the Urals showed him that the peasant army could not resist trained and well-armed regular units. It was decided to move south and raise the Don Cossacks to fight; on their way there was a powerful fortress - Tsaritsyn.
It was on the approaches to it that Mikhelson inflicted the final defeat on the rebels. Pugachev tried to escape, but was betrayed by Cossack elders, captured and handed over to the authorities. A trial of Pugachev and his closest associates took place in Moscow; he was executed in January 1775, but spontaneous peasant uprisings continued for a long time.
Prerequisites, reasons, participants, course and results of Pugachev’s uprising
The table below briefly characterizes this historical event. It shows who participated in the uprising and for what purpose, and why it was defeated.
Mark on history
After the defeat of the Pugachev era, Catherine the Great tried to do everything so that the memory of the uprising would disappear forever. It was renamed Yaik, the Yaik Cossacks began to be called Ural Cossacks, the Don village of Zimoveyskaya - the homeland of Razin and Pugachev - became Potemkinskaya.
But the Pugachev turmoil was too great a shock for the empire to disappear into history without a trace. Almost every new generation evaluates the results of the uprising of Emelyan Pugachev in its own way, calling its leader either a hero or a bandit. This is how it happened in Rus' - to achieve a good goal by unjust methods, and to hang labels while at a safe temporary distance.
In his novel “Dubrovsky” A.S. Pushkin described the life of serfs and the tyranny of landowners. He talks about a quarrel between two neighboring landowners Troekurov and Dubrovsky. Dubrovsky is a well-mannered, intelligent person who respects man first of all, and not his titles and wealth; for him, serfs are not slaves, not animals, but individuals. For Troekurov, serfs are of no value; he is rude, capricious, and at times cruel to them.
When the district court made a decision on the transfer of Dubrovsky's peasants to Troyekurov's ownership, it is natural that all of Dubrovsky's household servants were indignant. People knew about Troyekurov’s arbitrariness and did not want to leave their former owner. Dubrovsky stopped his people when they wanted to deal with the clerks who brought the decision from the district court. The peasants obeyed the owner, but some of them did not resign themselves; they understood that the decision would be carried out and that they had the power to change their fate.
At night, the young master Vladimir Dubrovsky set fire to his house, a rebellion was brewing there, and the peasants supported him. The house with the sleeping clerks was on fire, and a cat was darting about on the roof of the barn. Blacksmith Arkhip, one of the most courageous rebels, risked his life to save the animal. Why is cruelty and kindness so combined in people? I think because a person protests against violence, injustice, evil, and when humane arguments do not lead to a positive result, he understands that without a cold and calculating struggle he cannot win. And the innocent, the weak, the downtrodden, if you are stronger, need to be protected. Therefore, those who had a highly developed sense of freedom and justice went with Dubrovsky into the forest.
After the fire, a group of robbers appeared in the surrounding area, looting and burning the landowners' houses. At the head of this gang was Dubrovsky. Those who wanted freedom received it, those who wanted to fight for their rights became forest robbers
(No ratings yet)
Other writings:
- Life was not easy for the peasants during the time described by A.S. Pushkin in the story “Dubrovsky” - the time of serfdom. Very often the landowners treated them cruelly and unfairly. It was especially difficult for the serfs of landowners like Troekurov. The wealth and noble family of Troekurov gave Read More ......
- A.S. Pushkin, who all his life hated the injustice, emptiness and “savagery” of the nobility, in the novel “Dubrovsky” brought to the fore one of the representatives of the provincial nobility - an ambitious, noble rebel who suffered from his own class, young Dubrovsky. The tyranny and despotism of the noble master Troekurov Read More ......
- A.S. Pushkin wrote the story “Dubrovsky”. The main character in it is Vladimir Dubrovsky. Dubrovsky was tall, handsome, brave. He held the rank of officer. He loved his father very much, for whose sake he resigned. Vladimir received a letter in which it was written that Read More......
- AND INJUSTICE IN A.S. PUSHKIN’S STORY “DUBROVSKY”” (1) At all times, there have been people who resigned themselves to the strength and inevitability of circumstances and were ready to accept fate as it is with their heads down. But at all times people lived, Read More......
- F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” was created in 1866. It was a time of reforms; the old “masters of life” began to be replaced by new ones - bourgeois businessmen and entrepreneurs. And Dostoevsky, as a writer who subtly felt all the changes in society, in his novel Read More......
- Masha Characteristics of the literary hero Masha Troekurova is a 17-year-old beauty, Dubrovsky’s lover. Living in the family of the tyrant Troekurov, M. is internally lonely, secretive, and has a strong character. Her only joy is a huge library made up of French novels from the 18th century. As a child, my best friend was M. Read More......
- It is generally accepted that “Dubrovsky” is a novel, although in terms of volume “Dubrovsky” is more likely a story. Much attention in the novel is paid to exposing the “wild lordship”. The depiction of the life and customs of the provincial nobility is associated primarily with the image of Troekurov. The image of Troekurov is an image of a typical Read More ......
- Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky and Kirila Petrovich Troekurov were once service comrades. Both of them married for love, but were widowed. Dubrovsky has a son, Vladimir, and Troekurov has a daughter, Masha. Troekurov and Dubrovsky were the same age. Kirila Petrovich was rich, had Read More......
Life was not easy for the peasants during the time described by A. S. Pushkin in the story “Dubrovsky” - the time of serfdom. Very often the landowners treated them cruelly and unfairly.
It was especially hard for the serfs of landowners like Troekurov. Troekurov's wealth and noble family gave him enormous power over people and the opportunity to satisfy any desires. For this spoiled and uneducated man, people were toys who had neither a soul nor a will of their own (and not only serfs). He kept the maids under lock and key, who were supposed to do needlework, and forcibly married them off at his discretion. At the same time, the landowner's dogs lived better than people. Kirila Petrovich treated the peasants and servants “strictly and morally”; they were afraid of the master, but hoped for his protection in relations with their neighbors.
Troekurov’s neighbor, Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, had a completely different relationship with the serfs. The peasants loved and respected their master, they sincerely worried about his illness and looked forward to the arrival of Andrei Gavrilovich’s son, young Vladimir Dubrovsky.
It so happened that a quarrel between former friends - Dubrovsky and Troekurov - led to the transfer of the former’s property (along with the house and serfs) to Troekurov. Ultimately, Andrei Gavrilovich, who had a hard time surviving the insult of a neighbor and an unfair court decision, dies.
The peasants of Dubrovsky are very attached to their owners and are determined not to allow themselves to be handed over to the power of the cruel Troekurov. The serfs are ready to defend their masters and, having learned about the court decision and the death of the old master, they rebel. Dubrovsky stood up in time for the clerks who came to explain the state of affairs after the transfer of property. The peasants had already gathered to tie up the police officer and deputy of the zemstvo court, Shabashkin, shouting: “Guys! down with them!” when the young master stopped them, explaining that by their actions the peasants could harm both themselves and him.
The clerks made a mistake by staying overnight in Dubrovsky’s house, because although the people were quiet, they did not forgive the injustice. When the young master walked around the house at night, he met Arkhip with an ax, who at first explained that he “came... to see if everyone was at home,” but then honestly admitted his deepest desire: “everyone at once, so ends in water."
Dubrovsky understands that the matter has gone too far, he himself is put in a hopeless situation, deprived of his estate and lost his father due to the tyranny of his neighbor, but he is also sure that “it is not the clerks who are to blame.”
Dubrovsky decided to burn his house so that strangers would not get it, and ordered his nanny and the other people remaining in the house, except the clerks, to be taken out into the courtyard.
When the servants, on the master's orders, set the house on fire. Vladimir became worried about the clerks: it seemed to him that he had locked the door to their room, and they would not be able to get out of the fire. He asks Arkhip to go check if the door is open, with instructions to unlock it if it is closed. However, Arkhip has his own opinion on this matter. He blames the people who brought the evil news for what is happening, and firmly locks the door. Orderly ones are doomed to death. This act may characterize the blacksmith Arkhip as a cruel and ruthless person, but it is he who climbs onto the roof after a while, not afraid of fire, in order to save the cat, distraught with fear. It is he who reproaches the boys who are enjoying unexpected fun: “You are not afraid of God: God’s creature is dying, and you are foolishly rejoicing.”
The blacksmith Arkhip is a strong man, but he lacks the education to understand the depth and seriousness of the current situation. Material from the site
Not all serfs had the determination and courage to complete the work they started. Only a few people disappeared from Kistenevka after the fire: the blacksmith Arkhip, the nanny Egorovna, the blacksmith Anton and the yard man Grigory. And, of course, Vladimir Dubrovsky, who wanted to restore justice and saw no other way out for himself.
In the surrounding area, instilling fear in the landowners, robbers appeared who robbed the landowners' houses and burned them. Dubrovsky became the leader of the robbers; he was “famous for his intelligence, courage and some kind of generosity.” Guilty peasants and serfs, tortured by the cruelty of their masters, fled into the forest and also joined the detachment of “people's avengers.”
Thus, Troekurov’s quarrel with old Dubrovsky served only as a match that managed to ignite the flame of popular discontent with the injustice and tyranny of the landowners, forcing the peasants to enter into an irreconcilable struggle with their oppressors.
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search
On this page there is material on the following topics:
- Dubrovsky's responsibility for serfs
- Relationships between serfs and their masters - Dubrovsky
- characteristics of Arkhip the blacksmith
- Pushkin's revolt of the peasants in Dubrovsky's work
- essay Dubrovsky and the serfs
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. At the very beginning of the 17th century, there were periodic 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.
“October 10, 1607 Bolotnikov before Tsar Vasily Shuisky in the camp near Tula.” Original drawing by Alexander Petrovich Safonov (1852-1913), engraved by Puts 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 of the 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 common ideology.
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 layers turned out to be unbearably high, the desire of the authorities to control and limit the Cossack freemen as much as possible grew. Mass famine and a pestilence epidemic, as well as the general economic crisis that occurred as a result of the protracted war for Ukraine, played a role.
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 the Yaitsky town, 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, most of the population of the Middle Volga region, as well as representatives of the nationalities living in those places - Tatars, Chuvash, Mordovians, went over to his side. What was captivating was that Razin declared everyone who came under his banner to be a free person.
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. The tsarist army, after a month-long siege, nevertheless 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. The largest battle took place on the territory of modern Mordovia, in which about 20,000 rebels took part. 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.
The largest uprising of the 18th century was the 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 spread to almost the entire Urals, 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 a large number of small fortresses, cities and factories were captured.
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 the 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 the Simbirsk province 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 the Samara and Simbirsk provinces. 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. The total number of rebels ranged from 100 to 150 thousand people.
Soviet troops decided to concentrate on striking the main enemy forces located in Stavropol.
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 repressions against the inhabitants of the 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 during the Civil War occurred in the Tambov province, it is also called the Antonov rebellion, since the actual leader of the rebels was the Socialist 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.
At the beginning of 1921, the number of rebels amounted to 50 thousand people. Almost the entire Tambov province was under their control, railway traffic was paralyzed, and 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 avoid a potentially general 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 cases of the use of chemical weapons are reliably known. Some historians note that chemical shells led to the death of not only rebels, but also civilians who were not involved in the uprising.
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. The fighting in the Tambov province continued until the summer of 1922.
Textbooks are silent about this war, although it was a real war, with gun salvoes, dead and captured, with victors and vanquished, with a trial of the defeated and celebrations for those who won and received indemnities (compensation for losses associated with the war). The battles of that unknown war unfolded on the territory of 12 provinces of the Russian Empire (from Kovno in the west to Saratov in the east) in 1858-1860.
Historians often call this war “teetotaler riots,” because the peasants refused to buy wine and vodka and swore not to drink for the entire village. Why did they do this? Because they didn’t want tax farmers to profit at the expense of their health - those 146 people into whose pockets money from the sale of alcohol from all over Russia flowed. The tax farmers literally forced vodka on them; if someone didn’t want to drink, he still had to pay for it: these were the rules then...
In those years, there was a practice in our country: each man was assigned to a certain tavern, and if he did not drink his “norm” and the amount from the sale of alcohol turned out to be insufficient, then the taverns collected the lost money from the yards of the area subject to the tavern.
Wine merchants, having gained a taste, inflated prices: by 1858, a bucket of fusel wine began to be sold for ten rubles instead of three. In the end, the peasants got tired of feeding the parasites, and without agreement they began to boycott the wine merchants.
The peasants turned away from the tavern not so much because of greed, but because of the principle: hardworking, hard-working owners saw how their fellow villagers, one after another, joined the ranks of bitter drunkards, who no longer liked anything but booze. Wives and children suffered, and in order to stop the spread of drunkenness among the villagers, at community meetings the whole world decided: NO ONE DRINKS IN OUR VILLAGE!
What could the wine merchants do? They lowered the price. The working people did not respond to the “kindness”. Shinkari, in order to discourage teetotaling sentiments, announced a free distribution of vodka. And people didn’t fall for it, answering firmly: “DON’T DRINK!”
For example, in the Balashov district of the Saratov province in December 1858, 4,752 people gave up drinking alcohol. A guard from the people was assigned to all taverns in Balashov to monitor so that no one bought wine. Those who violated the vow were fined or subjected to corporal punishment by the verdict of the people's court.
The townspeople also joined the grain growers: workers, officials, nobles. Sobriety was also supported by the priests, who blessed parishioners to give up drunkenness. This seriously frightened winemakers and potion traders, and they complained to the government.
In March 1858, the ministers of finance, internal affairs and state property issued orders for their departments. The essence of those decrees was to prohibit sobriety. Local authorities were ordered not to allow the organization of temperance societies, and existing sentences on abstinence from wine were to be destroyed and not allowed in the future.
It was then, in response to the ban on sobriety, that a wave of pogroms swept across Russia. Having begun in May 1859 in the west of the country, in June the riot reached the banks of the Volga. Peasants destroyed drinking establishments in Balashovsky, Atkarsky, Khvalynsky, Saratovsky and many other districts.
In Volsk on July 24, 1859, a crowd of three thousand destroyed wine exhibitions at the fair. Quarter supervisors, police, mobilizing disabled teams and soldiers of the 17th artillery brigade, tried in vain to calm the rioters. The rebels disarmed the police and soldiers and released prisoners from prison. Only a few days later, troops arriving from Saratov restored order, arresting 27 people (and in total 132 people were thrown into prison in the Volsky and Khvalynsky districts).
The investigative commission convicted all of them based solely on the testimony of the tavern inmates, who accused the defendants of stealing wine (while smashing the taverns, the rioters did not drink the wine, but poured it on the ground), without supporting their accusations with evidence. Historians note that not a single case of theft was recorded; the money was stolen by the employees of the drinking establishments themselves, attributing the loss to the rebels.
From July 24 to July 26, 37 drinking houses were destroyed in the Volsky district, and for each of them the peasants were charged large fines to restore the taverns. In the documents of the investigative commission, the names of convicted temperance fighters were preserved: L. Maslov and S. Khlamov (peasants of the village of Sosnovka), M. Kostyunin (village of Tersa), P. Vertegov, A. Volodin, M. Volodin, V. Sukhov (with Donguz). The soldiers who took part in the temperance movement were ordered by the court to be “deprived of all the rights of the state, and the lower ranks - of medals and stripes for blameless service, whoever has them, to be punished with spitzrutens every 100 people, 5 times each, and to be sent to hard labor in factories on 4 years".
In total, 11 thousand people were sent to prison and hard labor throughout Russia. Many died from bullets: the riot was pacified by troops who received orders to shoot at the rebels. Throughout the country there was a reprisal against those who dared to protest against the drinking of the people.
It was necessary to consolidate the success. How? The government, like the heroes of a popular comedy film, decided: “Whoever bothers us will help us.” The tax system for selling wine was abolished and an excise tax was introduced instead. Now anyone who wanted to produce and sell wine could, by paying a tax to the treasury, profit from getting their fellow citizens drunk.
This is a chapter from the book of Saratov local historian, member of the Union of Writers of Russia Vladimir Ilyich Vardugin.