3.1. Problems of history PSR in the literature 1917 - 1920th

Process of liquidation of multi-party system in Bolshevist Russia has led to changes in approaches to studying of Party of socialists-revolutionaries. Most basic of them has occurred in an estimation of role PSR in a political life of a society.
If before overthrow of autocracy the party eserov was estimated by Bolsheviks as a necessary and important component of a political life of the country, active, though also unreliable owing to "conciliation", the participant of struggle against an imperial mode after V.I.Lenina's arrival and its supporters to the power these estimations have changed. Having refused to recognise legitimacy of the Bolshevist government, the decision of the Soviet power, Party of socialists - of revolutionaries, according to Bolsheviks, should leave a country political field. V.I.Lenin wrote: «When us reproach with dictatorship of one party, we speak: yes, dictatorship of one party! We on it stand and from this soil we can not descend...» 127. With it I.V.Stalin was solidary: « In spite of the fact that we had the block with left eserami and a management with them, actually we then had a dictatorship of proletariat and the poorest peasantry. This last has ceased to exist, when the management has passed entirely in hands of our party which does not divide and cannot divide a management of the state with other party. It also is called at us as proletariat dictatorship »128. The basic difference of Bolshevist estimations of history of party eserov during the specified period from the pre-revolutionary consisted, thus, in change of a status estimation of party eserov: from The subject of a political life of the country to «political bankruptcy». Estimating a social base eserov in 1917, V.I.Lenin wrote: «the Small country class (we name an average such which does not sell the labour), this peasant in Russia, anyway, is the main economy class which is a basis of a wide variety of political trends in petty-bourgeois democracy. At us in Russia these currents are most of all connected with parties menshevikov and eserov» 129. Therefore, specified V.I.Lenin, eserov and menshevikov it is impossible to consider original «as proletarian revolutionaries":"On Business it is small Russian bourgeoisie which forms the third class force »and constantly fluctuates between proletariat and large буржуазией130.« In last account, - he wrote, - these fluctuations of peasantry as the main representative of petty-bourgeois weight of workers solved destiny of the Soviet power... »131 Simultaneously V.I.Lenin noticed, that in the conditions of fierce class struggle supporters of "the third force» objectively help White Guards: «March, Volsky and The company »think itself« above »both struggling parties, think itself capable to create« the third party ». This desire, be it even sincere, remains illusion of the petty-bourgeois democrat, in the capitalist environment it is possible either bourgeoisie dictatorship, or dictatorship of proletariat and it is impossible to exist to anything to the third» 132. Transition to nepu has not changed Lenin negativism in the relation eserov. On the contrary, being afraid, that liberalisation of an economic life can lead to revival of political opponents of the Bolshevism, he repeatedly underlines necessity of toughening of struggle against them as dangerous competitors for influence on labour weights.
In February, 1922 V.I.Lenin sends the people's commissar of justice D.I.Kurskomu the confidential letter «About problems narkomjusta in the conditions of new economic policy». In it as the major measure of struggle against eserov obligatory statement of some exemplary (on speed and force of reprisal was ordered «; on an explanation to broad masses, through court and through the press, their values) processes in Moscow, Peter, Kharkov and the several other major centres...» 133. Works of 1922 became last Lenin products directed against socialists - of revolutionaries. Long time the part from them, concerning the organisations of reprisals, remained not known to readers up to 1960th years. Any part, obviously, is not involved in a scientific turn and to this day. However the great bulk of products of V.I.Lenina was well familiar 1917-1922 with criticism PSR to contemporaries and has made the most serious impact on formation of the Soviet historiography. Basically it concerns two Lenin positions: about the petty-bourgeois essence PSR ostensibly predetermining all its policy, and the concept connected with it of "the third way». After V.I.Leninym the Soviet historians, since 1920th, developed and persistently propagandised these ideas. Moreover, Lenin estimations promoted that in the organizational plan sources of the Soviet historiography of Party of socialists-revolutionaries had establishments far from a historical science - Central Committee RKP () and VCHK-OGPU. The Primary goal on party "working out" eserov was assigned to Confidential department VCHK-OGPU at which groups of "reviewers" on studying of history and modern practice of not Bolshevist parties have been created. Result of their activity were circulars in which historical sketches of occurrence and activity PSR contained, the basic programmno-tactical installations eserov in the past and the present, feature of organizational construction of party were considered, reviews of a party press, data about inner-party and okolopartijnyh groupings contained. In appendices to circulars were located extensive a selection party документов134. In another way "office" duplicating of documents of party eserov in 1920th the thematic "Bulletins" preparing and published by Information department VCHK - OGPU for dispatch in regions were. As well as circulars, these bulletins had a security classification and intended for members of Central Committee RKP (), party and Soviet workers on places. As a result joint efforts of security officers and Bolshevist publicists in the early twenties had been put in pawn the concept of history of party eserov which with some specifications dominated in the Soviet historiography up to the end of 1980th years. The given direction in "studying" of history of party eserov though took leading positions, was not the only thing in the Soviet historiography of 1920th years. In parallel and as though on the second plan in it the professional Marxist historical science, occurrence which, according to G.D.Alekseevoj, it was necessary for 1917-1923 when there was a whole system of the new centres of science which are conducting research work and engaged in preparation scientific кадров135 was formed. After decision SNK RSFSR from September, 25th, 1920 about creation of the commissions on studying of history of Bolshevist revolution and history RKP () in Moscow and regions are formed the special centres on studying of revolutionary events - Istparty. In 1923 Under the decision of the Political bureau of Central Committee RKP () the Institute is created V.I.Lenin in whom in 1928 has been included Istpart. Basically the given establishments were engaged in gathering of documents on history of Bolshevist party. Materials on a problematics interesting us in editions of these establishments have not been presented, except for the collection of documents «Our opponents» (M, 1929) in which some materials from eserovskoj «Revolutionary Russia» have been published, including comments to the program of socialisation of the earth and G.A.Gershuni's article «the Terrorist element in our program». Though collection documents chronologically were not beyond the first Russian revolution, they gave a certain notion about conceptual positions eserovskoj to party in the XX-th century beginning. The same tendency has found reflexion and in publications of autobiographies of politicians of Russia, their historical, philosophical and publicistic работ136. The basic source on party history eserov were the memoirs of its former figures which have appeared on pages of magazines «Penal servitude and the reference», "Past", «Red archive», «Proletarian revolution», and also leaving separate editions or as a part of anniversary collections. Each section of magazines has been supplied by the foreword, and its materials are commented. It is thought, that on selection of memoirs, their completeness and a variety, and also on riches nauchnospravochnogo the device these editions have not lost the scientific value and to this day. As a result in 1920th researchers had an opportunity to work with party documents eserov, first of all a personal origin and basically concerning the period of the first Russian revolution. At the same time founded in 1922 Glavlit already in the first months of the existence has published the position containing an interdiction for distribution to Russia of books which have left in the West, articles and memoirs eserov V.M.Chernova, V.M.Zenzinova, A.A.Argunova, left eserov I.Z.Shtejnberga and A.A.Shrejdera. In 1926 Central Committee RKP news department () has categorically demanded «nedopushchenija publication and all-round restriction of import from abroad products Menshevist and anarho-eserovskogo character». Such, at first sight, the illogical position is quite explainable: the interdiction concerned eserovskih the publications chronologically concerning by the period of revolution and Grzhdansky war 1917-1922 where as the main opponents eserovskogo "democracy" Bolsheviks acted already, instead of representatives of autocracy. Before historians-marksistami there were problems of consolidation of the forces, definitions of the most priority and actual problems from their point of view of domestic history on which studying followed direct the most steadfast attention, replacement of old bourgeois experts from the establishments which were engaged in history. The problem of consolidation of forces of new generation of historians was incurred by the All-Union society of historians-marksistov137. It has incurred registration of some problems on which research followed pay special attention. The basic period of history of Russia which is necessary for studying, in their opinion, the end XIX admitted - first third XX centuries It communicated historians-marksistami with occurrence in Russia most «advanced and revolutionary» a class - proletariat which in 1917 as they believed, became dominating. Change of positions of scientists of pre-revolutionary school passed rather painfully. With the beginning of a Bolshevist stage of Great Russian revolution the present persecution of "bourgeois" experts has been organised. History teaching at universities has stopped. Compromises between historians old, Pre-revolutionary school and marksistami were not supposed. The ideological requirement of that epoch said: «In our science To the expert-nemarksistu a penny the price ». M.N.Pokrovsky wrote «A history essence in that... That the history should directly and Indefatigably to explain to weights occurring class struggle, To open roots sometimes deeply latent class 12 Contradictions ». As believes the majority of modern historians, it was time when class, formatsionnyj, strictly determined approach has been violently introduced in practice of historical researches. Achievements Pre-revolutionary science were not rejected yet, but the concrete historical material was required to be released from «idealistic theories and concepts», including from narodnicheskoj. All accessible means - from terror before propagation were used. The edition of works on party history eserov became the important direction of this political order. Historians - marksisty A.V.Lunacharsky, J.M.Steklov, N.N.Popov, M.N.Pokrovsky, A.E.Morohovets, P.Lisovsky, V.Bystrjansky, A.V.Shestakov, B.I.Gorev, S.Chernomordik, E.M.Jaroslavsky from the first pages of the brochures declared, that they brand «traitors of national interests» 138. Basically the object of attention had appeared right esery, considered as the most significant opponents of the Bolshevism. The road to "crash" eserov in their image has been fatally predetermined by "unscientific nature", "melkoburzhuaznostju" socialism eserov. Authors divided history eserov into two stages: the first, before autocracy overthrow when they were the "fair" revolutionaries, the second, after February, 1917 when they became «helpers of reaction». Left esery at that time, have appeared as though out of criticism of Bolshevist publicists. There was it because many of them in 1918 - 1922 still were in officially legal parties - «revolutionary communists» and «national communists», and some have entered in RKP (). In 1920th in the Soviet historical literature have found the place a number that, connected with the first years of activity of Party of socialists-revolutionaries. It was noticed, that eserovskoe movement continued traditions of populism which «has revived again in the XX-th century beginning in ideology and tactics eserov» 139. As the historian M.Potash believed, it «has occurred because of the XX-th century which have begun in the beginning of country movement in 1902, especially in Kharkov and the Poltava provinces» 140. He wrote: «Party Socialists-revolutionaries has apprehended ideology Populism in its basic lines, beginning from panegoism, up to belief in a special way of development of Russia and a special role in this respect communities. Besides, it has included in sphere of tactics individual terror of "National will» 141. M.Potash has paid attention, that, having included in the program documents the term "working people", esery absolutely different layers and groups tried to unite initially, therefore have lost political strike. eserov historians carried party occurrence to 1898, and connected with occurrence of the first groups, taken to itself the name "socialists-revolutionaries". eserov researchers P.Gorin and M.Tamarkin connected the next five years of history exclusively with the terrorist beginning in their activity; only since 1905, authors believed, propaganda activity eserov among peasantry has begun: there was «a party country union», eserovskie groups were transformed to party. In revolution 1905-1907, according to historians, there was «an influence decline eserov, and influence of the Bolshevik party has accordingly increased, become is unique consecutive fighters for interests of workers of weights» 142. In numerous publications on history of the agrarian Movements in 1905-1907 were resulted individual, and, as a rule, The isolated facts about activity eserov in the country environment. As a whole they promoted a reconstruction enough the authentic Activity pictures eserov among peasants of concrete provinces 18 And during concrete time. Historians of that time aspired to show party eserov as the specific Russian variant of fruitless struggle not armed with the "scientific" theory with autocracy, as group of the individualists who completely have been torn off from a revolutionary mass movement, as the inveterate and limited terrorists. It became to convince readers, that only Bolshevist party "armed" with the eschatological Marxist theory of change of socially - economic conditions of a life of mankind, had the right to head struggle against autocracy. Therefore again the problematics connected with terror has appeared the most developed theme of 1917-1920th. In V.N.Meshcherjakova's book one of heads is specially devoted consideration of genesis of terror and its communication with obshcherevoljutsionnym движением143. To the public there were only two parts of the book, research obviously is not finished, as comes to an end with the period of revolution of 1905-1907. The historian underlined absence of the appropriate control over BO from Central Committee PSR, believing, that terror recession has begun in 1907 with the revolution termination. S.I.Chernomordik adhered to other point of view. In its opinion, over party eserov during this period oposredovanno the police Department through agent E.F.Azefa supervised. Last, as is known, was a member of Central Committee PSR, the head of the Fighting organisation, and at the same time was the provoker who is on the maintenance "ohranki". The party was represented to the historian by exclusively underground terrorist organisation. The author obviously exaggerated awareness of police and gendarmerie both their supervising and directing role, especially A.A.Lopuhina144. In the book «the Former people. A sketch of history of party eserov» A.V.Lunacharsky has rather fluently shown pre-October history PSR, having concentrated on sources "azefovshchiny" which saw to it in imperfect organizational beginnings PSR. A.V.Lunacharsky has given also a number of bright characteristics of heads BO: G.A.Gershuni, B.V.Savinkova, based on the personal memoirs. In whole its estimation of heads BO makes impression about extreme individualism, sacrificial essence and revolutionary incorruptibility of these characters. At the same time the author has underlined, what exactly terror has given PSR repellent forms and only thanks to efforts of terrorists the party eserov has been finished to almost utter annihilation. A.V.Lunacharsky's conclusion gave reason "qualitative" work of law enforcement bodies on liquidation eserovskih the terrorist groups which have crushed not only BO, but also other organizational structures PSR. In 1923 there was A.V.Luchinskoj's also devoted to the person of provoker E.F.Azefa21 the research. On the basis of wide istochnikovoj bases the author has described history of stay of E.F.Azefa both in PSR, and in security branch of Department of police. It has specified, that its annual salary in security branch corresponded to the annual salary of the Minister of Internal Affairs of empire - 12 thousand rbl., has in detail stopped on methods of actions of E.F.Azefa for the purpose of achievement of success by it. In its opinion, the dirt of treachery of E.F.Azefa, instead of vigilant service of police became a principal cause of  destruction of terror as way of political strike. Some the propaganda brochures which purpose was to prove an inaccuracy and perversity of the theory and practice eserov to ' U'U 1917, finishes the review of the literature of 1920th 71 Luchinsky A.V.great provoker Evno Azef. Pg., - M, 1923. 99 JAntarev A.Taktika VKP () in relation to bourgeois and petty-bourgeois parties. Kharkov, 1928; Morohovets E.Krestjanskoe So, the history of Party of socialists-revolutionaries of the pre-October period basically contacted activity of the Fighting organisation, studying of the concrete facts of terror, E.F.Azefa's provocative activity. Party, the reasons of its occurrence were shined extremely avariciously and odnostoronne. Its social base was reduced to country support, the structure was characterised as the weak and not branched out, propaganda activity contacted the project Earth socialisation, financial aspects of existence Were considered only in connection with ekspropriatsijami. As a whole even these questions did not become object of in-depth study and the analysis of historians. Only the brightest plots connected with murder V.K.Pleve, grand duke S.A.Romanova, D.S.Sipjagina, Attempt at P.A.Stolypina and other conservative figures of imperial administration had appeared in the centre of attention of historians - of publicists. Not so much scientific studying of history of party eserov, how many copying of the Lenin citations, ready conclusions without their critical judgement within the limits of the concrete historical analysis was a result of such "creativity". A.V.Lunacharsky, explaining the reasons of unknown numerical growth of party eserov after autocracy liquidation, has without grounds declared, that the reason is covered in putanosti its party program, eklektizme in the theory, political неразборчивости145. According to M.N.Pokrovskogo, esery in 1917 have shamefully renounced the basic program requirement - socialisation of the earth and became party of agrarian statistics. At the same time other conclusion of the historian that «the party eserov, becoming governmental, and did not become correcting» obviously did not keep within the offered ? Moustache B. I.Leninym the characteristic of this party in 1917. V.Vladimirovoj's book «Year of service« of socialists "capitalists" has been devoted display of "counterrevolutionary" activity of parties eserov and menshevikov from October, 1917 till autumn of 1918. Merits and demerits of this work were repeatedly analyzed in domestic историографии146. Predecessors already marked a significant amount of the sources involved with the author (the periodical press, memoirs, materials eserovskogo process of 1922, etc.), curious supervision about law of crash of "democratic" 97 Counterrevolutions. The lacks of work specified still in reviews of that time, were reduced to absence in V.Vladimirovoj's book of the deep analysis of the resulted facts, to a statement only lo External course of events. Long enough disputes in the Soviet historical literature of 1960-1980th have come to the end with a recognition of the book of V.Vladimirovoj the research, played a serious role in working out темы147. It is quite possible to agree with the given judgement and now - on volume of the involved material and scrupulousness in giving of the facts V.Vladimirovoj's work, undoubtedly, takes a leading place among the literature 1920 - h. The, the devoted history of party eserov. At the same time V.Vladimirovoj's conceptual positions did not differ special novelty and there were in a channel of charges on process PSR 1922 published and the neopublished which materials were widely used in the book. V.Vladimirova has in details disassembled all more or less significant Antibolshevist performances right eserov in 1917-1918, since junkerskogo revolts in Petrograd and finishing attempts at leaders RKP () summer of 1918. The significant amount of data is taken from G.Semenova's known brochure, and the story about V.V.Volodarsky's murder and the second attempt on V.I.Lenina is entirely based on recognitions were eserovskogo the insurgent. Aspiring it is more convincing to prove participation right eserov in terror, V.Vladimirova addresses to materials of IV congress PSR (November-December, 1917). As believes A.J.Suslov, use by the author of documents of this congress visually characterises a technique of work of V.Vladimirovoj with sources - in some cases peracute conclusions are based on such materials, whence these conclusions at all do not follow. So, V.Vladimirova quotes the resolution of IV congress PSR on a present situation: «In these conditions the Party of socialists-revolutionaries should proclaim the slogan -« All power to the Constituent assembly! »And to put all energy to concentrate round the Constituent assembly the sufficient organised forces that in case of need to accept fight with 30 Criminal encroachment ». An estimation of this resolution V.Vladimirovoj is rather categorical: «delegates of congress have taken of a position of civil war against the Soviet power. From the resulted resolution it is possible to draw a conclusion on quite clear aspiration eserov to protect the Constituent assembly as the government supreme body in the country. Its convocation was considered PSR, on the contrary, as possibility of peace change of the power.« All, in our opinion, depended on to giving to Bolsheviks and a shade of the moral justification for transition to bloodshed », - t 1 V.M.Chernov recollected in this occasion. Performance at V.M.Chernova's congress and the letter to congress A. R.Gotsa are treated by V.Vladimirovoj as an appeal «to terror against leaders of proletarian revolution». In this case B. Vladimirova directly follows the text of "Bill of particulars". A.J.Suslov sceptically approaches to an estimation of creativity of V.Vladimirovoj. In its opinion, citations from V.M.Chernova and A.R.Gotsa used the big popularity in the Soviet historiography confirming on this example terrorist plans right eserov. Other documents which are not keeping within the habitual scheme, the Soviet authors were ignored or appeared "formal", as, for example, in a case with Central Committee PSR decision in December, 1917 about inadmissibility of application of terror in struggle against the Bolshevism. The actual material resulted in the book of V.Vladimirovoj and its estimation of activity PSR have laid down in a basis of a statement of history of this party in the fourth volume «Histories VKP (», devoted to events of 1917-1920. Right esery were accused of participation in all performances against the Bolshevist power, since October, 1917, and also in razvjazyvanii (together with menshevikami) Civil war and terror. As proofs authors «Histories VKP ()» resulted, referring on V.Vladimirovu, the same letter to IV congress PSR of A.R.Gotsa and performance at V.M.Chernova148's congress. In the Soviet historiography of 1920th activity eserov has appeared presented in works on separate questions of history of Bolshevist revolution and Civil war. So, by a decade of dispersal of the Constituent assembly there was a whole series of publications about attempts eserov to keep it as the higher legislature республики149. As has characterised first and last day works of All-Russia constituent assembly JI.Д.Троцкий: «Constituent assembly dispersal was basic last collision of Leninism and chernovshchiny» 150. Certainly, historians could not pass by the party of the socialists-revolutionaries which have won in the Constituent assembly the majority of places. However some the serious and detailed analysis of activity PSR on the eve of convocation of the Constituent assembly and at its unique session in works of 1920th is not present. Already settled stamps, like that the majority eserov in the Constituent assembly «was actually fictitious» and that the policy eserov in a question on the Constituent assembly «has completely exposed a counterrevolutionary, treacherous role» this party prevailed. The party was not in the centre of attention of authors of the given works, tactics of Bolsheviks in relation to the Constituent assembly was studied basically. The main source of data about results of elections there was N.V.Svjatitskogo's article from the collection «Year of Russian revolution». Among works in which separate questions of strategy and tactics eserov in civil war are considered, I.I.Mintsa's monography about «is allocated with the democratic 36 Counterrevolutions »in the north of Russia. Analyzing a policy pravoeserovskogo on structure of the Supreme management of Northern area in 1918, I.I.Mints used considerable volume of documentary sources, including the neopublished materials of process PSR of 1922 (the indication of M.A.Lihacha, A.R.Gotsa, V.I.Ignateva). Considering the working and country policy eserov, I.I.Mints comes to conclusion about "pretentiousness" of all actions of the government Northern Areas, under the form democratic, and as a matter of fact directed on 37 Strengthening of positions of bourgeoisie. He believes, that esery have not carried out any basic reforms, playing a role «simple agents of bourgeoisie for proletariat dictatorship can be replaced only by dictatorship of bourgeoisie and esery objectively not 38 Can play an independent role ». The actual material stated in work by I.I.Mintsa, and its some judgements allow us to look differently a little at a conclusion about meaningly "bourgeois" character of a policy eserov in the north. First, extremely short term of stay at the power - only 2 months (August-September, 1918) - has not allowed the Supreme management of Northern area to start realisation of program requirements PSR, serious reforming of local government, earth socialisation in region. Secondly, English military command, I.I.Mints underlines it repeatedly, constantly interfered with government affairs. The Englishmen possessing real military force, have agreed to consider the Supreme management exclusively as the power economic, municipal, but completely not political. « Such position turned out, - wrote I.I.Mints, - that party, standing at the state wheel, however did not operate it »151. Thus, according to the historian, exclusively adverse outwardly - and internal political conditions have prevented the Supreme management of Northern area to realise the democratic program planned in the first days of stay at the power. In this case primary zadannost conclusions in the book I.I.Mintsa conflicts to honesty stated actual material. A situation not so characteristic for 1920th, but rather indicative for later period of the Soviet historiography. Serious influence on history illumination eserov was rendered by litigation on business of separate members of Central Committee PSR, passing in Moscow in the summer of 1922. It has received full enough estimation in K.N.Morozova, S.A.Krasilnikova, I.V.Chubykina, A.J.Suslova's works. It is necessary to stop only on some contradictions and errors of actual character which stir to an objective sight at process of liquidation of political opposition to the Bolshevism. Wide propaganda campaign round the process, developed by the authorities, included variety of elements: meetings, meetings, newspaper and journal publications, the edition of popular brochures. Soviet publicist S.Ingulov noticed, that «eserovsky process, the right, has turned all our press in honesty operating Istpart eserov» 152. The epithet "honesty" raises the doubts, but as a whole opinion S.Ingulova it is fair: in the spring and summer of 1922 process eserov was one of the major events of a political life of the Soviet Russia. All documents, books and the brochures which have left to process PSR and after its termination, A.J.Suslov suggests to divide into three groups. First, it is documents of the process. "Bill of particulars" and fragments стенограммы153 have been published. In the press there was also a number of documentary materials about activity of Party of socialists-revoljutsionerov154. All published documents have made only insignificant part of available materials, and their selection carried extremely Tendentious character. In the Soviet press there was presented a point of view only one - the accusing party. Performances on court of members of Central Committee PSR in an official press are published not были155, however speeches of some eserovskih "renegades" (G.Semenova, JI.Коноплевой and others), making so-called «2nd group» accused, have got on pages of the Soviet newspapers and documentary collections. Exclusively important role in the literature of this group is played by""Bill of particulars". Almost half of this composition is occupied with chapter 1 (« the Historical part »), devoted to party history Socialists-revolutionaries in 1917-1922. It is allocated seven large sections, since October revolution and finishing the Kronstadt revolt and the Parisian meeting of members of the Constituent assembly. Total charges can be formulated as follows: the party right eserov in the name of members its Central Committee was the initiator of civil war, took up with the White Guard organisations of various type and Representatives of "the international capital»; conducted the armed struggle against the Soviet power in the Volga region, Siberia and in the north; arranged revolts; promoted Kronstadt "mutiny" 156. Even these data, it was underlined in "Bill of particulars", would be enough for criminal prosecution of Central Committee PSR. However it is necessary to add them still with terrorist activity of the party which have become known after exposures by G.I.Semenova which was at this time the personnel worker of bodies VCHK-OGPU157. Authors of "Bill of particulars" refer to various sources - eserovskuju periodicals, collections of articles, official party documents, an evidence. Nevertheless, variety of contradictions and half-words in «the Historical part» are evident. So, the story about known junkerskom revolt in Petrograd and participation in it PSR is based on November, 28-29th, 1917 on indications of witnesses, in the basic M.J.Rakitina-Brouna. Right esery were accused not only of participation in revolt (that they and did not deny), but also cowardly refusal of it, A.R.Gotsa and N.D.Avksenteva expressed in public renunciation of the signatures under the order with the message on overthrow of the Bolshevist power, arrest VRK and restoration of the power of Provisional government. According to A.J.Suslova, A.R.Gots and N.D.Avksentev did not sign this order that it is possible to understand even from the fragment quoted in "Bill of particulars" from M.J.Rakitina-Brouna's indications: «Central Committee PSR has decided, that to it It is inconvenient to head revolt, the order was born in bowels «Committee of rescue of the Native land and revolution». However the given statement contradicts the documents of Committee signed A.R.Gotsem - as it члена158. A little unpersuasively, basically with references only on G.Semenova's indications, data about contacts PSR to the White Guard organisations and especially about espionage where authors could not furnish concrete proof any some are stated in "Bill of particulars". Charge right eserov in cooperation with «the Union of protection of the native land and freedom», the headed B.V.Savinkovym is characteristic in this plan. Being based on indications were esera I.S.Dashevskogo, enough uncertain, and "Union" documents, authors consider established the fact of cooperation PSR and savinkovtsev. However from the resulted materials it is possible to draw a conclusion only on contacts of separate members PSR with «the Union of protection of the native land and freedom» (in particular, in Kazan). Meanwhile at the disposal of Tribunal there were indications of the nearest assistant B.V.Savinkova, the chief of the central staff of the organisation A.P.Perhurova who on interrogation so has explained on March, 23rd, 1922 a question on mutual relations of "Union" with PSR: «I Believe, that the Central Committee eserov has not been adjusted sympathetically to our organisation. The opinion I base on following data: 1) between Draft and Savinkov were serious Disagreement about what Savinkov spoke time and again to me, stating fears, that «esery can spoil to us», thanks to the relation of the Central Committee to person Savinkov; 2) approximately in July, 1918 Frenchmen have detained delivery of the organisation of the promised money, thanks to intrigues eserov, tried to generate mistrust to Savinkov's activity; 3) in the end of 1918 Savinkov has sent me a note from Omsk in which it has been told approximately following: «the Power in Siberia has passed eserov to type CHernova, Avksenteva and To that is why hopes of favorable issue of a suit are not present. Thereof he, Savinkov, goes abroad through Vladivostok» 159. Composers of "Bill of particulars", in opinion A.J.Suslova, for quite clear reasons these indications destroying their version have preferred to ignore. In 1919-1920, it was informed further in "Bill of particulars", the party right eserov «was a number few the groups connected among themselves among which dominated... Opposite political tendencies and aspirations» 160. However how these isolated groups, moreover split ideologically, have managed to organise «everywhere in territory of the Soviet Russia» a number of mutinies and revolts, does not speak. M.Jansen analyzing materials of "Bill of particulars", has come to conclusion, that it was in bolshej degrees the political composition, than the judicial document »161. The similar judgement has under itself the serious bases. Authors of"Bill of particulars", actually proceeded not from legal norms, and from logic of political strike. After October, 1917 any power in territory of Russia, except power Sovnarkoma, was considered as Bolsheviks of the illegal. Already fraction PSR declaration at II All-Russia congress of Councils where it was spoken about non-recognition of Bolshevist revolution, appeared founders of"Bill of particulars"a convicting material. In their opinion, the given declaration marked the announcement войны162. Logically"Bill of particulars", the Party of socialists-revolutionaries should recognise at once the power of Bolsheviks and refuse any attempts of struggle against it. Actually esery were accused that in 1917 1922 Struggled for the power, that is founders of "Bill of particulars" called into question the purpose of any political party — a power capture. Accused esery declared, that never struggled with Councils, and recognised, though and with reservations, their role in political system of the country. Delegates from PSR noticed, that participated in work I-IV of congresses of Councils and have left the Soviet organisations not on the belief, and according to decision VTSIK from June, 14th, 1918. To Socialists-revolutionaries in "Bill of particulars" participation practically in significant Antibolshevist performances of 1917-1922 all in the slightest degree has been attributed. esery recognised participation of party in the armed struggle, but only before the February conference PSR of the 1919 which have refused application The armed force against Bolsheviks. Materials of "Bill of particulars" and other official publications of documents eserovskogo process (first of all speeches of the state accusers - N.V.Krylenko, A.V.Lunacharskogo and M.N.Pokrovskogo) became the basic source of the Soviet historiography, as process, and all posleoktjabrskoj to history PSR. Use of these documents in a domestic historical science up to the beginning of 1990th had noncritical character, except for works of dissidents (for example, A.I.Solzhenitsyna). Nobody called into question legitimacy of the charges shown in 1922 eseram, the general concept of history PSR stated in chapter 1 of "Bill of particulars". Meanwhile official publications of materials eserovskogo process represent the extremely tendentious, politized source demanding very attentive analysis. The second group includes the works written by the Soviet and party figures, writers, journalists A.V.Lunacharskim, J.M.Steklovym, I.Vardinym, N.N.Popovym, M.N.Pokrovskim and Czechoslovak communist B.Shmeralem 163. They represented a popular statement of materials of "Bill of particulars". In the centre of attention of all authors there were questions of participation of socialists-revolutionaries in Civil war. These publications intended mainly for use in work of propagandists. It was dictated by practical reasons: it was necessary To show to weights the facts of the armed struggle eserov against the Soviet power. Scales of the propaganda company were great. It is known, that I.Vardina and J.M.Steklova's books have been published in number of 20 and 25 thousand copies accordingly, and the circulation of the newspaper "Truth" where the part of materials was published, made in 1922 250 thousand copies. Besides, theses for propagandists «To process right eserov» under edition of A.V.Lunacharskogo have been published, N.I.Buharina and N.V.Krylenko, the propagandas written by request of department and Central Committee RKP propagation () 164. Brochures «Theses for the report on process eserov», «Esery behind« work »against Councils», two leaflets about «victims eserovskogo terror» V.V.Volodarsky and M.S.Uritskom. To help the authorities with liquidation of socialist opposition memoirs of the former figures eserov and menshevikov have been called also. This literature makes the third group of the works which have been let out to process of 1922 and after it. V.I.Ignateva, I.M.Majskogo, K.S.Burevogo165's books, despite various in the past the party accessory of their authors (K.S.Burevoj was member PSR, V.I.Ignatev belonged to party of national socialists, and I.M.Majsky was menshevikom) is united by the main idea: full rupture with the past, exposure own (and party fellows) struggle against Bolsheviks in days of civil war, repentance in sodejannom. The reasons which have induced the former enemies of a Bolshevist mode on a writing of these works, are not quite clear. Probably, I.M.Majsky, V.I.Ignatev and K.S.Burevoj have really passed through certain sincere evolution, have quite sincerely changed the belief. Could be and other reasons (payoff or blackmail), but in any case their books published in the state publishing houses in considerable circulations, were used by the authorities as the propaganda campaign part which purpose was to convince supporters PSR to tear with party as it was made by its some visible members. The similar purpose pursued pokajannye letters were eserov, captivated in the spring and summer of 1922 the Soviet press. Absolutely special place among let out to process eserov literatures is occupied G.I.Semenova's with brochure (Vasileva). Memoirs of the former head of the Fighting group PSR, filled with names and the facts about underground work right eserov (by estimates of V.S.Vojtinskogo, G.I.Semenov "has stipulated" in the brochure 93 человека166), became the key proof of charge on process of 1922. As it was already marked, terrorist activity PSR in 1918 was stated in "Bill of particulars" basically «on Semenovu». V.S.Vojtinsky named G.I.Semenova's brochure and its judicial indications in a considerable part a fruit «collective chekistskogo творчества167». Widely enough at this time were regional workings out are presented also. In Siberia at V.D.Vegmana's active participation a number of articles of memoirs character in which the role left eserov in struggle with Колчаком168, for example, is shown has been published. In second half 1920th activity eserov, enesov, extremists, left eserov has been shined on pages of the Siberian historical encyclopaedia — more than 20 articles. Here is how, For example, it was characterised in it it is national-socialist party Russia. «NSP (enesy) — the party of petty bourgeoisie organised by an opportunistic circle of writers - Populists, heads of magazine «Russian Riches» (Peshehonov, Mjakotin). V.I.Lenin characterised this extremely insignificant on number and influence party as "Tiny" and «a simple appendage of cadets», and cadets Considered representatives of this party «cadets of the second category». In Siberia national socialists of any role in a public life as during the period after revolution 1905, and 1917 - 1919 did not play. All its activity was reduced to the separate performances, several printing editions and constant blockings with other petty-bourgeois and bourgeois parties. It is national - socialist party, along with cadets and eserami, has entered in counterrevolutionary «the Union of revival of Russia» and Its representatives (F.Chembulov, S.Znamensky and I.Suhanov) took part in the Ufa state meeting. It is national - the socialist party actively supported Kolchaka and in counterrevolutionary circles has received "gratitude" for occurrence in so-called «the block political and public organisations». The reproduced historiographic source gives representation about the general approaches to studying of "petty-bourgeois" parties at this stage, including about loan by authors of the encyclopaedia of Lenin estimations without their critical judgement within the limits of the concrete analysis of history enesov, about belittling of their role in a political life of region, about the tendency to "degeneration" and "bankruptcy". So, in the conditions of one-party dictatorship historians and publicists carried out the accurate state order, providing ideological struggle with eserovskoj opposition. Popular and topical character of these works has not prevented, however, to the estimations stated then to be fixed for a long time in the Soviet historical science. First of all it concerns the rigid criticism eserovskoj theories of "the third way», prepared, according to historians, White Guard counterrevolution. Terror against Bolshevist leaders in 1918, revolt on Tambovshchine, the Kronstadt mutiny - all is official Soviet propagation strongly and has for a long time connected with a name eserovskoj parties. Publicistic sketches of 1920th have not given some the serious scientific analysis of history of party eserov. Problems of current political strike with opposition dictated the corresponding order: to prove Counterrevolutionary essence of socialists-revolutionaries, falsity of their ideology and law of  destruction. It is necessary to tell about certain achievements in the field of generalisation of historical knowledge of party eserov. First, it is necessary to carry expansion to them istochnikovoj bases, it has considerably replenished at the expense of memoirs certificates both were eserov, and active participants of the revolutionary events which were members of other parties. Secondly, there was an expansion of chronological frameworks of publicistic sketches: from the period of formation PSR before the termination of Civil war. Thirdly, publicists have specified number of party, feature of its tactics in different regions of Russia. So, on the instructions of Central Committee RKP (), in sketch of V.Bystrjanskogo specially published in German «Die Menschewiki und Sozial-Revolutionare» it was noticed, that in the summer of 1917 in PSR consisted more than 1 million человек169. In the analysis of history of Party of socialists-revolutionaries were engaged as well esery. Basically it passed in the territories which are under control of Komucha, in Siberia, in the north of Russia. Among them there were no professional historians, and the problem of creation of scientific history PSR before them did not stand. First of all socialists - revolutionaries were participants of political processes that has left a bright mark on their works. The total amount published by them is rather considerable. The Eserovsky periodicals, as well as memuaristika, especially in 1920th years, have created preconditions for the subsequent development western sovetologii, and its estimations have made serious impact on the future foreign historiography. Works eserov and for the Soviet historical science constant opposition in ideological polemic with foreign opponents was which characteristic line had certain value. The estimation eserami activity of the party depended on many circumstances: an is concrete-political situation, Residence of the author (in the Soviet Russia or behind its limits), degrees of participation in a party life and many other things. About activity PSR wrote both party leaders, and private soldiers esery, and the most different взглядов170. In 1919-1920 - e there are some works written by members of group "People" (later - «Minority PSR») - actually were eserami, also representing considerable interest. As a whole eserovskaja the historiography was not uniform in estimations of activity of party. It has passed some stages in the development, from the literature of an epoch of February revolution before works of the emigrant period of existence PSR (1920-1950th years). The period of revolution and Civil war has not left how many - nibud detailed, detailed works eserov about the party. Strategy and tactics PSR estimations meet basically in articles and small brochures. As sources for eserov personal impressions and periodicals materials served mainly. In the conditions of Civil war there was no neither time, nor a possibility of the detailed analysis of history of the party, demanding besides attraction of additional materials. Political strike forced eserov to pay special attention for the modern moment. To party activity during the previous period it was given less attention. At the same time development of tactical installations on the future was impossible without at least short analysis of a life of party at the last stage. History PSR in 1917-1922 was considered with different degree of attraction of documentary materials, mainly in collections of articles which were issued eserami in Russia and abroad. The collections published in Russia, as a whole are devoted the analysis of the various parties of political and socially - economic life of the country. Criticism of the Bolshevism and definition of problems of party - here the main themes pravoeserovskih publicists in 1918-1919 among which there were many known names - V.M.Chernov, O.S.Minor, M.V.Vishnjak, V.V.Rudnev. By 1920 publishing PSR in the Soviet Russia stops practically and transferred abroad. Most actively esery were published in first half 1918 When before party there was a problem of definition of the further policy after two severe defeats - in October 1917 After arrival of Bolsheviks to the power, and January, 1918 after Constituent assembly dispersal! Esery tried to understand, why their party, one of the most popular and mass in Russia, has not managed to resist to the Bolshevism. Judgements expressed the most different. A.Bah specified as the major reasons of failure eserov absence of party unity and a consistent policy in a question on war and мире171. According to V.Lunkevicha, main "sins" PSR of a steel "mnogogovorenie" and demagogy that has led to success of the Bolshevism skilfully using elements wide масс172. The coalition with bourgeois parties appeared the main error in the editorial of the collection the "Socialist-revolutionary" published by Central Committee PSR173. Esery have been compelled to establish the obvious fact, that «to the Bolshevism we did not manage to develop the practical program of a way out» 174. The situation in which have appeared esery in the beginning of 1919, was regarded by them as crisis in party. N.Berezov, eser and the deputy of the Constituent assembly, wrote in article «Year of a life of party S - R» about three severe defeats which were incurred by party in revolution: October, 1917, January and November 1918 175. Last defeat connected with defeat kolchakovtsami of congress of members of the Constituent assembly, arrest of Central Committee PSR and socialist members of the Directory, was reflected in party more painfully, than all previous: «the Party has come to be without the Central Committee, deprived of the best workers, without real forces, without the clear tactical slogans, torn off from broad masses, in their eyes considerably discredited», - with bitterness marked N.Berezov176. Similar thoughts were stated in the report of Central Committee PSR on April, 29th, 1919 by M.I.Vedenjapin177, about same wrote in September, 1919 E.E.Lazarev178. Socialists-revolutionaries considered as the main error absence of party unity, continuation of a policy of a coalition with the qualification elements, expressed in numerous concessions and compromises. «Itself we these concessions Have compromised, - specified eser B.Olenin, - and Counterrevolution not only have not disarmed, and on the contrary - have given to it both forces, and impudences. As a result of all this tactics we have come to be behind a board, and all struggle against the Bolshevism has passed to counterrevolution for which our shoulders served only as steps to the power »179. Thus, some esery actually agreed with V.I.Lenina's asserting estimations, that« petty-bourgeois democracy »has paved the way for White Guard реакции180. Conclusions which have made for itself esery of lessons of 1918, with the greatest clearness were reflected in decisions of IX Council PSR. Socialists-revolutionaries temporarily stopped the armed struggle against the Bolshevism and strengthened struggle with burzhuaznopomeshchichej reaction, that, however, at all did not mean a recognition Bolshevist диктатуры181. To other conclusions the part eserov, united 1919 has come in the summer In group "People". Sources "narodovskoj" ideologies are traced in left wing PSR long before «the Ufa agreement» - the slogan of peace opposition to the Bolshevism has been put forward in January, 1918 of M. JI.Коган-Бернштейном. Evolution of group "People" which have risen on a position of cooperation with Bolsheviks, has come to the end with an exit from PSR and formation by autumn of 1919 of "Minority of party of socialists - of revolutionaries». In 1919-1922 "narodovtsy" actively acted in the legal press, let out the brochures and collections of articles, memoirs in which propagandised peace and 71 Constructive relations with Bolsheviks. Nebolshevistsky historiography PSR in days of civil war has been presented not only works of socialists - of revolutionaries and "narodovtsev" though such, of course, there was a majority. The point of view of white movement about Komuche, Directories and eserah have expressed A.S.Solovejchik182 and A.V.Kolchak183. In A.S.Solovejchik's brochure sharply criticises the Samara government which, in its opinion, did not conduct the present struggle against the Bolshevism. As the sample of democracy Komuchu it opposes kolchakovsky a mode. Revolution of 1917 and participation in it eserov have been considered in memoirs of a known left social democrat of N.N.Suhanova. It «Notes about revolution», published in 1919 (in Berlin-Moscow), at once have been recognised by a valuable source about events in Petrograd. To them referred P.N.Miljukov, V.I.Lenin, M.N.Pokrovsky, L.D.Trotsky, I.V.Stalin, V.M.Chernov. Further N.N.Suhanova's "Notes" became a component both domestic, and a foreign historiography. In respect of a problem interesting us capacious characteristics of disagreements in the ranks of PSR, the estimations given to heads eserov, to various currents in party are especially valuable short, but. According to N.N.Suhanova, already since first days of revolution, among Petrograd eserov there were two basic directions: considerably - revolutionary, presented V.A.Aleksandrovichem and leaning against workers, and «intelligentsko - narrow-minded» which have headed V.M.Zenzinov, and after V.M.Chernov. «These leaders of socialists - of revolutionaries soon began« to represent »the huge inflated party which has included in the structure all petty-bourgeois, mezhumochno - layers intellectual and simply gravitating to everyone majority - to liberal landowners and fighting generals inclusive. Left and, in particular, tsimmervaldskoe the current represented by the Petersburg workers, has soon been absolutely absorbed by this rotten, but the boundless majority» 184. V.M.Chernova's position and all eserovskogo the Central Committee throughout summer of 1917 is estimated by the author as shaky and unscrupulous. The leader eserov, in N.N.Suhanova's interpretation, obviously mismatched a role of the leader of the largest party of Russia which «has already spent a huge share of the weight, having conceded to its Bolsheviks; in villages it still kept it». As marked N.N.Suhanov if earlier at eserov there were currents after 75 kornilovshchiny fractions were generated. Distinctive line PSR in 1917, in opinion The Menshevist publicist, there was a confusion. It to the full concerned all eseram, including left. According to N.N.Suhanova, left esery did not think at all of the 76 Participation, or nonparticipation in work SNK. «Here I was convinced for the first time, that left esery, despite the"oppositional"platform, is"worse"- (italics than N.N.Suhanova) Bolsheviks: their weight, being rural elements, was more dark, and their leaders were absolutely 77 Are frivolous ». Thus, a party estimation eserov, presented by the Menshevist publicist, quite 78 Corresponded to the judgements stated both eserami, and their political opponents. Perhaps, with even big sarcasm to an estimation of activity PSR in 1917 the leader enesov A.V.Peshehonov has concerned. He has underlined, that the party eserov has gone on elections to the Constituent assembly not simply in a split condition, and in a drama condition. Under list PSR balotirovalis both left eser B.D.Kamkov, and right eser G.I.Shrejder who was the head of a Petrograd municipal duma. «And here these two people the party together, near conducts in the Constituent assembly.... Unless it not a drama?», - asks A.V.Peshehonov's question, and itself answers: the Party eserov spends to the Constituent assembly of people, 79 Which are already excluded or are subject to an exception of party ». The leader enesov noticed, that split in Party of socialists - of revolutionaries was inevitable, he explained it to that is inadmissible to unite in one organisation of the people sharply dispersing among themselves in sights and tactics. Under A.V.Peshehonova's offer congress TNSP (enesov) even has accepted the decision about pre-election agreements with PSR only in those districts where in its lists will not be left эсеров185. Thereupon it is necessary to notice, that the attention of many politicians and party publicists has been involved in such problem as judgement of history of Party of the left socialists - of revolutionaries. The beginning was necessary to it in 1918-1920 when a number Bolshevist, levoeserovskih and eserovskih authors has published the sketches on separate aspects of history PLSR. Though the scientific analysis was in most cases substituted for party rhetoric, authors could designate problems of allocation PLSR from party eserov, and then and political  destruction left eserov. The basic attention of party publicists at this stage has been chained to two thematic plots: histories of the agreement left eserov with Bolsheviks and to events on July, 6-7th, 1918 in Moscow. According to V.I.Lenina, the reasons of allocation left eserov from PSR consisted in a number of their theoretical parcels: an internationalist position, a future recognition behind socialism, dictatorship of proletariat and "labour" peasantry, tactical actions - requirements of transition of all power to Councils, deepenings of revolution, the decision it of social problems. Having analysed statements left eserov, the leader of Bolsheviks has characterised them as the closest to «to proletariat from bourgeois-democratic ideologists of peasantry» 186. Proceeding from this position, and also considering practical actions left eserov, V.I.Lenin has come to conclusion, that their allocation from party eserov has been connected with "popraveniem" PSR as a whole and a course right eserov on a coalition with bourgeoisie. Interesting discussion between V.M.Zenzinovym - to one of leaders of right wing PSR and I.Z.Shtejnbergom representing the left wing of the party thereupon is represented. V.M.Zenzinov asserted, that «we saw extreme revolutionism at eserov, entered into party only yesterday and on the contrary, more moderate and quiet positions occupy tested esery, working in party for a long time already». In turn I.Z.Shtejnberg marked, what exactly «underground esery (i.e. old, tested partijtsy) concern the radical 83 eseram, and "March" have taken conciliatory positions ». Valuable remarks on party tactics eserov, persons of its leaders contained, for example, in a sketch of "Memory proshjana» The published V.I.Leninym on December, 20th, 1918 in the newspaper "Truth". The leader of Bolsheviks wrote, that P.P.Proshjan «It was allocated at once with deep fidelity of revolution and », that in it« the convinced socialist »was visible to socialism, Resolutely becoming «on the party of Bolsheviks - Communists against the colleagues, the left socialists - Revolutionaries ». And only the question on the Brest world has led «To a full divergence» between proshjanom and Lenin. On L.D.Trotskogo's published in 1924 to the memoirs, events On July, 6-7th, 1918 in Moscow V.I.Lenin has estimated as «the next Monstrous kolebnutie the small bourgeois... - It so ironically and Has told: kolebnutie is that condition, about which F.Engels It was expressed: «had a snack has fished the small bourgeois» 187. L.D.Trotsky characterised relations of Bolsheviks and left eserov as «uncertain and shapeless». He wrote: «Inside Different establishments and relation departments between Bolsheviks and Left eserami differed that bolshej uncertainty, than More was then in our own party new and Stochastic elements. Already one that fact, that the basic kernel Revolts there was levoeserovskaja an organisation in armies CHK, Brightly enough characterises formlessness 86 Mutual relations ». Subsequently L.D.Trotsky has estimated left eserov as representatives of"petty bourgeoisie"having called them« worthless "," ridiculous "," political greenhorns ». The history of party left eserov has drawn V.I.Astrova, V.Vladimirovoj, A.V.Shestakova188's attention. V.Vladimirova, marking the positive moments in the politician left eserov during Bolshevist revolution, did the basic emphasis on their disagreements with Bolsheviks. The author marked adherence left eserov to the slogan «All power to Councils!», support of a course by them on world revolution, their struggle in 1917 with "oborontsami". The block of Bolsheviks and the left socialists-revolutionaries has received more all-round estimation in A.V.Shestakova's articles. The historian has come to conclusion about necessity and utility of the block both for Bolsheviks, and for left eserov. Bolsheviks, according to A.V.Shestakova, overcoming instability left eserov, could make the block with them «a counterbalance to that counterrevolutionary struggle which developed right esery among peasantry. The block has helped proletariat to contact organizational peasantry» 189. For left eserov, in opinion A.V.Shestakova, the block with Bolsheviks has appeared favourable in respect of acquisition of own person, expansion of trust among wide broad masses, first of all the peasantry demanding deepening of revolutionary changes in village. The historian has stated judgement, that a great bulk of "labour" peasantry liquidation only any more did not satisfy landowner landed property. They demanded bolshego - to take away the earth from rich peasants and to expropriate fists. As believed A.V.Shestakov, thanks to the block with Bolsheviks left esery became spokesmen of interests of this category of peasantry - serednjakov and poor men. The estimation of strategy and tactics left eserov and eserov - extremists has been undertaken in detailed article of journalist Dalja. Being on business trip in Samara, it has appeared the witness of armed conflicts between the provincial Council headed by extremists, and Voennorevoljutsionnym the committee, the supervising role in which was played by Bolsheviks. Having analysed transient mutual relations of extremists and communists, the Distance has come to conclusion, that events on May, 17-19th, 1918 in Samara - «are, undoubtedly, short fight for the power of anarho-extremists and Bolsheviks, instead of any counter-revolutionary insurrection dutovtsev and White Guards as on it it was informed in newspapers» 190. Histories of the Samara conflict were devoted by the sketch the participant of events G.Lelevich191, the truth, ascertaining, that the documentary at it documentary and newspaper material was lost in days учредиловщины192. Studying of mutual relations eserov, left eserov and peasantry became one of private, but, undoubtedly, important questions. The given problem rose in works of the former minister of agriculture of Provisional government, a member of Central Committee PSR of N.J.Byhovskogo193 and historian-marksista M.G.Gajsinskogo194. N.J.Byhovskogo's work has memoirs character and contains many interesting supervision and remarks, especially about I All-Russia country congress of Councils (May, 1917). The author's estimation of cumulative results of activity of all All-Russia congresses of Councils of country deputies which have taken place in 1917-1918 is important. According to N.J.Byhovskogo, at congresses attempt to lead Party of socialists-revolutionaries of the power in Russia has been undertaken, to protect peasantry from «proletariat dictatorship», to transform the Soviet power to really democratic and multi-party political system. The author specified, that the termination by Bolsheviks of activity of the All-Russia country congresses, liquidation of their executive committee meant abolition of the All-Russia class organisation of peasants, undermined party positions eserov, transformed peasantry into politically and class economically deprived of civil rights. Concerning M.G.Gajsinskogo published as the answer of N.J.Byhovskomu's work, modern historians have dispersed in estimations. So, T.V.Osipova wrote to 1974, that the book carries more likely popular scientific, than research характер195. V.M.Lavrov, on the contrary, believes, that if the book M.G.Gajsinskogo mismatched level of scientific works of the middle of 1970th in 1933 of such discrepancy was not. At the same time V.M.Lavrov has noticed, that an essential lack of work are incorrect statements of the author about ostensibly «to a juggling eserovskimi bigwigs of elections of the All-Russia country congresses and is artificial the picked up structure of delegates» 196. V.M.Lavrov also has specified, that M.G.Gajsinsky has not considered necessary to consider at least one concrete example confirming so serious charge. It was limited to a reasoning: time the management of elections belonged eseram, means, they should garble results of elections: «If the congress structure is garbled eserami the country order about the earth is garbled also and, accordingly, the Lenin Decree about the earth.... To Q “7 To such metamorphosis conducted the consecutive party approach ». In the mid-twenties the book of economist-agrarnika L.N.Litoshenko197 has been written and taken out abroad. In revolution of 1917 the author adhered to the political views close to the right cadets. With 1918 for 1930 it worked in the Soviet bodies of agricultural statistics, simultaneously being engaged in studying of agrarian history of Russia in revolution. As wrote L.N.Litoshenko, since July, 1917 the Party of socialists-revolutionaries was convinced of practical impossibility of the program requirements. By estimates of one of visible eserovskih economists, N.Ogonovskogo, levelling investment with the earth would demand immediate resettlement of 25 million souls from malozemelnyh provinces in the multiground. «New heads of land reform (first of all V.M.Chernov, as the agrarian minister. - A.K.) start to grow cold to own projects and come back to a policy of predecessors from whom they just struggled. Minor laws on prohibition of ground transactions, on the organisation of cleaning of haymakings, on protection are published and their cabins, etc. On the basic question on destiny of the earths of unearned using and on rules of distribution of ground fund prepare only projects and statistical materials, the decision is in essence postponed to the Constituent assembly» 198. L.N.Litoshenko has come to conclusion, that Bolsheviks have decided to use the basic points of the program of socialists - of revolutionaries. In its opinion, after Decree acceptance about the earth the Party of socialists-revolutionaries has appeared before a dilemma: or to protect the old point of view and to lose influence in village, or to recognise the Soviet power and to follow it in an agrarian question. L.N.Litoshenko has drawn a fair conclusion: «Weights have left more to the left, urban proletariat for Bolsheviks, and village for the left socialists-revolutionaries» 199. He believed, that the majority of members somehow the selected Constituent assembly only by inertia has appeared belonging to structure of the right wing of the party of socialists-revolutionaries. At the same time the author has come out with the assumption, that V.I.Lenina's calculation on spontaneous country socialism (or, speaking and chairman Sovnarkoma - «on revolutionary creativity of weights») was not justified by words of the leader of Bolsheviks. Instead of in a friendly way adjusted peasantry before the Soviet power there were a blank wall petty-bourgeois elements. On L.N.Litoshenko's trope: « One drink she sent all large-scale enterprise in the interior and now slowly digested extraction, threateningly growling on the address of everyone who will dare to come nearer to it »200. He believed, that the disappointment has served in spontaneous socialism as the main cause of a failure of Bolsheviks from narodnicheskoj the ground policy. In this case rupture of the block with left eserami became logical necessity. The first step in this direction was made by V.I.Lenin, having declared at V congress of Councils, that the adoption of law about socialisation was"error"from the party партии201. Thus, according to L.N.Litoshenko, events in Moscow became on July, 6-7th, 1918 only an occasion to rupture of relations. The reasons consisted in disagreements of understanding of model of socialism. Bolsheviks« insisted on "state", left esery - on "spontaneous". From two struggling currents the greatest force the first possessed »202. The road to crash left eserov, in the image of the Soviet historians, has been fatally predetermined by unscientific nature, "melkoburzhuaznostju" socialism left eserov. Authors divided history of the left socialists into three stages: the first - to Ratifications of the Brest contract and their exit from SNK when they were «fair, but sincerely mistaking revolutionaries». The second - before V All-Russia congress of Councils when they were engaged «in wrecking and sabotage, persistently achieving failure of the Brest world; combated against the food policy of the Soviet power, supporting a fist». The third stage which has begun after July, 6th 1918г., has made - 104 Party left eserov «anti-Soviet and counterrevolutionary». One of the first figures of this партии203 have addressed to history PLSR. In their works has found the place illumination of the reasons of occurrence of the left wing of the party of socialists-revolutionaries, disagreements with orthodox eserami, the plots connected with party strategy and tactics, the party program. Earliest of these publications, perhaps, can name «the Sketch of occurrence of Party of the left socialists-revolutionaries», written by the secretary of Central Committee PLSR I.F.Leontevym-Nechaevym in May, 1918. He wrote: « Time the hope of the left socialists - of revolutionaries of change of a line of conduct of the right wing of the party has failed, the way out could be thought only in the form of the organizational split anticipated to those voleju the Central Committee, an exception of party of separate far-outers of members, dissolution of all Petersburg organisation entirely standing on a position of the left wing; an exception of fraction a sots-roar of N The Congress of Councils... Left a sots-roar. It was obvious, that only one revolt going under a banner - «All power to Councils!», could break a coalition with the "allied" governments »204. Expressing adherence of the party to socialism and the Soviet power, authors - left esery at the same time aspired to open and character of the disagreements on some question with Bolsheviks and menshevikami-internatsionalistami205. First of all for B.D.Kamkova, V.E.Trutovskogo, I.Z.Shtejberga and others left eserov approaches distinct from Bolsheviks to ratification of the Brest peace treaty, introduction of grain monopoly and execution of decree SNK about the organisation of committees of the poor were problem. Fragility of the block between left eserami and Bolsheviks has led to that the majority of works of publicists PLSR has appeared is not claimed, and later has dropped out of a scientific turn. After events on July, 6-7th, 1918 in Moscow character levoeserovskih publications had, as a rule, character of justifications. At the same time in a number of articles and the sketches published left eserami, the regret and a repentance for the political errors made by them are traced. It is visible from the brochure printed in 1918, after 1 Pj The Moscow events. Left esery wrote: «We as party lose at the same time friends - critics at the left and we get against our will of enemies -« friends »on the right. Bolsheviks, naturally, turn away from us, changed it the most difficult and sharp minute of class struggle, but to us stick right esery and izhe with them. We creep away on seams. The Soviet party of social revolution is ready to turn to conspiratorial anti-Soviet conciliatory party» 109. Levoeserovsky editions were published 1919-1922 Exclusively abroad or it is underground, as, for example, «Bolshevik party M.Spiridonovoj's Post card of the Central Committee» though M.A.Spiridonovoj devoted to revolutionary activity by P.P.Proshjana's other publication, Bolsheviks nevertheless have resolved to изданию206. Let's bring some results to section. Since 1917 the sharpest begins ideological and political strike concerning the further state system of Russia, an economic and political life of a society, modernisation type. It reflected political confrontation of various social and political forces. It has made the biggest impact on all process of formation of a historiography of Party of socialists - of revolutionaries, having transformed it in extremely politized area of researches. The given phenomenon was not realisation of malicious intention of Bolsheviks. Such is type of existence of public consciousness of XX century, character of mutual relations between a science and ideology, a science and a policy was that. Being formed and developing on a Marxist-Leninist theoretical basis, the Soviet historical science during this period has passed two consecutive stages. At the first stage (1917 middle of 1920th) the attention to the question on change of shots, about otvoevanii scientific positions at «bourgeois professorate» supervising universities was brought. The given problem has found the decision, first of all in creation new scientifically-educational institutions: komvuzy, Communistic university of J.M.Sverdlova, Institute of Red professorate. Creation of istoriko-party archives (Istpart) and development of societies of regional studies conducted to the organisation and involving in the historical Studying «the advanced democratic forces and first of all party shots» 207. The communistic academy and K.Marksa and F.Engelsa's Institute became centres of science of a new Soviet science. Expansion of this new network of the scientific organisations answered also to a new thematic orientation of a historical science. K.Marksa and F.Engelsa's institute, Communistic academy, Istparty were simultaneously the centres of collecting and studying of the documentation on history of class struggle and on revolution history. The law on creation of uniform state fund and formation TSentrarhiva were the largest factor of development of the Soviet historiography. In respect of concrete studying questions of history of Bolshevist revolution, history of political parties, first of all Bolshevist, and also the organisations operating in parallel with it were put forward. It has defined also character of the basic publications of the considered period: «revolution Annals», «Red archive», collections regional Istpartov, etc. Simultaneously in the general-theoretical plan prime value was got by struggle with «bourgeois and petty-bourgeois» a historiography which representatives continued to act at the Soviet universities (N.I.Kareev, S.F.Platonov, L.P.Karsavin) and abroad, in emigration (P.N.Miljukov, V.M.Chernov, V.A.Mjakotin, M.M.Karpovich). In struggle against a "petty-bourgeois" historiography the important role M.N.Pokrovskogo's works have played. By 1925 the put Central Committees RKP (problems basically have been executed: new centres of science have developed the work, new scientific shots have allowed to create a wide network Scientific and educational institutions on all country. At the second stage (the middle 1920 - the beginning of 1930th) has occurred a struggle aggravation for «Marxist-Leninist methodology in a historical science». As a result the domestic historiography «was cleared of harmful Antimarxist installations, narodnicheskih vestiges and M.N.Pokrovskogo's so-called school» 208. In 1917-1920th in Russia there were certain conditions for the publication of works and documents on revolutionary movement histories, including participations in it eserov. A number from them has been published in magazines «Penal servitude and the reference», "Past", «Red archive». At this stage in the state and private publishing houses, in Bolshevist collections and magazines documents, memoirs in which certificates on different aspects of history eserov were resulted were published. It is necessary to tell and about the theoretical works written by leaders various партий209, the separate popular works directed on geroizatsiju in public consciousness of revolutionaries and most 114
<< | >>
A source: Kononenko, Anatoly Anatolevich. Historiography of the creation and activities of the Socialist Revolutionary Party in the years 1901-1922. / Thesis / Tyumen - 2005. 2005

More on topic 3.1. Problems of history PSR in the literature 1917 - 1920th:

  1. chapter 5. Formation and realisation of new approaches to history PSR in a modern domestic historiography
  2. CHAPTER 3. History illumination eserovskogo movements in publications 1917 — the middle of 1950th
  3. «I was Russia»: Historicism of art thinking I.S. ­ The Sokolov-Mikitova in stories of 1920th years
  5. 1.3. Problems of a periodization of history of economy
  6. 1.1. History of studying of terms and problems of their transfer domestic and foreign linguistics
  7. § 4. Gnosticism problems in the newest history of politiko-legal doctrines
  8. 2. The basic literature at the rate “economy History”
  9. 1.3. Mutual relations between the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic and the Mongolian National Republic in 1920th years
  11. § 1. Working out of the project of new edition of Position about a notarial part of 1904: the reasons and history, problems of the theory of a notariate. A new image of the notary
  12. the Appendix 1. The maintenance of pragmatical history of programs on general history of classical grammar schools
  13. Shilov Denis Nikolaevich. "Russian necropolis" Grand duke Nikolay Mihajlovicha: the creation History, the neopublished materials and problems of their studying and the edition, 2004
  14. the Appendix 7 - Organizational structure EGZHU, 1867-1917
  15. §1. Development of the Nizhniy Novgorod periodicals during the period with 1838 for 1917
  16. 1917-1930th: a principle of "the extended hand»
  17. the Analysis of survey of the literature, statement of problems of work
  18. §2. The literature review on problems of forecasting of bankruptcy.
  19. Evolution of the Policy of Law of the Soviet state concerning invalids in 1917 - 1930th HH century