<<
>>

Researchers about socialists - revolutionaries after autocracy overthrow

the Soviet historiography throughout decades tried to prove legitimacy of an one-party mode and its representatives who have won in Civil war. Actions of the parties representing alternative visions of the future of Russia, appeared obviously illegal.
The full change of the public paradigm which have been gone through on a boundary of 1980-1990th, abrupt turn from a totalitarian society to the opened and more free were accompanied by so deep shifts and in the field of historical самосознания417. Past reconsideration is inevitably connected with wreck of former myths, stereotypes, revaluation of historical values in search of new criteria of public progress, at last, with change of the problematics of historical works in advantage before forbidden or considered unworthy research by that. In this plan splash in scientific attention to the Russian history of the end XIX - the XX-th century beginnings is quite proved and clear. The publication in Russia of monographies and articles of the foreign authors, devoted to this or that problem of history of the Soviet society became distinctive line of filling of a historical science in 90th years of the XX-th century. At this stage in Russia there are works of R.Konkvista, A.Rabinovicha, R.Tucker, A.Avtorhanova, M.Voslenskogo, S.Koena and другие418. First of all Claimed the works which object of research was the CPSU, its leaders, organizational structures, an ideological platform have appeared the Russian reader. At the same time as though by the second echelon of the foreign historical literature in Russia the works devoted including socialists - революционерам419 began to be published. Acquaintance to publications of the western historians along with the general crash Soviet, an one-party system certainly, has made considerable impact on all subsequent historiography of a problem. Particularly it was showed in avalanche change by that, And, in particular, to leaving of domestic historians from studying «struggle of the CPSU against...» And increasing attention to opponents of the Bolshevism. The reference of researchers to the themes which have excited the public in the early nineties, has shown backlog of a domestic historical science from western where these questions were considered for a long time as the developed. Change of priorities in historical researches has to the full affected and the increased interest to history of Russia in the first quarter of XX century, in particular, to events of 1917, which steels to be estimated by many exclusively negatively. The reference to a theme of political parties in 1917, including to eseram as socialists-revolutionaries were traditionally perceived by historians as the most significant and largest opponent of the Bolshevism at that time became one of directions of public and scientific interest to revolution history again actual. As V.M.Chernov wrote in due time, the party eserov in February, 1917 represented «skeletoobraznoe a condition, it existed as organizational whole in the form of a network of few illegal groups, not having even correct, 57 The conventional organizational centre ». Position has changed within the first month of revolution.
In steel party 58 To register regiments, factories and villages. In June 1917г. PSR became the largest political party of Russia. At the same time one of paradoxes of revolution 1917г. There was almost an undivided rule at the First All-Russia congress of Councils of working and soldier's deputies menshevikov, instead of eserov. The first has paid attention to this circumstance V.P.Buldakov420. He believes, that representatives RSDRP by March, 1917 had installation on creation of Councils and were widely known in working sections of Military-industrial committees. As to eserov they obediently enough followed for menshevikami. «For this purpose there were some reasons. First, mensheviki stood to social democratic leaders II Internatsionala on which pacifistic activity hopes of the termination of imperialistic war were pined more close. Secondly, among moderate socialists has taken roots "Marxist" (leaders II Internatsionala) belief that Russia cannot avoid the long period of democratic evolution of the country in the conditions of parliamentarism. In - the third, esery on narodnicheskoj traditions avoided "policy", preferring to concentrate on the decision of questions social. At last, as esery representation about a way of Russia to socialism through country cooperation and working self-management they tried to concentrate the efforts to the organisations of weights for gradual socialisation of the earth, and then started with factories and factories »421. To similar conclusions have come P.V.Volobuyev, S.V.Tjutjukin and G.I.Zlokazov422: «After February esery have put the program of" country socialism »under cloth and were assured of creative wisdom menshevikov and prematurity of socialism in Russia». Developing this thought, G.I.Zlokazov at the same time considers, that the policy of "golden mean" used eserami and menshevikami, has doomed VTSIK finally to defeat and /GL Leaving from a political arena. By the way, V.I.Lenin neatly named such policy «lax revolution» 423. Considering a position and tactics of moderate socialists, historians have come, as a matter of fact, to a common opinion according to which the steps undertaken by parties eserov and menshevikov, have been in many respects caused by their sights at revolution prospects. In particular, esery «did not trust in own ability to keep the power and to operate the country» as considered, that coming to power only "socialist" parties «makes active forces of the extremely right reaction and can lead to tsarism restoration» 424. At the same time in works both domestic, and western authors previous them the point of view according to which the "conciliatory" policy eserov naturally followed from their position of "the class world» and idea of "unity of live forces of the country» 425 has been stated. The greatest interest in respect of an explanation of a course and a revolution outcome represents a question on political consequences of creation of the coalition government. In a domestic historiography in connection with working out of this problem two aspects were allocated. It was noticed, that leaders eserov, following for menshevikami, have gone on formation of the coalition government while there were favorable conditions for transition peace by all power to Councils. April crisis 1917г. Has shown overweight of forces on the party of Councils and their absence at bourgeoisie to apply violence concerning revolutionary weights. However the socialist management of Councils has not taken advantage of this possibility and has given bourgeoisies chance to become organised, that further and has led razvjazyvaniju civil войны426. Secondly, according to domestic historians, as well as their western colleagues, the policy eserov and menshevikov in 1917 has led to falling of authority and influence of these parties among working and soldier's weights and finally to them to "logic defeat». However, within the limits of discussion of a question about political «alternatives to October» the point of view which supporters consider eserov as carriers of "democratic alternative» was designated, opposing it both «counterrevolutionary dictatorship», and «proletariat dictatorship». However nerazrabotannost methodological aspects of researches as a whole has led to that these alternatives, according to V.P.Buldakov, «stole up in conformity 67 To predilections of authors ». Much smaller attention is given disagreements and contradictions between participants of is moderate-socialist camp, in a consequence of that even there is an impression, that esery and mensheviki always were at one and in relations of these parties there were no conflict situations though actually it was far not so. Probably, the given party of mutual relations eserov with the allies should find fuller reflexion in works of researchers. It is necessary for historians to show, how there was a block between the parties, what mutual estimations were given by partners in a coalition, on what principles cooperation of defence elements of both parties, on the one hand, and internationalist - with another was under construction. In modern historiography PSR the large research problems connected with consideration of the concrete moments of activity eserov, and also with the general conceptual estimation of value and role PSR in 1917 are allocated some. In the latter case works of generalising character on party history eserov urged to solve this problem. Such researches несколько427, however statement of theoretical problems, the reasons of defeat of party eserov in political strike are expressed in them obviously insufficiently. Some exception N.D.Erofeeva's position looks only. Based on the "modernisation" theory, she assumes, that the socialist ideology eserov more all reflected aspiration to modernise the country on-krestjanski, having kept its agrarian shape. The history of Russia till 1917 has shown limitation of conservative and liberal models of modernisation of the country. With 1917 struggle occurred for a celebration of one of variants of socialist model of modernisation of the country. In this struggle the victory has appeared for Bolsheviks not casually. As believes N.D.Erofeev, in those conditions their program had an industrial orientation, they were "statesmen" and more corresponded to the decision of the main task facing to the country. The Eserovsky model of modernisation recognised that Russia owing to the developed international division of labour remains and after updating by mainly agrarian country. It is impossible to dismiss and evolution PSR from revolutionary populism to the West European reformist socialism in which course esery lost the «integrity and revolutionary energy». In it, in its opinion, the defeat reason эсеров428 is covered. N.D.Erofeeva's point of view concerning the reasons of political wreck PSR is proved enough, but in the modern literature there are also other positions calling into question refusal eserov to accept industrialisation «as the most important 7П Imperative »the Russian future. The program orthodox eserov if in 1917 in their party the right wing dominated was how much utopian? V.N.Ginev wrote in due time, that« transition from country positions on so-called "nation-wide" in general was characteristic in 1917 for eserovskih the leaders especially holding the governmental posts ». Developing the thought, the historian on the joint Russian - foreign colloquium which has taken place in 1993 in Sankt - Petersburg, spoke:« Earlier we wrote, that left esery Have played more positive role, than right in 1917. Now it is represented debatable. The equal right to the earth, a wage labour interdiction, refusal practically from levelling land tenure? Whether change it to peasantry and the agrarian program or display of elements of realism? »429. In this case, as the known German historian M.Hildermajer underlines, there can be no conversation on utopianism PSR even if V.M.Chernova's"left-centrist"fraction has reconciled with 72 The "soft" form of industrial development of Russia. The radical changes which have occurred in Russia in 1990 - e have introduced certain corrective amendments in illumination of mutual relations of party of socialists-revolutionaries and the country organisations. The publication in the book «Politicians of Russia 1917 became first signs in this plan: the Biographic dictionary» under P.V.Volobuyev's edition (M, 1993) (for the first time from the end of 1920th K) data on three All-Russia country congresses which have included full structure of delegates, their party accessory and the basic requirements. Further the role of the country organisations has found the reflexion in monographies V.M.Lavrova and T.V.Osipovoj430. In the first the major accepted resolutions are investigated, allowing to draw a conclusion on the events occurring at congresses, their social composition, character of the disagreements which were taking place at discussion of the basic question on preservation of private landed property to decisions of the Constituent assembly. The key problem, according to V.M.Lavrova, consisted in that immediate socialisation of the earth has not caused explosion of hatred of the proprietors making not less of a quarter of all country population of Russia. Cardinal changes in an agrarian question could provoke (that later and has occurred. - A.K.) wreck of a financial and economic life of the country as a whole, since an earth large quantity (31,671 million desjatin.) It has been put in pawn in banks. On the security of the earth banks have given out about 32 billion 268 million rbl., almost as much, how many on industry crediting. The nationalisation of the earth offered by Bolsheviks, or socialisation on what insisted esery, inevitably would lead to bankruptcy of banks. At I congress of Councils of country deputies dominated esery, from 1353 delegates there were only 9 Bolsheviks. However the majority of deputies as it is reflected in reports, intuitively gravitated to V.I.Lenina's resolutely demanding immediately to transfer all the earth to peasants position. V.M.Lavrov believes, that deputies of country congress would support immediate transfer of the earth to peasantry and even power transition to Councils, call for that leaders eserov. Peasants sincerely considered, that the state and the general work is the blessing, and harm proceeds from private interests "zazhravshihsja" capitalists and to it подобных431. As a result V.M.Lavrova's position has actually coincided with a conclusion of the English researcher of M.Perre considering, that eseram serious impact on country movement was not possible to make. The English historian confirmed: «the Basic requirement of peasantry - gratuitously to give them all landowner earth it is impossible to identify with socialism. And more peasants also did not want anything» 432. Complex research of peasantry as the active participant of historical events of tragical years of revolution and civil war was undertaken 1917-1922 by T.V.Osipova. She believes, that the agrarian program eserov did not give the answer to a question, at the expense of what and whom the state will satisfy inquiries of urban population and army in products selhozproizvodstva if the equation in norms of land tenure provides only own requirements of country economy, not providing commodity manufacture. Levelling land tenure according to T.V.Osipovoj, was an old social Utopia of peasants which they have not refused in 1917, that finally has led to their tragedy. Peasantry, the historian believes, it has appeared the deceived class which has suffered defeat in struggle against the communistic state. Illumination of relations between eserami and peasantry has found the place as in capital, and regional researches. Among researches of last years it is necessary to note works as A.A.Kurenysheva, V.S.Kobzova, A.V.Medvedeva, E.P.Sichinskogo, S.V.Starikova, O.V.Konovalovoj, I.V.Marimovoj, A.A.Vorobeva433. The country organisations as an accompanying element of research process have drawn attention and American-Russian historian J.G.Felshtinskogo. In the monography «Wreck of world revolution. The Brest world: October 1917 - November 1918». (M, 1992) a number of pages is devoted Extreme and to II All-Russia country congresses. Developing sights of the American researcher of O.H.Radki434, J.G.Felyptinsky believes, that split in party eserov on the left and right promoted Bolshevik party strengthening. And left esery, having followed a dissenting way of struggle against the party and "having trusted" in Bolsheviks, promoted dissolution of Executive committee of Council of country deputies, and having taken part in dispersals of the country not Soviet organisations, also are responsible for drama destiny of the Russian peasantry. Among problems of history of party eserov after October, 1917 four plots are most actively developed: a role right eserov in formation of political opposition to a Bolshevist mode in the first posleoktjabrskie months; activity PSR in days of Civil war; replacement of party from a political scene in years nepa and formation eserovskoj emigrations. Last years active studying of a repressive policy of the Soviet state in relation to Party of socialists-revolutionaries has begun. Till May, 1918 when there was a performance of the Czechoslovak case and full-scale Civil war has actually begun, orthodox socialists-revolutionaries have suffered two serious defeats: in October, 1917 when have not managed To resist to Bolshevist revolution, and in January, 1918, not having managed to defend the Constituent assembly where PSR had the majority of places. These plots also are in the centre of attention of modern researchers. Certain interest of researchers is caused again by a creation problem of "the homogeneous socialist government» after October events in Petrograd. Undertaken at the initiative of Vikzhelja (the All-Russia executive committee of the union of railway workers and employees) negotiations on this occasion with participation of Bolsheviks, right and left eserov, menshevikov and of some other parties and groups have ended with failure. The majority of authors is inclined to blame for a failure of negotiations both parties which have not managed owing to ideological and practical reasons to make a compromise while there was a real possibility of creation of the multi-party democratic socialist 78 The governments. А.X.Бурганов explained behaviour right eserov «practically full absence of communication with the revolutionary people» therefore Central Committee PSR has turned to a staff without 79 Armies. Other historians, on the contrary, specify in Bolsheviks as the main originators of failure of negotiations as they «were ready to divide the power only with those parties which will agree for a role of the younger partner and will implicitly confirm Bolshevist resolutions» 435. In this plan usually Refer to V.I.Leninym's known estimation of negotiations as Diplomatic cover of military actions. He has seen in Case with Vikzhelem something bolshee, than struggle for The governmental posts. It was clear for V.I.Lenina — mensheviki and esery wish not to admit political monopoly Bolsheviks on the power. Chance of creation of the democratic The governments with participation of all socialist parties were After October events in Petrograd, in our opinion, it is insignificant In view of absence even desires for the agreement between the right Leaders PSR and RSDRP with Bolsheviks, though in the separate 01 Local eserovskih the organisations there were other sights. Leaders PSR have been adjusted sharply antibolshevistski. From its part, leaders of Bolsheviks of V.I.Lenin and L.D.Trotsky felt mistrust to the opponents. Compromise possibilities in this case are represented speculative. In November-December, 1917 esery pined all hopes of change of a political situation in the country on convocation of the All-Russia Constituent assembly where they have won the majority of places. Voting for eserov, marks L.G.Protasov, it is possible to consider as a choice in favour of the centrist line which have appeared, however, owing to objective circumstances of the impossible: the centre party became struggle party, has turned in 2 The main oppositional force. So, on a question set in September, 1917 E.k.breshko-Breshkovsky, as will arrive esery if will receive minority of voices on elections in All-Russia The constituent assembly, she has answered: «We will disperse it». Nevertheless a number right eserov, according to JI.Г.Протасова, considered then inadmissible the armed way of struggle for the power, that, according to some historians, has helped Bolsheviks - socialists of democratic sense could lean against broad support of broad masses if would operate more resolutely. As writes about this T.A.Sivohina, «split in parties, absence of the present leader, the uniform point of view for a role of the forthcoming Constituent assembly» 436 has affected. As a result eseram it was not possible, according to the historian, effectively to counteract the vigorous policy of Bolsheviks and to mobilise weights for protection of people's choices. Constituent assembly dispersal as a result became a turning point in history of Russian revolution as «in an embryo» contained curling of those democratic freedom for the sake of which revolution and was made. In a modern historiography the point of view dominating in the Soviet science remains also - Constituent assembly dispersal corresponded to moods of broad masses. On the such Wasps Positions there is A.V.Medvedev. Esery, in its opinion, tailed after events. The exit for them was the same, as for left eserov - active participation in Decree realisation about the earth, work in the Soviet bodies власти437. A.V.Medvedev, thus, considers, that socialists-revolutionaries and other opposition parties should recognise at once legality of the Bolshevist government and refuse struggle for the power. It is difficult to agree with it at least because mission of political parties - in government achievement, instead of in refusal of it. Opinion A is represented to More true. JI. Litvina, believing, that all participants of the conflict bear equal responsibility for the actions as as a result any could appear the winner 87 The party. In the literature of last decade it is made much for overcoming of tendentious stereotypes according to ideological preconditions of formation of Party of socialists - революционеров438, working out agrarian программы439, economic policy ПСР440. It is necessary to notice, that in researches of this period the social base eserovskih the organisations "has considerably extended". Researchers even more often pay attention to increase in quantity of the party organisations out of cities after monarchy overthrow. However, on their supervision, PSR in 1917, unlike cadets and the left radicals, aspiring to extend the influence and on village, got city character. A number of historians has called in question traditional representations about number eserov. If in the Soviet literature their quantity was defined in 0.7 - 1 million persons in works of last decade results of calculations appear more modest. Deviations in a number estimation eserov are especially striking if to go on a way of gathering of the information on the regional organisations. So, modern scientists managed to collect data only about several tens organisations of socialists - revolutionaries on Урале441, instead of 104 92 The predecessors designated in works. Last figure causes bewilderment, considerably dispersing with official data PSR - 436 organisations eserov on all country. Seriously the statistical information on number Far East eserov in 1917 in works differs S.P.Rudnika442 and I.S.Kochetkovoj443. A number of works in which region of research of the party organisations eserov steels the Volga region, Mordovia, the Chuvash edge, Urals Mountains and Siberia, testifies in favour of that fact, that the generalised figures about number eserov carried out propaganda function and is obvious завышались444. As an example the same Ural region where number of the largest organisation of party of socialists - of revolutionaries so raznitsja, that causes bewilderment can serve. So, according to a number of historians, in 1917 number PSR on 97 Urals Mountains made about 40 thousand persons. Under I.Podshivalova's certificate, in region (the end 1917 - the beginning 1918) the first on number were left esery, «which totaled in the QO Numbers of 7-8 thousand members ». It is possible to assume only, that the historian meant all Urals Mountains, and only Ekaterinburg, or there was a landslide exit from party numbers, or artificial overestimate of number of the organisations« for the report »took place. The period in history eserov after Great Russian revolution long time was in the Soviet historiography practically closed theme. The matter is that all attempts eserov to operate within the limits of the Soviet laws in an opposition role to a Bolshevist mode finally have been stopped by the Soviet retaliatory bodies and have ended with leaving PSR from a political arena. Sharp Antibolshevist performances eserov, on the one hand, and punishment of them authorities - with another, during Soviet time concerned the themes which have been not intended for wide discussion in the open press. Cancellation of this interdiction has given the first encouraging results in 1990th: Along with the publications of documents of FSB which have been carried out by the Russian historians mentioned above, there were first monographies ". The similar picture accompanies also to other political party - PLSR. «The round table» in magazine "Native land" (1990, №5) with L.M.Ovrutskogo and J.G.Felshtinskogo's participation which was called «More to the left of left» became one of first signs of the new approach to the left socialists-revolutionaries. Behind this name there was J.G.Felshtinskogo's radical Antibolshevist position and L.M.Ovrutskogo's "orthodox" point of view. The fact of occurrence of the similar publication said, that in the Soviet historiography «under a curtain» its existence have really blown winds of main recesses. A.S.Velidov, the recognised researcher of events on July, 6-7th, 1918 in Moscow though continued to assert about «incontestable certificates, that left esery set as the purpose armed revolt», at the same time "has specified", for the sake of what they it have made - «rescue of the Soviet power and world revolution» 445. In it, in its opinion, «danger of petty-bourgeois revolutionism» 446 is brightly reflected. Apparently, charges in "anti-Soviet" character of "mutiny" in 1990th began to disappear even at conservative historians. In the literature of last decade a number of problem questions, such as the reasons of political and organizational rupture left eserov with PSR, theoretical views left, a social base, party geography, number, tactics at different stages of activity, the reason of political  destruction has been put. The event which has caused by a life the left current in PSR, the First World War was, considers L.M.Ovrutskij447. In its opinion, the group "porazhentsev" has played a kernel role round which in the future there was a Party of the left socialists-revolutionaries. J.V.Leontev believes, that the historical Esery-extremists and the extremely left group in PSR, the headed J.L.Judelevskim, arisen even before war were predecessors PLSR. The historian has agreed with L.M.Ovrutskogo's opinion, that in days of the First World War the majority future left eserov has taken of accurately expressed internationalist position, and in Great Russian revolution has intuitively supported Bolsheviks. As writes J.V.Leontev, the reasons of this support of a steel unconditional belief left eserov to world revolution, in revolutionary socialism, and so-called "golgofizm" - sacrificial mood to bring on a revolution altar. Other reason of political and organizational rupture with PSR J.V.Leontev names basic divergences of a politiko-legal country organisation. «If an ideal for a great bulk eserov was the classical democratic republic of parliamentary type left esery were the convinced supporters of the power of Councils» 448. Conviction left eserov in justice of the Soviet system was based on possibility by re-elections of the representatives to influence state machinery work. According to J.V.Leonteva, «this point became the main stumbling-block and has moved a bowl of scales at the moment of painful fluctuations left eserov in a question on a choice between« odnorodnosotsialisticheskim the government »and a coalition with Bolsheviks» 449. The social composition of party left eserov in the modern literature is characterised as the union Left-wing radical vnesoslovnoj intelligency, labour peasantry and workers, as a rule, not in time yet to come off from деревни450. Left esery considered itself as spokesmen of interests first of all labour peasantry by which meant small independent производителя451. According to historians, levatskie "manners" PLSR peasantry did not interest and even at times guarded, however this party defended their interests, having proclaimed the slogan «the Earth and will!» . Researchers have counted up, that more than half of delegates of party congresses left eserov belonged to age group from 25 till 30 years, and almost the quarter was more younger. They However, mark, behind shoulders at left eserov already there were whole biographies: prisons and references, and at some and penal servitude, runaways, emigration, front. Their special psychological warehouse of "romanticists of revolution» supplements an accessory to «risk group» and absence versatile vital опыта452. Political geography PLSR, according to historians, is wide enough - the party had the organisations in all regions of Russia. Disputes are caused by a question on number of party left eserov. It is clear, that process of allocation PLSR from PSR proceeded non-uniformly and in some regions was tightened till summer of 1918. Impossibility at once to adjust the party account, and also absence of communication with a number of territories and the areas which have been cut off by Civil war from the Central Russia, do not allow to define number of party numbers precisely enough. In the historical literature two absolutely not comparable figures - 300 thousand 453 and 150 thousand left эсеров454 are resulted. So, according to L.M.Ovrutskogo and A.I.Razgona, credentials committee of III congress PLSR who has taken place on June, 28th - on July, 1st, 1918, has testified fast growth of party numbers (have been presented 85 thousand party members, however, by calculations The credentials committee, all them was not less than 300 thousand) 455. The more amazingly, historians notice, that on July, 6-7th, 1918, «in two days powerful and all the gaining in strength Soviet party has turned to a conglomerate of groups and the small groups pulling every which way, disoriented in political space and deprived of a uniform management» 456. In our opinion, definition Number levoeserovskih the organisations requires additional specification. In the same way the further studying of electorate PLSR and an establishment of distinctions is necessary between Members with party membership cards and sympathising, as in levoeserovskie fractions in Councils, party groups and fighting teams frequently registered non-parties. In the literature of last years the attention to the question on stages of activity of Party of the left socialists — revolutionaries has been brought. Its decision gives the chance to historians to lean against more exact chronology, to show activity of this party more accurately and more full. J.V.Leontev has offered a history periodization levoeserovskogo movements in territory of Russia: «I period (June - October 1917г.) - time of fractional existence levoeserovskogo covered inside PSR. II period (November 1917 - first half of March 1918г.) - declaration and organizational building of independent party and the block with Bolsheviks. III period (second half of March - the beginning of July 1918г.) - transformation into mass party, constructive Opposition. IV period (July 1918 - first half of February 1919г.) - struggle attempts for the power, semilegal existence and a series of party splits. V period (from 2nd half of February on the end 1919г.) - illegal existence PLSR, creation initiatives «Party of revolutionary socialism» and levonarodnicheskogo the block. VI period (the beginning 1920 - the middle 1922г.) - collecting of forces and the differentiated existence of various currents of party. VII period (second half 1922 - 1925г.) - association with eserami-extremists, disintegration Party structures, existence of circles, and... Party "agony" »457. As a whole agreeing with the given periodization, we will notice, that in many regions of Russia left esery already in 1919 have ceased to represent a little significant political force. For example, one of last mentions of organisation PLSR in Urals Mountains - the letter levoeserovskogo the active worker, directed on September, 15th, 1919 from Ufa - were in the recent past the unconditional domain of party: «Yesterday there was a general meeting The organisations.... There was a lot of public, merchants, officers and other alien revolutions people.... To expel them to hell 113 From our numbers! ». The subsequent mentions about left eserah edges are connected exclusively with activity VCHK in which information reports it was informed:«... All of them under the control and dangers do not represent »458. In a modern historiography left eserov are presented different, and at times and opposite estimations of tactics PLSR. According to J.G.Felyptinskogo with whom V.M.Lavrov is solidary, «persecution, joint with Bolsheviks, not Soviet country organisations has deprived PLSR of support of mullions-strong group of the peasantry which has not accepted October. Upholding of interests« Soviet »labour peasantry has pushed off left eserov with the rural proletarians (farm laborers), demanding, at unconditional support of Bolsheviks, repartition of all earth and redistribution not only landowner, but also country property. At last, the aversion of the logic of Bolshevist socialism with its experiments in village has doomed PLSR to defeat» 459. As L.M.Ovrutsky and A.I.Razgon, on the contrary, consider tactics PLSR successful. Having headed, along with Bolsheviks, process of deepening of revolution, having supported the slogan «All power to Councils!», PLSR in the winter-spring of 1918 has achieved essential successes and even on some positions began to advance the partner in a coalition - RKP (). In acknowledgement to the thesis historians give of a word of the little-known deputy from the Pskov province, and then one of theorists PLSR of O.L.Chizhikova: « We will be not included into the government not because we did not wish to ratify the world are an utter nonsense. But we will be not included into the government for deeper reasons, that at the moment the Bolshevik party collapses. And time so, we should concentrate all forces be able take in hand the power »460. Really, authority PLSR, especially in a countryside, was much vesomee authority RKP (. Besides at this particular time in the Bolshevik party the fraction of the left communists insisting on immediate revolutionary war with Germany was formed. Among considerable works in which it is considered Tactics of party left eserov, it is necessary to name J.G.Felshtinskogo's monography «Wreck of world revolution» (M, 1992) and the collection of its sketches «Leaders in the law» (M, 1999). It is necessary to agree, however, with J.V.Leontevym, that fantastic reconstruction of a secret management levoeserovskim "plot" by workers VCHK by order of F.E.Dzerzhinsky, made J.G.Felyitinskim, is represented for today not 117 Quite convincing. J.G.Felshtinskogo's essential contribution to illumination of mutual relations between two parties bolshevistsko-levoeserovskogo the block is conclusive. At the same time the analysis of these relations in L.M.Ovrutskogo, A.L.Litvina and A.I.Razgona's works is represented to more thoughtful. Stating own estimation to the plots investigated by J.G.Felyptinskim, it would be desirable to pay attention to a previous situation. First, left eserov hardly it is possible to name revolt anti-Soviet because Soviet power since November, 1917, and, probably, and July, 1917 did not exist. The Councils which have arisen in March, 1917 public authorities were not, as were perceived by contemporaries as the public and class organisations of soldiers, workers and the peasants, created on purpose nedopushchenija monarchy restorations. Having demanded to remove the slogan «All power to Councils!» After events on July, 3-4rd 1917 g in Petrograd, V.I.Lenin recognised, that the government is in Russia at Provisional government. After October events in Petrograd when the power has actually passed to Bolsheviks, Councils have turned to "screen" two-party, and since July, 6th, 1918 and one-party dictatorship. As the secretary Perm gubkoma PSR has fairly noticed L.V.Zatejshchikov — «Councils of working and soldier's deputies have lost the value And Bolsheviks have played thus the role. Now Councils - - 118 Only the party unions ». Secondly, if on IY the All-Russia congress of Councils PLSR it has been presented 20 % of voices on Y congress it has received about third of mandates, 31 %. Besides, researchers believe, that Bolsheviks had been admitted a fabrication of the firm majority of the delegates, differently levoeserovskih delegates would be still больше461. Growth of authority left eserov consisted in country support as in the spring of 1918 from the Soviet parties only PLSR opposed Bolshevist prodrazverstki and plantings since June of the poor committees which were called in use «committees of idlers». Policy PLSR directed against ratification of the Brest peace treaty, as is known, has found encouragement and in other party in power - RKP (), among the left communists though serious disagreements between lenintsami and the left communists by time of carrying out of V All-Russia congress of Councils have been already overcome. Despite it, hardly events can be characterised on July, 6th as Antibolshevist. According to J.G.Felyptinsky and L.M.Ovrutsky, «many leaders PLSR, its numerous party congress of Councils have learnt about performance from newspapers» 462. In comments to published in 1990 in Russia M.A.Spiridonovoj's to letter in the Central Committee of Bolshevik party, J.G.Felyptinsky who has acted as the editor, has noticed, that, Accusing communists, M.A.Spiridonova has not told, that till July, 6th 1918 PLSR together with Bolsheviks so «meanly and meanly» Poisoned all parties standing more to the right. Does not mention Spiridonov and How left eser P.P.Proshjan has arrested right eserov Helsingfors, and left eser V.A.Ustinov participated in closing «News of Council of country deputies», supervised The right socialists-revolutionaries, and in dispersal not Soviet The country organisations. M.A.Spiridonovoj's letter, on To the remark of the author, - svoebraznyj an epilogue to short bolypevistsko - levoeserovskomu to the union. Eserovsky, as well as other not Bolshevist organisations, Were scattered under the influence of animosities or fear of surrounding, Mass transitions of the former supporters to Bolsheviks, Suspiciousness and "control" reprisals from 121 The authorities. Certain interest in this context represents G.E.Zinoveva's statement at XI congress RKP () in March, 1922: «We do not give possibility legally to exist that who applies for rivalry with us. We have clamped a mouth menshevikam and eseram. Proletariat dictatorship as speaks t. Lenin, is very severe thing. To provide proletariat dictatorship, it is impossible to do without not to break 1 ' U'U Back ridge to all opponents of this dictatorship ». The number which has taken place soon of indicative processes and arrest in 1925 of last structure of Central bureau PSR are not adequate proofs of existence and political strike eserov in territory of the Soviet Russia. The certain place in a modern historiography occupies Theme of provincial multi-party system. It is quite natural Reaction to a situation of the last decades, when the given Ifr the problematics was developed narrowly. Even in the late eighties, When at the all-Russian level certain shifts were outlined In theme research, in conceptual approaches regional Historians, behind few exception, defining were Former sights and judgements. Necessity of a regional component for the organisation Researches of history of party eserov it is important, first of all, therefore, That with easing in 1917-1918 of vertical communications (the centre — The province) has essentially increased a periphery role. Most 1 Successfully this problem dares historians of Urals Mountains. I.V.Narskogo's article in meeting of the works devoted to the 60 anniversary V.V.Shelohaeva, shines activity of the organisations of political parties in Uralsk region. The author believes, that all parties, being the alien tool brought during a public life of Russia from Europe, have played as a whole a negative role «multi-party system Blossoming in 1917 was imaginary, and its decomposition permissibly to interpret as natural process and one of displays of the social disintegration which has captured all spheres of human activity in revolutionary accident» 124. I.V.Narsky also has noticed, that by results of elections in 123 The review of the literature on party eserov see materials of the Ural region in work: Kononenko A.A.socialist in a political life of Urals Mountains (1917 1918). Tyumen, 2003. S.4-17. 124 Narsky I.V.revolution and destiny of provincial multi-party system (Urals Mountains, 1917-1922)//Calling of the historian. Sb. The item to V.V.Shelohaeva's 60 anniversary. M, 2001. S.322-339. The constituent assembly Ural esery have much more outstripped local Bolsheviks. For them these results have appeared even more unfavourable, than on the country as a whole, especially if to mean, that in party tops this region by tradition was considered as a Bolshevism stronghold. Historians as a whole managed to show full enough process of allocation of party left eserov from PSR on materials of Urals Mountains. According to M.I.Ljuhudzaeva, this process has begun a little earlier, than in central губерниях463. The block left eserov with Bolsheviks in Urals Mountains has most effectively proved in industrial regions края464. A considerable role consolidations levoeserovskih forces were played by their military organisation in Ekaterinburg. Using the influence among workers of edge, left esery as believes M.I.Ljuhudzaev, were not content with the minor and subordinated position and took part in many spheres of a political life of Urals Mountains. Left esery have entered into revolution in many respects with ideological luggage of populism. They became successors of the agrarian program eserov with its destructive requirement of levelling section of the earth. Struggle left eserov against the world for «revolutionary war» cost it of loss of 19 % of voices at the All-Russia congresses of Councils: at III congress in January, 1918 They had 39 % of delegates, and at IV congress already 20%465. Central Committee PLSR action on July, 6-7th, 1918, in opinion M.I.Ljuhudhaeva, as a whole has not received support Ural left eserov. More likely they aspired to the compromise with Bolsheviks, but the last have sharply enough left the recent partners in a coalition. It has allowed author SH to doubt a conclusion of some historians who have declared the flexible To tactics of Bolsheviks in relation to left eseram, especially after July 1918 года128. In the subsequent left esery have accepted active participation in Civil war in region territory, in 129 That number on the party of Red army. Certain interest is represented thereupon by the monography of Novosibirsk historian A.V.Dobrovolskogo devoted 1 ' ¶p To political strike eserov Siberia. The historian writes about large political success Siberian eserov in the spring of 1917, the trust credit to which has not been settled also in the late autumn. Events of October, 1917 in Petrograd, according to A.V.Dobrovolskogo, have split the Siberian organisations of socialists-revolutionaries, »one of them welcomed Bolshevist revolution, hoping On formation of the homogeneous socialist government, other steels in opposition. News about Bolshevist revolution, dispersal of the Constituent assembly and many local governments have made the organisations eserov Siberia the centres of formation of the anti-Soviet armed underground. The author has in detail shined activity of Vsesibirsky committee PSR, its participation in the Western-Siberian commissariat and expansion of Antibolshevist movement in Siberia. Successes of this movement communicate the historian with presence in region 128 Ljuhudzaev M. I. The decree. soch. С.20. 129 GAPO F. Р-804. Оп.1. Д.1. L.31-32. 1ЧП Dobrovolsky A.V.Esery of Siberia in the power and opposition (1917-1923). Novosibirsk, 2002. 131 In the same place. С.323. More prosperous, more economic, than in the Central Russia, peasantry. A.V.Dobrovolsky believes, that from a concession eserami imperious powers burzhuazno - oblastnicheskim to circles SHCH the Siberian provisional government took a frank course on Revival of old, pre-revolutionary usages, and esery the policy objectively promoted coming to power A.V.Kolchaka132. Complex research of socialist parties within the limits of regional multi-party system (on materials of the Volga region) was undertaken by S.V.Starikov133. It arrangement of political forces after February revolution, occurrence of the left groups in socialist parties - mensheviki - internationalists, left esery, esery-extremists interested. One of heads of the dissertation is devoted the Left-wing socialist concept of revolution. Practical actions of the left socialists in November 1917-April, 1918 have received illumination in the course of realisation І Concepts of the left block. S.V.Starikov it is detailed, on the basis of a wide and various circle of sources investigated relations of the left socialists with Bolsheviks, has shown the reasons of disintegration of revolutionary union RKP () both SSRM in Samara and RKP () and PLSR - in Kazan. Some judgements of the author, in our opinion, it is not enough ! / Are given reason. So, it is difficult to agree with the author's thesis that «it is impossible to assert that Bolsheviks have untied terror... These months (the beginning 1918 K), for even in relation to 132 In the same place. 1 S.V.left's old men socialists in the Russian revolution (March 1917th July, 1918). (On materials of the Volga region): Diss.... Dr.s ist. Sciences. SPb., 1997. To the right socialists and its cadets was not »466. But, as is known, still on October, 27th, 1917 V.I.Lenin has signed« the Decree about the press », and after it -« the Decree about arrest of leaders of Civil war », directed against cadets. On December, 4th 1917г. V.I.Lenin has signed the Decree about arrest of I.G.Tsereteli, V.M.Chernova, F.I.Dana, A.R.Gotsa, M.I.Skobeleva, etc. for oppositional performance in 135 The press, named it "provocative". On January, 15-17th, 1918, in Ekaterinburg, for example, Bolsheviks have dispersed the organisation right eserov, and its leaders A.A.Koshcheeva, B.A.Zheleznova and A.A.Egorova have arrested. At the same time working out of "narrow" problems and plots, attention as can seem at first sight, to the private questions, inherent S.V.Starikova's in work, allow to understand "spirit of the age". Moderate socialists, in its opinion, have quickly enough settled the credit of trust of inhabitants of the Volga region, therefore the block of Bolsheviks and the left socialists in the largest centres of region has developed in the summer-autumn of 1917: in Kazan - between left eserami and Bolsheviks, in Samara - between eserami - 137 Extremists and Bolsheviks. Thus the author has come to conclusion, that the left socialists, having shown the initiative, have entered into the extreme authorities created by Bolsheviks - VRK. In Kazan between Bolsheviks and the left socialists - original distribution of duties has occurred revolutionaries - the first worked exclusively in a city, the second — in village. In Samara and Simbirsk extremists have accepted active participation in discredit right eserov. «If in the centre at level of the government the block of Bolsheviks and left eserov practically D has settled itself the Brest world, in the Volga region on provincial and District level it still remained », - does a conclusion S.V.Starikov467. The situation originality in the Volga region consisted that by April 1918г. The region began to turn to the centre of the big policy. A.L.Kolegaev has returned to Kazan, to Samara all staff SSRM has got over - N.I.Rivkin, A.A.Zverev, M.V.Selivanov, here is underground future figures Komucha gathered, and Penza in connection with deterioration of food supply of capitals even became object of steadfast attention of V.I.Lenina. The major component of imminent conflict as believes S.V.Starikov, became a question on party influence in Councils. ^ in the spring 1918г. For the first time the slogan «the Power has been sounded To councils, instead of parties! », extremists initiated which. As the answer Bolsheviks, according to the historian,« have actually provoked «anarho-maximal mutiny» liquidation gubispolkoma and all organisation became which purpose 139 t-g ^ Extremists ». The order on dissolution of the supreme body of the Soviet power in province territory has arrived from the centre. In Kazan, in ? Essence, the same has repeated. Local Bolsheviks, following instructions of the Kremlin, have dispersed levoeserovskie the structures which have lifted in the answer as its author names, - «the Kazan revolt». It is necessary to agree with an author's conclusion: «Having used wholly the left socialists, Bolsheviks more in them did not require... The tragic element of the left socialists consisted volume, that their alternative has not given and could not give instant results which expected. Emergency measures in treatment of Bolsheviks have received more chances» 468. The interesting facts about last days left and right eserov contain in the book of D.B.Pavlova469 mentioned already. On a basis earlier not accessible documents from AP the Russian Federation, TSA FSB and other archives the author has shown process of liquidation of parties eserov, menshevikov, anarchists and other representatives of the Russian multi-party system. A leading role in disappearance of opposition parties as shows D.B.Pavlov, the repressive policy of Bolshevist dictatorship has played. Innovative value of the book is great, however variety of questions in this work is shined, in our opinion, insufficiently in detail. With reference to PSR it concerns reprisals in relation to party in October 1917 - to first half of 1918. There is no clearness in judgements concerning "legalisation" PSR in 1919. In more detailed analysis, taking into account new materials litigation of 1922 requires. It is necessary to note incomplete, in our opinion, illumination of the internal reasons of disintegration and party disorganisation eserov without which characteristic it is impossible to make an integral picture of real events. Against the left socialists-revolutionaries the author carries the beginning of reprisals to July 1918г., connecting them with murder of the German ambassador of V.Mirbaha: «Besides arrest of numerous fraction PLSR on V-м congress of Councils, at night with 6 for July, 7th in Moscow committees left eserov in Rogozhsko-Simonovsky have been with its full complement arrested, Krasnopresnensky, etc. areas, there have passed arrests at factories and factories, in Moscow sovdepe. On July, 8th without any trial have been shot 14 left eserov, according to the authorities which have accepted the most active participation in« mutiny ». In total on business on July, 6th to responsibility 964 persons» 470 have been involved. The peak of reprisals against left eserov and extremists close to them, according to D.B.Pavlova, has fallen to 1919. As argument he refers to the letter from July, 1st, 1919 of vice-president VCHK of I.K.Ksenofontova which named party left eserov «one of the most dangerous enemies» 471. Persistent shadowing leaders PLSR has been established in the beginning of 1919 then as a result of carrying out of special actions all has been arrested almost levoeserovskaja a top. In May 1920г. Head VCHK F.E.Dzerzhinsky ascertained, that PLSR «is crushed CHK» and «for us is harmless» 472. According to D.B.Pavlova, head VCHK has hastened with conclusions. The historian believes, that PLSR was lost not earlier than the end of 1922 though the party of the sample of 1920 was only pale shade of that 150-thousand collective what it was in 1918 473 Unfortunately, the author does not result accurate proofs about final date of existence of party left eserov and its statement looks unfounded. The listed lacks are quite clear - at small volume of work and wide chronological frameworks (1917 - the middle of 1950th years) some sketchiness according to separate questions is inevitable. Nevertheless D.B.Pavlova's book is the essential contribution to studying of a problem of political  destruction of opposition parties and can serve as a starting point for the further researches. In different degree these plots were shined also in A.M.Rybakova, V.N.Lupojadova, J.G.Felshtinskogo's works and others исследователей474. Certain successes are reached by domestic historians in restoration of names of heads eserov. And if earlier in the works written in the tideway of a biographic genre, prevailed apologetic tone now the estimation of activity of V.M.Chernova, M.A.Spiridonovoj and other leaders eserov becomes more сбалансированной475. Biographic data about leaders of socialists-revolutionaries practically were absent in a domestic historiography. Now their real participation in a public and political life of Russia, depth of that trace which they have left in its histories and degree of a readiness of their personnel became the basic criterion in an estimation of persons eserov. Authors of sketches had to do the big research work in returning of names of politicians to which the history has appeared unfair. D.A.Kolesnichenko who has prepared the publication about V.M.Chernove, has highly appreciated its publicistic activity, having specified, that works of the leader eserov «have received in the Soviet historical literature detailed enough analysis and an estimation as antiscientific, hostile to the Marxism, harming to revolutionary movement by false theoretical parcels and utopian views» 476. Not denying relevancy of the contribution of the Soviet historians in studying of theoretical postulates eserov, substantiations of law of historical  destruction of their party and crash eserovskoj socialism concepts, the author considered, that «time of more moderate approach to a heritage of neopopulists» 477 has come. D.A.Kolesnichenko has in detail shined the political biography of the figurant, having underlined, that the main country requirements the Provisional government where as the Minister of Agriculture since May, 1917 V.M.Chernov entered, could not execute. «For realisation eserovskogo the agrarian legislation it was required to tear with a policy of conciliation immediately. CHernov at it did not dare. He preferred tactics of manoeuvring and attempts of pressing bourgeoisie and landowners to convince them to go on some concessions. On the other hand, he admonished peasants not to conduct captures of the landowner earths» 478. Other publication in collective work «Russia on a boundary of centuries: historical portraits» it has been devoted M.A.Spiridonovoj. Its author, S.V.Bezberezhev, has noted presence of rather solid biography Spiridonovoj which has appeared in the West still at her life. From time to time there there were also others, devoted to it публикации479. In the Soviet press small materials about M.A.Spiridonovoj began to appear 152 More recently. S.V.Bezberezhev has in detail stopped on the description of a life of M.A.Spiridonovoj as till 1917, and later. It has emphasised on circumstances of struggle of M.A.Spiridonovoj against a right-centrist part of management PSR, asserting, that this struggle has not been directed on split of Party of socialists - of revolutionaries. M.A.Spiridonova and its companions aspired only to strengthening of the positions in party and to attraction on the party of the majority of its members. Confirming to S.V.Bezberezhev's arguments gives M.A.Spiridonovoj's of word which in one of articles wrote: «We, minority, remaining in party... We declare ideological struggle for prevalence in party» 480. To organise the job lot left esery have dared only in November 1917 года.481 Up to declaration on November, 18th 1917 levoeserovskim with meeting of I congress PLSR of M.A.Spiridonova fed hope of a gain left the majority in PSR. S.V.Bezberezhev states an estimation of a position left eserov as inconsistent and fluctuating. It was showed in initial refusal to be a part of the Soviet government. The block of Bolsheviks and the left socialists - of revolutionaries is characterised by the author as having great value for strengthening of the Soviet power. M.A.Spiridonova, according to the historian, to an aura of the great martyr has managed at this time to add, in many respects thanks to characteristic populism for its political practice, popularity of the emotional orator, the publicist and the politician defending country interests. J. Read named it during that moment «the most popular and influential woman in Russia». M.A.Spiridonovoj's position in relation to the Brest world is represented to the author ambiguous, etapnoj. Even on April, 19th, 1918, acting at II congress PLSR, she urged to divide responsibility for it with большевиками482. Polemizing from B.D.Kamkovym, M.A.Spiridonova rejected at that time appeals of some delegates to untie «revolutionary war». In April - June, 1918 it abruptly changes the position. The author in strict conformity with tradition incriminates M.A.Spiridonovoj charge that «petty-bourgeois revolutionism has got the best of the responsible state relation to business», not thinking of that circumstance, that PLSR to lose there were simply imperious powers and functions. But M.A.Spiridonova after an exit left eserov from the government was on March, 19th, 1918 a unique link with Bolsheviks and has left from them «after others» 483. Other circumstance of the conflict of M.A.Spiridonovoj and Bolsheviks to which the author of a sketch has not paid attention, is decree SNK about the organisation of committees of the rural poor from June, 11th, 1918. In complication of relations between Bolsheviks and left eserami (still supervising bolshee number of village councils) poor committees should become «the second power» on village and withdraw "surpluses" of agricultural products from peasants. Before that decision SNK from the May, 13th, 1918, giving large powers narkomprodu in which the state proclaimed itself the main distributor still was accepted before became the main manufacturer. This major, at a sight of the author of the dissertation, a plot it is impossible to motivate notorious "melkoburzhuaznostju". Replacement of "socialisation" of the earth with its "nationalisation" is a corner stone of contradictions, the analysis which S.V.Bezberezhev, unfortunately, has not given. M.A.Spiridonovoj's life after events on July, 6-7th, 1918 It is presented by a continuous train of arrests, amnesties, references, and, at last, according to classical expression zhirondista Verno («Revolutions as Saturn devour children») - execution on September, 11th, 1941. The large contribution to the further personification of figures PSR has brought the biographic dictionary «Politicians of Russia. 1917» (M, 1994), left under P.V.Volobuyev's edition. In the dictionary it is included more than 300 biographies of figures of the All-Russia scale which has actively proved in events of 1917. Among them members of the Central Committee of the All-Russia parties, a number of known regional politicians. The majority of them was included into Preparliament, has been selected (or was put forward) in members of the Constituent assembly. As a part of a personnel - 30 persons participating in work of the higher directing bodies PSR and PLSR. The reference to this gallery of portraits gives the chance to get acquainted with the supporters of socialist idea who were in basic adherents of the country socialism on the basis of socialisation of the earth, levelling land tenure with regular repartition of the earth on labour norm. Composers of the dictionary aspired to give the chance to get acquainted with reaction of politicians to the major events of rough 1917 Including on such, as wreck of a monarchy with all chain of consequences, creation and Provisional government evolution, participation of revolutionary democracy in activity of Provisional government and others. The dictionary contains N.A.Avksenteva, V.A.Algasova, A.A.Bitsenko's biographies in the general number, E.k.breshko-Breshkovsky, K.S.Burevogo, V.K.Volskogo, M.J.Gendelmana, A.R.Gotsa, B.M.Donskogo, A.A.Izmajlovich, V.A.Karelina, B.D.Kamkova, I.Kahovskoj, A.F.Kerenskogo, I.N.Kovarskogo, A.L.Kolegaeva, I.A.Majorova, S.L.Maslova, O.S.Minora, M.A.Natansona, P.P.Proshjana, N.I.Rakitnikova, V.V.Rudnev, B.V.Savinkova, P.A.Sorokina, M.A.Spiridonovoj, A.M.Ustinova, V.M.Chernova. According to the author of the dissertation, work of a group of authors has brought the essential contribution to history studying, and in particular party histories eserov, including left. The method of the reference to the past by means of a genre of a political portrait is taken for a long time on arms by mankind. The biographic dictionary of the most active citizens reflecting their political sights, forms and methods of practical action, is capable to show one of the factors, influencing historical process, namely personal. In history of parties it is necessary to see difficult whole, weaved of real destinies of concrete people in their dialectic interaction. Not to condemn and not to glorify, but to try to understand, why each of them operated in the circumstances offered by history so, instead of differently. It is thought, that such approach has been realised by collective edition of the dictionary. It is especially necessary to allocate such etapnoe on the importance and informativnosti the edition, as the encyclopaedia «Political parties of Russia» (M, 1996). The detailed are included In it Historical sketches about all large parties, including eserah, their publications, the specified and fuller data about leaders. It does the encyclopaedia by the irreplaceable grant for preparation of historiographic works. The edition has received Scientific community appreciation, however, in our opinion, it does not have not enough fuller bibliographic reviews. The certain contribution to studying of biographies of political opponents of the Bolshevism (on materials of Urals Mountains) has brought 1 57 D.V.Bugrov. Having addressed to personal aspect of history eserovskogo movements (within the limits of the Perm province) in 1917, it has published the data reflecting positions which leaders of local organisations PSR adhered. Has shown evolution of their sights, the basic marks of political history of 1917 in Urals Mountains. In work resumes 18 eserovskih functionaries are resulted, the material, concerning congresses of Councils, the country congresses of various level which were passing under the influence of right eserov in territory of province in 1917-1918 is generalised. As the basic sources the author was served by archival funds of Urals Mountains and periodicals of that time. Unfortunately, some biographic works are executed at rather low level. So, V.P.Tchaplygin's article about V.M.Chernove not only does not bring practically anything the new leader at image PSR, but also contains rough actual errors and on what not based суждения158. V.P.Tchaplygin, for example, 157 Hillocks D.V. Opponents of the Bolshevism in Urals Mountains in 1917 Sverdlovsk, 1991. 1 SX Tchaplygin of Century P.V.Chernov: the intellectual and the revolutionary//without any references to sources confirms Questions, what exactly under the influence of V.M.Chernova of Central Committee PSR in February, 1918 «has supported tactics of terror against the Soviet power» 484. Even composers of "Bill of particulars" on process of 1922 did not confirm the similar. The positive estimation of scientific community was received by two editions of the textbook on history of political parties of Russia, A.I.Zeveleva who has left under edition (M, 1994.1 izd.), and V.V.Shelohaeva, A.I.Zeveleva and J.P.Sviridenko (M, 2000. 2 izd.). Thus the repeated edition is expanded at the expense of attraction of materials eserovskih national party formations. Authors aspired to give the fullest data on each of the all-Russian parties - from the moment of occurrence before disappearance from a political arena. They considered, that "crushing" of activity of parties on various, often subjectively installed stages and the country periods, reduces value of researches - the integrity of a statement of history of each job lot disappears. Therefore the group of authors has departed from this historiographic tradition. Unlike the previous collective monographies this work is constructed by a principle «on the right - on the left», i.e. At first the history of right parties, then more left was stated. The basic problem authors saw in overcoming of the stereotype which has developed in a society of change of paradigms - occurrence instead of the former enemies of the people of new antiheroes - V.I.Lenina and Bolsheviks. The main lack of this, as well as other collective monographies, all is represented to the author the same inconsistency of separate heads and distinction in treatment of the interfaced problems which not in forces to overcome even editorial editing. It is necessary to carry full enough historiographic review of works of predecessors, statement of priorities to advantages of the given work at the present stage, including complex studying of system of multi-party system in Russia. According to authors of the textbook, the further studying of the reasons and consequences of liquidation of multi-party system to Russia, and also development of the historiographic and source study researches analyzing party work PSR - PLSR, strategy and tactics of these организаций485 is necessary. At the same time at the textbook there are also some discrepancies actual характера486. «The main opponents of the Bolshevism in influence on working class - esery and mensheviki, - Writes N.S.Simonov, - originally were not outlawed. Communists spent in relation to them more flexible policy, than to other parties. Along with violent suppression of their political activity Bolsheviks used methods of the agreement with those fractions which divided their idea of a world socialist revolution »487. The historian has underlined, that during Civil war Bolsheviks aspired to finishing split in oppositional socialist parties to definitive organizational rupture between those from them who gravitated to the Bolshevism, and those who, on the contrary, aspired to oppose to it the alternative program of transition to socialism and the organisation of the Soviet power. It is difficult to us to agree with such author's terminology, as «the Soviet and parliamentary democracy (Constituent assembly)». Would more likely here the formulation «the Soviet power and parliamentary democracy». After all it is not casual J.O.Martov at extreme congress RSDRP (united), taken place on November, 30th on December, 6th, 1917, has said a phrase - «the Victory of the Soviet power — smaller harm in comparison with attempts of its violent overthrow even for the sake of a democracy celebration», accurately understanding, that the Soviet power not is democracy. With N.S.Simonova's other statement that «the country has met news about dissolution of the Constituent assembly with rare indifference» 488, S.V.Tjutjukin is solidary. He writes: «the Constituent assembly has left in a historical non-existence, not having caused in hearts of overwhelming majority of Russians of desire actively to protect it» 489. To the same opinion V.I.Miller was inclined. He marked: « Very few people knows, how Central Committee PSR has reacted to Constituent assembly dissolution. Though, of course, there were protests and even "resolute", against this certificate, but already on January, 8th at Central Committee session has been decided to find out, «what working conditions at III congress of Councils and when congress has opened, esery have accepted in it participation. Moreover, when congress has selected VTSIK Councils, into it have entered and 7 eserov» 490. The known historian-writer R.B.Gul adhered to other sights: «As the democrat I considered necessary convocation The All-Russia Constituent assembly which should establish the democratic constitution in Russia. As Constituent assembly convocation was the slogan of Voluntary army, I have gone there on the armed struggle against the Bolshevism »491. However it is necessary to recognise, that such recognitions are individual. One of the most discussed and complicated questions in the literature about PSR is the problem of terrorist activity of party in 1918 (V.V.Volodarsky's murder and the second attempt at V.I.Lenina). For the first time with all sharpness this theme has sounded on litigation of Central Committee PSR by summer of 1922. Since this moment all historiography of a problem of terror was divided into two directions: the Soviet historians adhered to the version of official charge reduced to responsibility of Central Committee PSR for attempts in 1918. On the other hand, emigrants, and after them foreign researchers and dissidents called into question participation of socialists-revolutionaries to террору492. The situation was complicated by almost full closeness of documentary sources in the Soviet archives, first of all materials of process of 1922. One of the first, called into question participation in attempt at V.I.Lenina right eserki F.Kaplan, became B.M.Orlov. In the publication «the Myth about Fanni Kaplan» he named L.V.Konoplevu as possible murderers V.I.Lenina, however has not resulted the source study analysis of documents. Doubts in the one who shot, have arisen even in days of Civil war. About it to criminal case returning testifies to the second attempt at V.I.Lenina during litigations on business of party right eserov (1922) and «anti-Soviet pravotrotskistskogo the block» (1938) also. As is known, general public prosecutor A.J.Vyshinsky persistently achieved from accused recognitions in attempt at V.I.Lenina right and left eserov, and also N.I.Buharina. First message VTSIK in connection with attempt at Lenin It has been signed by J.M.Sverdlovym and it is dated on August, 30th, 1918, That is right after shots. There customers have been defined 168 Crimes - right esery. In turn, the party Central Committee eserov (PSR) has declared the non-participation in attempt. The Central Committee of party left eserov (PLSR) has called on August, 31st, 1918 in reply to shots in V.I.Lenina to pass to terror against «a citadel of the domestic and international capital». Proofs of membership of F.E.Kaplan in the ranks of PSR it is not revealed. Unfortunately, there are more than questions, than answers, leave comments to the collection of documents «Litigation over socialists - revolutionaries (June - August, 1922)» (M, 2003). S.A.Krasilnikov and K.N.Morozov, trying to answer questions, whether there was in a reality a group of insurgents - of terrorists of G.A.Semenova, in what degree management PSR bears responsibility for terrorist activity of this group, whether really F.E.Kaplan shot at V.I.Lenina, in our opinion, could not make it. On the contrary, it is possible to assert, that about the second attempt at V.I.Lenina on August, 30th 1918 We still know a little. In 1990-2000th under the influence of a foreign historiography and in connection with occurrence of new documents the theme of terror and PSR became again extraordinary actual. Thus a part of researchers 169 Continues to defend the former concept, has appeared also 170 Set of other hypotheses. Most original of them - so-called «the Kremlin plot», J.G.Felshtinskogo presented in works. The American-Russian historian believes, that from the end of summer of 1918 against crisis of Bolshevist and Soviet power structures and mistrust growth to them from the population J.M.Sverdlova's influence with simultaneous falling of authority of V.I.Lenina493 starts to amplify. About crisis in Bolshevist party in the summer of 1918 it is known much less, than about that during signing of the Brest contract, but the facts of murder of M.S.Uritskogo and attempt at V.I.Lenina - in a sense words of the certificate of it. To summer of 1918 in J.M.Sverdlova's hands all party and Soviet power, in V.I.Lenina's hands - only the power of chairman Sovnarkoma has concentrated. Not casually J.M.Sverdlov in documents 1918-1919 1 7 ' AT Was called even as the Chairman of Central Committee RKP (). J.G.Felyptinsky tends to opinion, that to attempt on V.I.Lenina was involved J.M.Sverdlov and in F.E.Dzerzhinsky's any measure. J.G.Felshtinskogo's arguments can become only the basis for the further studying of this version. What for J.M.Sverdlov has ordered to translate F.E.Kaplan from a building on Lubjanke to the Kremlin, than haste with its execution though the consequence has not been finished yet J.M.Sverdlov was afraid of that is caused, demanding to destroy F.E.Kaplan's shot without court remains? Answers to these questions while are not present. At the same time the majority of historians states judgement, that Bolshevist declarations on this question are tendentious enough and are not always given reason. In their light participation of Central Committee PSR in mysterious attempts of summer of 1918 looks at least doubtful, that leads to a conclusion about falsification by the authorities of key charges on process 1922 года494. For works of the modern writers devoted to activity PSR in days of Civil war, interest to the reasons of a failure of their policy of "the third way» is characteristic. Esery have opposed the party and to Bolsheviks, and white movement, but have not managed to come to power in the all-Russian scale though in 1918, during epoch Komucha, appear, had for this purpose every chance. A number of historians, including J.A.Poljakov, specifies, that in the conditions of polarisation of political forces long existence of intermediate formations невозможно495. This thesis was always put forward also by the Soviet historiography, however the regret about «the missed possibilities» and aspiration to understand an event on the basis of refusal of the Lenin thesis about "petty-bourgeois" nature PSR now is appreciable. As marked А.X.Бурганов, for «the third force» it has not appeared in sufficient scale of a social base, "people-people" in Russia have not been generated yet. According to A.V.Dobrovolskogo, «preconditions for such ending for socialists - of revolutionaries have been put in pawn in the statement of the power of Councils, with an establishment of close cooperation of the right and left counter-revolutionaries. For rather short period of event have placed all political forces in the places and the authorities of the extremely right reactionaries who have established military dictatorship by A.V.Kolchaka» 496 have very quickly led. For A.V.Dobrovolsky's persuasiveness results G.K.Ginsa's writing opinion: « As underground figures esery are irreplaceable, as managers and workers they, behind a small exception, anywhere 177 Are not suitable ». A.V.Dobrovolsky writes:« the First actions eserovskoj the authorities in the name of the Western-Siberian commissariat Have visually shown a difference of sights and approaches Socialists-revolutionaries and representatives of others Political forces on the future device of Siberia »497. Esery Have voluntary transferred the power in hands Time Siberian The governments, and, according to the Novosibirsk historian, «Objectively promoted A.V.Kolchaka's coming to power» 498. Thus, A.V.Dobrovolsky agrees with opinion V.I.Lenina writing, that «the constituent assembly and white Guards mean same, that after the first it is inevitable 180 The second comes ». K.V.Guseva's modern position is interesting herein. He marks:« In Constituent assembly territory court-martials have been entered, there were conflicts between bourgeoisie, officers and uchredilovtsami. The policy of a real embodiment did not find «the third force» »499. Trying to take of an intermediate position, does a conclusion the historian, PSR it has appeared incapable to resist to realisation by restorers of the intentions, and counting on support of peasantry which wished to get rid of food dictatorship, it has not considered categorical aversion peasants of class character of landed property, the irreconcilable relation to the landowner landed property and their growing discontent with a policy of the party, not managed to overcome resistance« enemies of peasantry »- кадетов500. eserov K.V.Gusev considers as other major reason of defeat inner-party contradictions in an estimation of a policy of "the third force». Right esery have supported Voluntary army and A.V.Kolchaka. Other part of party rejected decisions of IX Council on the ground that «both armies standing against each other are identical, and the approach to them, 1 83 Practical plans and other should be same ». At last, the third grouping declared the struggle sermon on two fronts latent support of White Guards. According to K.V.Guseva501, V.M.Chernova's conflict to the left wing of the party, the so-called group "People" which has received the name from the newspaper published by them, has made serious impact on process of disintegration PSR. Group "People" has entered negotiations with Ufa revkomom on a theme of joint struggle against A.V.Kolchakom. «Aspiration to please all - criminally» - so qualified "narodovtsy" chernovsky the slogan «the third force» also have demanded from 1 The Central Committee that it has followed a struggle way for revolution ». In Central Committee PSR answer has decided to dismiss group" People ", but she has not obeyed and has declared an exit from party. Confirming to K.V.Gusev's opinion results a fragment from the letter eserovskih active workers:« party Crushing, on the one hand, has put a hard blow of the basic party on a number of independent groups, having weakened it and having broken balance, and on the other hand - has decoloured new eserovskie formations which in the course of the further budding have brought the activity to naught »502. Modern historians have come to conclusion, that at the heart of disagreements in eserovskoj to environment various representations about character of occurring revolution and a position in it eserov laid. According to researchers, in civil war position was aggravated also with that the country has appeared divided by fronts on variety of the isolated areas, communications of the local party organisations with the centre have been extremely complicated. In difficult, quickly varying conditions, believes N.D.Erofeev, «these organisations quite often had to operate independently, and their actions, at existing considerable ideological divergences, quite often dispersed with 1Я7 Official line of party ». Thus, the majority of modern historians considers as the defeat reasons eserov in civil war: to the politician of centrism while there was an extreme polarisation of all forces. Other reason researchers name absence of a serious social base. The peasantry, in their opinion, has left to Bolsheviks, seeing in them unique opponents of returning to landowner landed property, and the proletariat already traditionally was considered as "ancestral lands" RKP (). Probably, to these reasons it is necessary to add heterogeneity of Antibolshevist forces with which it was necessary to enter agreements, internal contradictions, factiousness, organizational imperfection partii.i intervention of interventionists. Not a secret, that English-French "allies" rendered the financial and military help first of all to those whom in practice saw true fighters with the Bolshevism, and esery as those were considered only temporarily. On other positions there are representatives of that direction In historiography PSR which in the main continues To adhere to sights and estimations of the Soviet historical science. In their opinion, right esery were lost as political party In view of refusal of constructive cooperation with Bolsheviks And persistence on upholding of the of "the third line», unreal in Time of Civil war. Such are works already mentioned 188 A.V.Medvedeva, I.T.Filippova and others. In them the traditional set of charges to PSR repeats: right esery played a role of instigators of Civil war, organised anti-Soviet revolts, including Tambov. As to litigation of 1922 it as writes A.V.Medvedev, «has shown incontestable facts of anti-Soviet activity 189 gg Right eserov ». Practically all resulted positions are exposed in a modern historiography, both foreign, and the domestic, given reason criticism.« Tragedy of country revolts, - considers M.S.Frenkin, - there was a spontaneous, unorganized character and absence of a due political management this powerful movement. Especially fatal for revolts there were inexcusable errors eserovskoj parties which in the conditions of civil war beforehand has not created the armed force in a counterbalance to Bolsheviks »503. «The party management eserov, - writes N.D.Erofeev, - considered, that the party should not be based in the political and social struggle« on unsteady soil of politically amorphous rebelliousness », speculate« on national animosity ». It more than frostily concerned to numerous, but to the isolated, spontaneous country performances. Even« antonovshchinu »it estimated as« semigangster »movement. But the main thing, such performances were not approved by party because they sprayed forces of democracy, mismatched its tactics of their accumulation and the organisation» 504. Historians agree in opinion, that about the direct organisation and management PSR of country revolts cannot be and speeches. Separate esery, certainly, could participate and participated in these performances as a whole, however, carrying spontaneous характер505. But, as the known researcher of country revolt in Western Siberia V.I.Shishkin marks, the material on which researchers referred at the existence proof to territories of the Tyumen province and adjacent districts with it of "the Siberian country union» and the leading part in it of party eserov, was exclusively narrow, had mainly chekistskoe an origin and at all was not exposed to check on actual reliability, and was perceived некритически506. Undoubtedly, socialists-revolutionaries have played Certain role in razvjazyvanii Civil war, having made of corresponding decisions on VIII Council PSR in May, 1918. As believes A.J.Suslov, right esery had the full moral right to struggle for the power armed by owing to that have won elections in All-Russia Constituent Собрание507. It is possible to agree With this statement only partially. Really, each democracy should be able to be protected. But whether had esery the moral right to begin Civil war only because have won elections in the Constituent assembly? According to the majority of modern historians, Constituent assembly dispersal did not become the global reason to start Civil war and the people have apprehended this event as a whole are indifferent. Then PSR was guided not by interests of democracy and the people, and exclusively own, party that is, bears the share of responsibility for SHCH razvjazyvanie Civil war in Russia. The repressive policy of the Bolshevist government became one of the main reasons of leaving PSR from a political scene. The first special works on this theme have appeared in a domestic science in the late eighties годов508. However it is impossible to consider process of political  destruction PSR as exclusively result of Bolshevist terror. It is difficult to agree with E.G.Gimpelsona's opinion, that «such result of reprisals became possible owing to loss of communication of these parties with weights, isolation from them» 509. The political  destruction eserov not only a consequence of a retaliatory policy of the authorities taking all measures for isolation of the Russian socialists was faster. More true I.V.Chubykina's point of view, the author unique at present special research about socialists-revolutionaries in emigration looks: «replacement eserov from the Russian political arena soon After the termination of civil war became a consequence not only repressive actions of the Bolshevist authorities and White Guard modes, but also deep ideological and political - ~ 197 Disagreement in most eserovskoj parties ». Modern historians, analyzing character of a repressive policy concerning socialists-revolutionaries, mark its multistage character. According to D.B.Pavlova, "priorities" of a policy varied depending on degree of danger of different groups eserov. In 1919 as the most hostile were considered left esery, in 1920-1922 - esery and left esery - "podpolniki". But the general course of a policy of Bolsheviks remained former: discharge eserov from the power, deprivation of their mass support, by a different sort of frauds and direct reprisals replacement from Councils, and then isolation from socially - political life вообще198. A.I.Jurev considers, that besides rigid reprisals in the relation eserov "soft" measures, such as the organisation All-Russia and regional congresses of former members PSR were applied also. The given actions were organised and spent under control GPU and had for an object to proclaim "self-liquidation" or "self-dissolution" of the organisations of socialists - of revolutionaries. As a result of attraction of the new materials which have been found out by the historian in TSA FSB, A.I.Jurev has drawn a conclusion on financing by security officers of the All-Russia congress were eserov. F.E.Dzerzhinskogo's department is concrete has allocated, by data 107 CHubykin I.V.Russian socialists-revolutionaries in emigration (1920th years): Diss.... kand. ist. Sciences. M, 1996. С.144. 1 QO Pauls D.B.Bolshevist dictatorship against socialists and anarchists. The 1917-middle of 19150th years. M, 1999. С.102. A.I.Jureva, 18 million рублей199. From the beginning of 1920th activity PSR is transferred abroad, mainly to Germany, Czechoslovakia and France. Destinies SHCH remained in the Soviet Russia not numerous and Isolated groups of socialists-revolutionaries practically are not studied in the absence of access to corresponding archival documents. Necessity of studying of history PSR in whole and its separate members up to the end of 1930th years as GULAG units of socialists - of revolutionaries have gone through is meanwhile obvious. On this research direction by the Russian and foreign historians while it is made it is not enough. The little has more carried eserovskoj emigrations (1920-1950th years) though here again not numerous researches, except for I.V.Chubykina's mentioned dissertation, consider only separate aspects PSR abroad, and in particular, publishing деятельность200. At the same time eserovskaja emigration has left the big ideologically-theoretical heritage, including the memoirs and historical works which unbiassed studying represents considerable interest. Summing up to section, we will notice, that uneasy transition to a new stage of historiography PSR, first, has generated original symbiosis of different approaches and estimations, noncritical use of the terminology which has come from publicism. Even at L.M.Ovrutskogo, A.I.Razgona, K.V.Guseva's some best works there were especially publicistic names 199 JUrev A.I.last of page of history of Party of socialists - of revolutionaries//Domestic history. 2001. №6. With. 130. 200 Lisenkova L.N., postnikov S.P. About party publishing eserov abroad//the Russian emigration in Czechoslovakia (1918-1945). / SPb., 1996. S.19-24. «Stepsons of revolution», «Knights of terror», «the Eserovsky virgin» etc. However authors of other works adhered also to more academic terminology: «moderate socialists», «the left socialists-revolutionaries», «the right socialists», "socialist parties". In researches attempt to open the term maintenance «moderate socialists» which was reduced to concept «the supporter socialist reformatsii» became. Secondly, the analysis of the literature devoted to Party of socialists-revolutionaries, shows, that researches in this area developed in the tideway of the same laws, as a domestic historiography as a whole. Possibly, in the decision of theoretical aspects of a problem today it is difficult to expect any qualitatively new opening or original concepts. It follows from this, that modern historians face to a choice: to adhere to traditional positions of the Soviet historiography, or to approach to problems of history of party eserov from alternative positions which were in turn generated under strong influence foreign, and before that is the emigrant literature, also deeply subjective. Thirdly, modern historians formulate a problem of concrete filling of scientific knowledge of party taking into account specificity of regions, the social groups, recruiting party ranks, its tactics under the relation not only to Bolsheviks, but also menshevikam and more to right parties. We for the present know about eserah-co-operators and trade-union figures, about participation eserov in work of a different sort of legal congresses where the most burning questions of political and socially - economic life of the country were discussed, hospital cash desks a little, kulturnoprosvetitelskih the organisations process of leaving PSR from political arena in 1920th is etc. insufficiently studied Filling of these lacunas demands expansion of archival searches as in the Russia, and abroad, first of all in the USA and the Netherlands as Central Committee PSR archive is stored in these states. The detailed biographic dictionary eserovskih figures of different levels since the published contain surnames only members of the Central Committee, bibliographic indexes eserovskoj the literature and leaflets is necessary also. The further studying is demanded by a question on number, social and national structure PSR. Fourthly, historiography PSR of 1990-2000th has undergone considerable changes in comparison with the last decades. Though the part of works continues to propagandise stereotypic positions of the Soviet historiography, the majority of historians has refused the Lenin partijno-class approach. That is promoted much by introduction in a turn of new sources (the given process still far is not finished) and critical reconsideration of known materials. * * * * Speaking about a condition of a Post-Soviet historiography eserov, we will notice, that the majority of modern researchers of party has paid attention to a pre-October stage of its history, at the same time publication and involving process in a scientific turn of new sources creates a necessary basis for creation of large generalising works on history PSR in 1917-1920th, the requirement in which is obvious. Despite a number of the positive changes which have occurred for last 10-15 years in a domestic historiography of Party of socialists - revolutionaries, we are far from idealisation of the present stage of the Russian historical science. Reflecting on its prospects, it is necessary to note the negative aspects directly connected with the social validity of modern Russia. Events on the post-Soviet territory (Georgia, Ukraine) eloquently testify that there where the discontent of people with the existing power reaches a critical point, when the people, including scientific community, are occupied by an elementary physical survival, and the ruling layer does not have not enough wisdom and flexibility in due time to spend radical reforms, revolutionaries usually undertake business. Thereupon it is necessary to note the financings which have become by already chronic difficulty of research programs, Constant threat of closing of scientific institutions, especially academic profile, distinction between a standard of living and the salary of the scientist, especially in comparison with foreign colleagues. Though a problem here not only in material "feed". It would seem, right now researchers can act in a role of objective and impartial interpreters of history. But it does not occur. Instead of deep and bright works the modern book market is filled by set grey, however, judging by quality of polygraphy, is far not cheap, tactical fakes, like A.T.Fomenko and G.V.Nosovskogo's written in a genre the volumes «national history». Today a literature stream cannot follow and furthermore to buy new books even experts, especially in regions, let alone fans of history. Among the circumstances, political parties of Russia braking intensive studying of the beginning of XX century, it is possible to allocate three factors: prevalence of interpretations of history PSR by means of toolkit of political history, delay of penetration of approaches of historical anthropology, shy attempts of application of elements prosopograficheskogo the analysis and experience history. As a result the objective judgement of a role eserov is far from end. It is necessary to hope, that the history of Party SHCH of socialists-revolutionaries becomes full compound Part of a new Russian historiography. It is pleasant, that serious scientific researches with attraction of archival materials start to take today upwards over a conjuncture which "pleased" readers in first half 90th of the XX-th century.
<< | >>
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 Researchers about socialists - revolutionaries after autocracy overthrow:

  1. CHAPTER 6. Studying of history of Party of socialists - revolutionaries the Russian emigrants and foreign researchers
  2. the Beginning of studying of history of Party of socialists - of revolutionaries
  3. 4.1. Party of socialists-revolutionaries as object of scientific researches
  4. 3.2. Studying of history of socialists-revolutionaries in the early thirties - the middle of 1950th
  5. 6.1. The Russian emigrants about Party of socialists - of revolutionaries
  6. Kononenko, Anatoly Anatolevich Istoriografija. of creation and activity of party of socialists-revolutionaries in 1901-1922 / the Dissertation / Tyumen, 2005
  7. 1.2. New tendencies of development of the international life under the influence of globalisation in estimations of the Russian and Mongolian researchers
  8. CHAPTER 1. ORIGIN And DEVELOPMENT of the CATEGORY of the OFFENCE In WORKS of the RUSSIAN RESEARCHERS (SECOND HALF XVIII - the BEGINNING of XX CENTURIES)
  9. the Published documents of political parties and public associations 3.1.
  10. 3.1. Problems of history PSR in the literature 1917 - 1920th
  11. Chronological frameworks.
  12. 5.1. Studying of genesis of party eserov
  13. the Conclusion
  14. Archival sources 8.1.
  15. Periodicals 7.1.
  16. 12. Help and encyclopaedic editions 12.1.
  17. Kriminogennye and viktimogenyye the factors promoting terrorism
  18. Memoirs 6.1.