6.1. The Russian emigrants about Party of socialists - of revolutionaries

Occurrence and development of foreign historiography PSR passed in a context of statement and the decision of wider and global research problems: political history Russia, Bolshevist revolution and Civil война510.
Expatriation from Russia opponents of the Bolshevism, including heads PSR became the major factor which has influenced formation of scientific interest to these themes abroad. Acting at X congress RKP () on March, 9th, 1921, V.I.Lenin has paid attention that 2 million Russian emigrants are abroad. Also has added: them has expelled Civil war. These words had been very short and precisely characterised a problem essence. Revolution has shaken an old system of Russia to the basis. Many of those who during Civil war has been deprived the power and the property, could not reconcile easy to it, and have left the Native land. The Russian abroad represented the difficult phenomenon, its structure was rather various, and in partijno-political aspect as is never wide - from monarchists to anarchists. For more than thirty years of existence eserovskogo abroad (to the middle of 1950th) on light there was a great variety of the editions which have made one of greatest emigrant комплексов511. Actually the first impulse western "sovetologii" has been given development subjective memuaristikoj Russian emigrants of the first wave. According to L.K.Shkarenkova, by 1930 have abroad appeared more than 150 former professors Russian университетов512. Known historian-emigrant M.M.Karpovich wrote, that its colleagues on exile still feel past events as political topical character; in their searches of "whipping boy", collective or personified, quite often The desire to vent on someone by the friend own «youth sins» is found out. At the same time it reminded A.I.Gertsena's words - the history «is knocked at once on one thousand gate» - and insisted on scientific legitimacy of studying of alternative variants of development of Russia, suggesting to establish, what relative density of the factors which have led to a celebration of one possibility over others. Reflexions that was if the First World War has not begun, M.M.Karpovich considered not only Admissible, but also necessary for the historian «intellectual experiment» 513 in the tideway of alternatives of social development. Position forcedly "strangers", marks The modern American historian of Russian origin M.Raev, «informed sometimes to emigrants a special sharpness of historical sight. But their quite often same position generated an aberration of nostalgic property: psychologically they Required such image of the past which promised them the best fate »514. In "cold" war the foreign historical science has replenished with representatives of the second wave of emigration among whom there were the historians specialising on studying of multi-party system, revolutions and Civil war in Russia. It is necessary to consider and that circumstance, that in third, already Post-Soviet emigration a number of experts has left limits of Russia, having joined to the western colleagues. In connection with these circumstances, it is visible, expedient to allocate two directions in a foreign historiography of Party of socialists-revolutionaries: emigrant and actually foreign.
Moreover, it is separated also the factors which have influenced formation of a problematics. For emigrants of the first and second wave they in bolshej degrees are connected with personal insult for compulsory dispatch from the country, for emigrants of the third wave caused by beggarly conditions of existence of scientists in Russia and political reasons, - with already generated scientific interests. The basic reason of the reference to research PSR for a foreign historiography became, in our opinion, global ideological and political opposition between the Western world and communistic Russia named the US president by R.Reagan by "empire of evil". As known American historian D.Raleign confirmed: «the fear was the Reason which has induced me zaiteresovatsja by Soviet Union and Russia... The Fear before nuclear war with Soviet Union took a considerable place among my children's impressions, and after visiting by impulsive Soviet leader N.S.Hrushchevym of New York in 1959 this fear has amplified» 515. The desire is better to learn the potential opponent has resulted D.Raleign in Russian studying, and further has played a role at definition of a theme scientific исследований516. Certainly, the theme choice is Individual business, but historical problematics in many respects It is defined by public requirements. Absolutely It is obvious, that socialists-revolutionaries interested western sovetologiju at this stage first of all as the political opponent of communism and totalitarianism. In respect of chronology emigrant and foreign Historiography also have certain differences. The emigrant historiography of party eserov should be divided into three stages: 1920-1930th, 1960-1980th and modern. A foreign historiography, first of all European and Anglo-American - On two stages: 1920-1930th and about 1950th - on present time. As the basis for such periodization from the USSR, secondly, the political reasons shown, including, stages of emigration, first, serve in ideological opposition with Soviet Union. And though events of the first quarter of XX century in far and not clear Russia slightly interested The foreign reading public, to the middle of 1950th the Party of socialists-revolutionaries, thanks to memoirs eserovskoj emigrations, was perceived by the western political science as the most significant and powerful opponent of Bolshevik party. Certainly, both foreign directions in studying of history of party eserov have much in common. First, it is the general istochnikovaja base. It remained invariable about 1920th when party documents and epistolary sources have been taken out from Russia. They have entered into the richest collections of archive PSR at the International institute of social history in Amsterdam (Netherlands), in archival meeting of documents on revoljutsionnoosvoboditelnomu to movement at Guverovsky institute of war, revolution and the world at Stenfordsky university (USA) and in Bahmetevsky archive in New York. However, despite the sharpest ideological opposition, foreign historians in 1970-1980th had possibility to use the Soviet archives and libraries. So D.Raleign worked in library of Lenigradsky university, in archives of Moscow and Saratov, a R.V. Daniels, the author of the known monography «Red October», worked in libraries and archives of Moscow and Novosibirsk. An another matter, that the Soviet archivists limited this reference to the Russian archives to foreigners, often refused in delivery of affairs, declared about utere or a shabby condition of documents. The relation to foreign colleagues has changed for the better only from the beginning of 1990th years. Secondly, the general for emigrants and the western historians, especially at the first stage, methodological approaches. The majority of representatives of the first wave of emigration leant against the Euroasian theory which is a substantiation of a special antiwestern way of development of Russia. Others searched for an explanation XX century occurring in the beginning to changes in religious philosophy, in messianic sights about special calling of Russia. To some extent their sights have been connected with attempt to find the compromise between the Russian revolution and former foundations of imperial Russia. The third were imposed by others religioznomisticheskie directions. They have found reflexion in magazine «New hailstones» published under edition I.I.Bunakova-Fondominskogo in Paris in 1931-1940 To write history of the party to eseram-emigrants it was not possible, though in this direction they have made certain "reserve". At least, separate publications about the most important, from their point of view, history stages eserov, as well as about the people who have left a trace in revolutionary struggle, exist. Thus all subsequent foreign historians of socialists - of revolutionaries long enough were under influence eserovskih concepts of history PSR and eserov, left memoirs. Further, in 1960th, approaches to party studying eserov in the western political science have considerably changed. According to J.G.Felshtinskogo and A.Gejfman, the western scientists looked on eserov in general eyes большевиков517, and fundamental works of foreign historians and separate historical monographies as these historians believe, seldom resisted to conclusions official Soviet теории518. Unfortunately, the named authors did not give reason for the judgement. It is possible to assume only, that it is a question of their critic of so-called "revisionist" school who has appeared in the West in 1960th years. «There, where« revisionists »underline a social component of an event, - visible American political scientist R.Pipes wrote, -« traditsionalisty »pay the main attention of the political. Methodologically raznjashchimisja approaches cause also an obvious divergence of interpretations: at a sight of" revisionists », privodnym a history belt are impetuous and anonymous forces whereas at a sight« traditsionalistov »as a determinative the human will» 519 acts. From our point of view, now in an emigrant and foreign historiography of party eserov both approaches - "traditional" and "revisionist" - are in a parity parity. Generalising and analyzing opinions of foreign experts, it is difficult to define quantity of supporters of this or that direction, they are faster are equal. The part eserovskih publications is presented by obituaries, 1 9 Another - sketches by anniversaries of party fellows. The most known works written in эсеровской environment of emigration, a steel V.M.Chernova's two books «the Birth of revolutionary Russia (February revolution)» (Paris-praga - New York, 1934) and its memoirs «Before a storm» (New York, 1953). They began to be used as the basic source by the foreign historians who are engaged in studying of the Russian political parties of the first decades of the XX-th century. In the memoirs V.M.Chernov has shown a way of formation of Party of socialists-revolutionaries, has resulted characteristics of its most visible figures, known terrorists, has especially stopped on working out of program documents of populism. Naturally, in the centre of attention of the author there were people with whom he had to create party - G.A.Gershuni, E.K.Breshkovskaja, M.R.Gots, M.A.Natanson, and also political opponents - P.B.Struve, V.I.Lenin, G.V.Plehanov, J.O.Martov and others. The characteristic valuable to historians was received also by E.F.Azef. The period shown in memoirs, is extensive enough, with 1880 till 1919 year. At this time the party headed V.M.Chernovym, was necessary to pass a way from not numerous levonarodnicheskih the organisations to the largest Russian political organisation, then to test bitterness of defeat, reprisals and new emigration. It is clear, that the author aspired to justify a policy of the party at different stages of its history, to give the interpretation of events, having shown thus not only strong, but also weaknesses of socialists-revolutionaries. It is thought, that it was possible to it. At least, memoirs To V.M.Chernova became an integral part of a foreign historiography. Traditional theme for the emigrant literature of a steel the events connected with the first years of history of Party of socialists-revolutionaries. Esery-emigrants considered as one of the main preconditions of occurrence PSR an original combination in one country of social and economic progress and political backwardness. This circumstance caused irreconcilable contradictions both between the appeared new revolutionary groups, and in them. Members of such groups, according to V.M.Chernova, did not find to themselves a place in traditional structure of the autocratic state, they were covered by disappointment and feeling of isolation. The environment of the last also left many future revolutionaries, the recruited ranks of the organisations struggling with the existing mode by violent methods. In 1931 in Berlin the book of the historian - menynevika by B.I.Nikolaevskogo as which source conversations of the author with V.M.Chernovym, V.M.Zenzinovym, N.D.Avksentevym served, JI.Бурцевым and other 520 has been published Century. But, as predecessors have already noted, work is impoverished by absence of references to documents, archives with which B.I.Nikolaevskij521 worked. In the head «Basis of party of socialists-revolutionaries» the author has shown a supervising political kernel of a new political group which represented M.R.Gots, G.A.Gershuni and V.M.Chernov. In the attention centre there was also E.F.Azefa's who has become figure, according to the Menshevist historian, the father - founder PSR, «on which share the easiest and at the same time most advantageous part of work fell only: formal end of association, negotiations with adherents in emigration and statement of the further edition« Revolutionary Russia »abroad - this time already as body of new party» 522. As believed B.I.Nikolaevsky, E.F.Azefu, after defeat of Tomsk printing house eserov, A.A.Argunov has transferred all appearances, passwords, all without an exception of communication in Russia, it have allocated with powers for negotiating with foreign narodnicheskimi groups. However E.F.Azef not only has carried on these negotiations, but, having adjusted the newspaper edition «Revolutionary Russia», has at own risk promulgated the statement for a party creation of socialists-revolutionaries. B.I.Nikolaevsky has come to conclusion, that association of isolated socialist-revolutionary groups was conducted under the full control of Department of police and is concrete S.V.Zubatova. Occurrence PSR occurred, according to the historian, stage by stage, as a result of difficult and refined "game" as workers of political investigation, and revolutionaries, and also the provokers introduced in their circle: «Zubatov could spend liquidation of groups of socialists-revolutionaries across all Russia. But it was not included into its plans. He wished to continue game and to advance Azefa to the centre of the All-Russia organisation. For this purpose Azef should go abroad and take part in association of all narodnicheskih groups of Russia» 523. Thus, B.I.Nikolaevsky has estimated occurrence PSR as result of difficult and laborious work of Security branch, Aspiring to take under the control all revolutionary organisations. Naturally, it did not deny a role most In a revolutionary way-narodnicheskogo movements, its tendencies to self-organising. But, underlines B.I.Nikolaevsky, without Participations of Security branch association of socialist-revolutionary groups in party eserov would occur for some years later though to name PSR zubatovskoj the organisation, like «Meeting of Russian factory workers», the historian has not risked. The basic difference of Party of socialists-revolutionaries from previous it narodnicheskih the organisations, including from 1 7 Terrorist «National will», according to A.Gejfman, consists that esery could not ignore influence of the Marxism which has become by a component of Russian revolutionary movement, and have connected traditions of political terror with revoljutsionizatsiej weights, having put terror tactics in the subordinated position. In addition to propaganda and propaganda value of acts of terrorism, according to the historian, the terrorism in eyes eserov should carry out two more important functions: to protect revolutionary movement and to bring fear and disorganisation in government numbers. The author has stated judgement, that all participants of the terrorist organisations - people mentally unbalanced, without certain partijno-political installations. She asserts, that any of three leaders of the fighting organisation did not show any interest to theoretical problems. G.A.Gershuni's role was reduced exclusively to the organisation and selection of shots; at B.V.Savinkova it was not simple time for teoretizirovanija as it personally took part in acts of terrorism; the mysterious E.F.Azef exposed in 1908 as the police agent, never hid the neglect to socialist ideology and openly declared that consists in party only to an establishment in Russia the constitutional system. A.Gejfman's similar estimations transfers and on private soldiers eserov. As she said, M.A.Benevskaja was hristiankoj and did not leave the Gospel, I.P.Kaljaev composed prays in verses and glorified Supreme, E.S.Sazonov adhered to religious sights. As revolutionary terror became the mass phenomenon, even more often there were cases of a mental unbalance. A.Gejfman writes, that directly ahead of V.K.Pleve's murder eserka M.G.Seljuk has appeared incapable to transfer burdens of underground existence, has lost composure and, trying to get rid of an increasing panic, itself has surrendered polices. According to A.Gejfman, insurgents surrounded themselves with an aura of danger, risk and privacy, bringing the lives on a party altar. Dealing with such people, Central Committee PSR recognised a fighting direction as the core in party activity. At the same time the historian belittles a role of the Central Committee in business of management BO, that, in our opinion, just and corresponds to the validity. Both G.A.Gershuni, and E.F.Azef of very few people informed on a technical aspect of affairs in BO. Actually Central Committee PSR defined a victim and transferred question "decision" in BO. Names of executors of acts of terrorism became, as a rule, known already from newspapers. BO used such autonomy which allowed its members to operate almost uncontrolledly, in the conditions of full privacy from the Central Committee. It is no wonder, that in BO persons of such people, as D.Brilliant, B.V.Savinkov, I.P.Kaljaev for which terror turned to end in itself were formed. To lacks of the monography of A.Gejfman, more likely, it is necessary to carry excessive idealisation of a fighting direction in party activity while there were peace forms of partijno-political activity PSR: publishing, Co-operative, cash desks of mutual aid, strike and strike, and as believes the majority of modern Russian experts, they and prevailed in activity PSR in 1901-1911 524 The biographic aspect of history of Party of socialists - of revolutionaries has found the reflexion in I.Z.Shtejnberga's memoirs. Emigrated to 1920th on the West, the member of Central Committee PLSR and the former people's commissar of justice in SNK has published rather solid on volume M.A.Spiridonovoj's political biography. Bibliographic feature of work of I.Z.Shtejnberga is that its book has been published during time when the heroine of a narration was in Soviet politizoljatore that has imposed a certain psychological stamp on all character of research. Basically I.Z.Shtejnberga's work is constructed on personal impressions though the author used also the documents of the party which has been taken out from the country. Acting on March, 3rd, 1928 at meeting American «the Jewish working union of G.A.Gershuni», I.Z.Shtejnberg has underlined M.A.Spiridonovoj and G.A.Gershuni's close spiritual communication and has declared the right left eserov to conduct from Gershuni the family tree. In I.Z.Shtejnberga's book process of formation young revoljutsionerki, its participation in murder of the Tambov provincial adviser of G.N.Luzhenovskogo, behaviour on court, stay on penal servitude is in details enough described. The Levoeserovsky publicist has specially stopped on the description of revolutionary actions 1917-1918, having shown an exclusive role in them M.A.Spiridonovoj, especially in questions of formation and 21 Organizational registration PLSR. The concept of history of party eserov after Bolshevist revolution was presented to 1922 by foreign Delegation PSR. As the reason of it the campaign developed in the Soviet Russia in the spring and the summer of 1922 round litigation over Central Committee PSR and party active workers has served wide antieserovskaja. Foreign esery already on March, 7th, 1922 have created in Berlin the commission in connection with process in Moscow. Among the numerous printed matter published by foreign Delegation, the collection «Twelve condemned men» is allocated, in the appendix to which esery have presented a sketch of history PSR 99 After October revolution. It became the original answer to charges to the socialists-revolutionaries, sounded in Moscow. Esery have put forward countercharges to Bolsheviks and categorically denied the fault in crimes attributed by it. The defeat in Civil war esery explained plot of burzhuazno-monarchic groups, simultaneously with Bolsheviks attacked on «democratic forces» in the Volga region and Siberia. Quoting decisions of IX Council, the Foreign Delegation proved, that PSR has stopped the armed struggle against Bolsheviks and has concentrated all forces to struggle against «white reaction». The mentioned facts, it was specified in the conclusion, are quite sufficient for a refutation of "slanderous fabrications» Bolsheviks. With estimations of foreign Delegation PSR K.Kautsky's known German social democrat and a social democrat of V.S.Vojtinsky were solidary, 23 Presented articles in the collection «Twelve condemned men». According to K.Kautskogo, Bolsheviks the first have applied violence in relation to other socialists and have dispersed the Constituent assembly because have appeared powerless to win round by means of propagation the majority of proletariat and peasantry. In such conditions of opposition there was only one form of open political performance - Civil война525. V.S.Vojtinsky specified, that court over eserami in Moscow - last link in a long chain of prosecutions of socialists in the Soviet Russia which have begun at once after capture of the power by Bolsheviks. A source of hatred of Bolsheviks against socialist parties that these parties are defenders of democracy and democratism in Russia serves, as carriers of the beginnings of activity, amateur performance of workers, workers and крестьян526. Data about reprisals to which socialists - revolutionaries in the Soviet Russia were exposed, have been generalised in the collection "Che" which also have been let out by Foreign Delegation PSR. Its authors were the people who have tested Bolshevist terror in Moscow and Saratov, Yaroslavl, on Kuban and in Astrakhan. They should incline the European public opinion to support of socialists-revolutionaries and try to soften a fate accused eserov in Russia. In many respects it was possible if to judge on a protest campaign against the Moscow process in which social-democratic parties of Germany have taken part, Belgium, France and other countries, and also personally K.Kautsky, E.Bernshtejn, A.Frans. Menshevik B.Dvinov recollected later about accused eserov, that «... If they have been rescued, it, undoubtedly, has occurred under the pressure of the European proletariat» 527. The concept of history PSR presented by Foreign Delegation, had in many respects advertising character and held back some essential parties of a party life. It was not mentioned reprisals to which resorted right esery during epoch Komucha, the question on party splits, the tactical errors of party which had serious consequences managed. Works about revolution and the Civil war, created in emigration, in overwhelming majority carried memoirs характер528. Actually historical researches which have left from - under a feather eserov, practically was not. The exception makes 29 M.V.Vishnjaka's book about the Constituent assembly. Work of the former secretary of this meeting tsenna that its author perfectly familiar with a subject of the research, has tried to track struggle of socialists-revolutionaries for the Constituent assembly up to kolchakovskogo revolution. Though M.V.Vishnjak did not participate in Komuche, it has involved the extensive memoirs both historical literature and documents, including the Soviet editions. M.V.Vishnjaka's book is written with frank liking of the author to the party and so sharp aversion of the Bolshevism. «October, - wrote M.V.Vishnjak later in memoirs, - at once, completely and has for ever made me the irreconcilable enemy» 529. M.V.Vishnjaka's work about the Constituent assembly is interesting from the point of view of the reasons because of which, according to the author, struggle of socialists-revolutionaries has ended with defeat. These reasons were as the general, and specific. To number of the general reasons of M.V.Vishnjak carried «defect of will», F insufficient aspiration of party to the power, and also their excessive 31 Adherence to the right and justice. The lack of "national consciousness» in a society which was guided exclusively by motives of a class and sociopolitical order became fatal. «The people - any people, - concluded M.V.Vishnjak, - are capable and to fall, and is very low, and to be mistaken - and is very deep». Concerning the specific reasons of defeat eserov in 1918, M.V.Vishnjak allocated «prematurity of occurrence Komucha, its insufficient organisation, weakness of army. However it at all does not reduce value of the Volga movement for the Constituent assembly which defeat became defeat of all Russia». Its estimations in many respects coincided with statements were komuchevtsev, underlining in the memoirs importance of the борьбы530. At the same time in separate questions the author expressed the special opinion which was not coinciding with the point of view "Volga" eserov. So, M.V.Vishnjak highly appreciated results of the Ufa state meeting, including their big political good luck testifying about «growth of the political * V Maturity and responsibility of Russian public ». Eser V.I.Lebedev concerned meeting more sceptically as it, in essence, was «compromise which has a little delayed the end». However distinctions in M.V.Vishnjaka's approaches and komuchevtsev are not so essential. The main thing that united them, as well as all pravoeserovskuju emigration in an estimation of activity of party in days of civil war - aspiration to present SH struggle PSR as «the third way», movement for the present Democracy, genuine democracy and socialism. It is possible to agree with the modern historian A.V.Medvedevym asserting, that esery «have not created more or less complete picture of Civil war, struggle of classes and parties» 34. Truly and that esery aspired «to become silent the role in kindling of Civil war, quite often went on the notorious -z with Falsification of events and conjectures... ». Undoubtedly, to revolutionaries, as well as any other party, the desire to justify the actions was peculiar to socialists-. There are bases to accuse them in notorious distortion фактов36. Though in separate works eserov there is a sharp criticism of activity PSR in 1917-1918, 37 It is directly spoken about large and "fatal" errors of party. With researches on history eserov in revolution and Civil war in emigration such known scientists and politicians as P.N.Miljukov acted and S.P.Melgunov. In the works of 1920-1930th years they mentioned party activity eserov, estimated role PSR in the Russian civil war. According to P.N.Miljukova, absence of the real help to it from party Antanty, and also that movement on Volga 34 became causes of death Komucha Medvedev A.V.Bolshevik and neopopulists in struggle for peasantry in days of civil war (October 1917-1920гг.): Diss.... Dr.s ist. Sciences. N.Novgorod, 1994. С.39. 35 In the same place. 36 Litvin A.L.red and white terror in Russia. M, 2004. S.142-151. 37 Suhomlinov V.V. Politicheskie notes//Will of Russia. Prague, 1928. № 10-11. S.156-167. Socialists-revoljutsionery531 have headed. S.P.Melgunov in the book about A.V.Kolchake has accused right eserov of desire to oppose the party to all to the rest SH to Antibolshevist movement that has led to failure Комуча532. Works on histories PSR which has appeared in days of Civil war and later in emigration, are various enough. Mostly it is articles of istoriko-memoirs character created by participants or eyewitnesses of occurring events. Neither socialists-revolutionaries, nor somebody of other of representatives of not Bolshevist historiography have not created special research on history ПСР533. In the publications they concerned mainly problems of Civil war in Russia. Socialists-revolutionaries and other authors of 1920-1930th were excited, as a matter of fact, with one question - in what the reason of defeat of party in struggle against Bolsheviks and leaving from the Russian political scene? The role of reprisals from Bolsheviks and white movement was underlined, unsuccessful experience of a coalition with bourgeoisie was marked, whose "treacherous" role has come to light «too late». Interestingly in this plan V.M.Chernova's recognition: « From the point of view of the left centre, developing me and my political friends, Russian revolution, as revolution national, took one extreme place: it is absence in Russia steady and mature liberal bourgeoisie »534. The leader eserov believed, that the party of cadets has become« skladochnym a place for everything, that was once more to the right of it ». In its opinion, there were two more reasons on which the coalition with cadet party became erroneous. The first - opposite estimations in the ethnic question permission: cadets have opposed a federalism principle, and esery should reckon« searching the emancipation with "not state nationalities». The second - a support of cadets on old command structure of army whereas esery understood necessity of its radical democratisation. All it, were written by V.M.Chernov, «created deep alienation and antagonism between cadet party and the Soviet democracy. It was necessary to recognise the coalition power as the gone through stage of revolution and to pass to more homogeneous power from the firm krestjansko-worker, federalisticheskoj and the pacifistic program »535. Esery in emigration did not ignore own errors, sometimes rather serious, and first of all that PSR could not keep unity of the numbers and show hardness in realisation of the program. Nevertheless the relation eserov to events can be characterised 1917-1922 V.I.Lebedeva's who has entitled one of articles words «it is better 43 Defeat, than change or capitulation... », that is even if struggle PSR for democracy and socialism has been doomed initially, to begin it costed. Modern special works on the given problem abroad a little. It is possible to allocate only V.N.Brovkina's works about the Russian political parties in 1918-1922 годах536. Its researches are based on a wide range of sources, including a considerable documentary material from the Russian and foreign archives, it has allowed for the first time after book JI.М.Спирина «Classes and parties in Civil war in Russia (1917-1920)» to create a full-scale picture of history Parties and movements in Russia in days of Civil war. In work «Bolsheviks in the Russian society: Revolution and years of Civil war» asserts V.N.Brovkin, that Constituent assembly dissolution was represented eseram, familiar with history of Great French revolution, as triumph «bonapartistskoj dictatorships». Proceeding from this message, before eserami there was a dilemma - to protect the Constituent assembly and to take part in Civil war, or to refuse its protection that will be crash of democracy and objectively to promote an establishment avtokraticheskogo a mode in стране537. Such statement of a question as believes V.N.Brovkin, was key for PSR. In its opinion though esery also considered restoration of the rights of the Constituent assembly by the strategic target, they were not ready to the armed struggle for it. Instead of it Central Committee PSR in January, 1918 has made the list of theses which as a whole kept within the concept of peace opposition to Bolsheviks within the limits of the Soviet mode. Moreover, naming the Bolshevism «a counterrevolutionary direction» because of Its relations to recently arisen democratic institutes, esery have refused to use against it means traditional for, namely terror. They motivated it with that the Bolshevism unlike imperial avtokratii was the power leaning on raspropagandirovannyh workers and soldiers. Political inexperience of the Russian weights and initial forms of class consciousness have made their extremely susceptible to the maximal program of Bolsheviks in which they have caught only requirements to plunder national and private собственности538. According to V.N.Brovkina, esery in the beginning of 1918 have set as the purpose rallying of working and soldier's weights round idea of "democratic socialism», meaning socially - economic restrictions on direct introduction of socialism in Russia. Particularly this idea was embodied in socialisation of the earth, selective nationalisation of banks and partial regulation in the industry. For realisation of the program esery as writes V.N.Brovkin, carrying out of new elections in Councils of different levels have demanded. The historian has come to conclusion about use eserami at this stage of exclusively legal forms of struggle, namely increase in the representation in Councils. They, first, have tried to organise opposition to Bolsheviks only within mode structure, that as a matter of fact reminded donkihotstvo. And secondly, esery have aimed the propagation almost exclusively at workers and soldiers though were perceived in a society as defenders of interests of peasantry which, according to V.N.Brovkina, with indifference has concerned dispersal The constituent assembly. The researcher believes, that for such approach at eserov there were serious bases. In cities, * Where Bolsheviks headed Councils, their disappointment in the politician, especially in the light of an amplifying economic crisis and any forms of proletarian dictatorship, became the most expressed. As V.N.Brovkin's example results Petrograd where the discontent with Bolsheviks was showed in participation of proletarian weights in demonstration in Constituent assembly protection on January, 5th, 1918 By estimates of the American historian of Russian origin, in the spring of 1918 re-elections in Petrograd Council at twenty factories have brought convincing victory PSR. In February, 1918 from fifty new deputies 36 have appeared eserami, 7 - menshevikami and 7 - беспартийными539. The general crisis of the industry, abusing office position of separate representatives of the new power and permanent suspiciousness of Bolsheviks and left eserov, according to V.N.Brovkina, have led to variety of conflicts in such cities, as Astrakhan, Bryansk, Tula, Yaroslavl, Kaluga, the Silver-tongued orator, Izhevsk where on request of proletariat re-elections in Councils of working and soldier's deputies have taken place. Almost in all cases, according to the historian, re-elections have ended with a victory eserov and меньшевиков540. Bolsheviks and left esery have answered it with cancellation of results of elections, dissolution of Councils, formation of Revolutionary-military committees and martial law introduction in these cities. To similar conclusions the Russian historians have come also. So, according to D.O.Churakova: «Twice on re-elections of the Izhevsk Council Bolsheviks have suffered defeat: in the end of May and in the end of June. And if in May the situation it managed to be resolved peacefully in June the Izhevsk Bolsheviks by means of the reinforcements which have arrived from Kazan have dispersed city council and have arrested about hundred deputies of new Council, leaders of opposition parties and the organisations »541. The  destruction problem eserovskoj parties in 1918 is not reduced by V.N.Brovkinym only to Bolshevist reprisals against esero-Menshevist Councils and to defeat of proletarian strikes headed by moderate socialists. In its opinion, from within party eserov the apathetic mood of its members, the confusion dominating in a number of the regional organisations weakened, tendencies to decrease in their number. Particularly it was shown and in disappointment of broad masses of the population by political processes in a society that has been caused by amplifying prodovolstvenno-fuel crisis in the country. «The tragedy eserov consisted that on all critical turns PSR broke up into competing fractions which nejtralizovyvali each other» 542. In the autumn of 1917 PSR has broken up on eserov and left eserov. At the Ufa state meeting in 1918 - on right, led by N.D.Avksentevym, and the left centre, led by V.M.Chernovym. V.N.Brovkin writes, that the party eserov has not achieved the purposes and in May, 1918 it has again appeared before a dilemma: to begin full-scale Civil war or on what insisted mensheviki, to continue to build mass opposition within structure of the Soviet mode. On change of a position of members of Central Committee PSR, according to the historian, signing SNK Brest-Lithuanian of the peace treaty has affected. An example of Ukraine where Germany at first supported Central Radu, and then has dethroned it, having established the power of the protege, the hetman P.Skoropadskogo, does V.N.Brovkin's conclusion, in eyes eserov was possible and in Russia. He has come out with the assumption, that the management eserov excessively exaggerated degree of national anger the "shameful" world owing to what has changed peace tactics on военную543. As the researcher believes, the question on cooperation with not socialist forces became the basic problem for eserov in May, 1918. The part eserov aspired to it, considering, that without right parties and groups Antibolshevist movement cannot be created basically. Others saw in this cooperation returning to the unsuccessful policy of the coalitions which have received a negative estimation on IV Party council. Moreover, this part eserovskogo the Central Committee represented the future management released from Germans and Bolsheviks of territories the exclusive right of former structure of the Constituent assembly, certainly, without the elite to it Bolsheviks and left eserov while right wing PSR supported the coalition government made of all Antibolshevist forces. «These dispersing plans - the reason of the future disagreements in the politician Antibolshevist 52 East front », - has drawn V.N.Brovkin's conclusion. By its estimation, eserovskie the armed performances as well as revolt of the Czechoslovak case, have been directed at all against Bolsheviks, and are faster against economic and political enslavement of Russia by the German imperialism. However following judgement of the author, that esery have left the idea of the armed struggle against Bolsheviks as soon as have learnt about a victory of November revolution (1918г.) in Germany, it is represented interesting only as an alternative hypothesis, insufficiently obosnovanno. It is impossible to forget, what exactly in November, 1918 to a management of white armies admiral A has come. V.Kolchak, and its supporters have subjected to rigid reprisals of socialists-revolutionaries. More likely, this reason has forced eserov to change the relation to Bolsheviks and again to pass to tactics of peace opposition. Possibilities of "new" tactics eserov, according to B. N.Brovkina, hardly it is necessary to exaggerate. He believes, that The further Bolshevist reprisals have shown own structural "defects" eserov which are appreciably connected with a heritage of the autocratic form of board in Russia, absence of a civil society, the initial stage of formation of political institutes, their weak degree of influence among the population: «PSR in 1918 collapsed as quickly, as well as grew in 1917. It has returned besides to a condition, than was at an old mode: the radical City groups with a prevailing role of intellectuals »544. Tragedy PSR, according to V.N.Brovkina, consisted in that, «that it there was an intellectual party for peasants, instead of party of peasants. Eseram it was not possible to incorporate to national movement, they did not have not enough clearness of the purposes and an orientation of actions. Besides, at critical stages socialists - revolutionaries broke up to competing fractions, which nejtralizovyvali each other» 545. A policy of Bolsheviks in relation to eseram and V.N.Brovkin's to other parties characterises as the politician of destruction: by 1920 all political parties were actually ликвидированы546. In general in the western historiography long since one-party membership formation in Russia spoke a course of the Bolshevist power on eradication of political opposition. This tendency had the sources in the emigrant literature of 1920th years and A.I.Solzhenitsyna has become stronger under the influence of the Russian dissidents, in particular. In the publicistic research "Archipelago GULAG" he has addressed to history of the Soviet political processes, especially allocating process on business right eserov 1922. The writer has carried this court to "indicative", similar to the subsequent litigations 1930 - 1940th years. «It is the first experience of process, public even on a kind at Europe, and the first experience of" indignation of weights ». And the indignation of weights especially was possible» 547, - marked A.I.Solzhenitsyn. A.I.Solzhenitsyn does not justify Party of socialists - of revolutionaries. On the contrary, the writer sharply criticises this «is pathos-talkative, and as a matter of fact become puzzled, helpless and even inactive» the party which has not resisted against Bolsheviks. The analysis made A.I.Solzhenitsynym, has brought the contribution to development of a historiography of process of 1922 though the writer leant only against official Soviet editions. "Archipelago GULAG" was not special historical research, but Stimulated the further researches in this area Professional historians that has led as a result to occurrence of the monography of M.Jansena devoted to process of 1922. In 1970-1980th in a foreign and emigrant historiography 57 The problem of responsibility PSR for terror has been lifted again. A.I.Solzhenitsyn, B.M.Orlov, M.Jansen have not believed the official Soviet version though could not present own proved hypothesis in view of absence of necessary sources. In a modern historiography the point of view of foreign historians has received documentary acknowledgement in respect of absence of any serious proofs of a management of Central Committee PSR terror in 1918 году548. However, as we already marked, till now in studying of mysterious attempts at V.V.Volodarsky and І V.I.Lenina remains many ambiguities. The history of Party of the left socialists-revolutionaries - of internationalists (PLSR) has appeared less developed theme in an emigrant historiography. Till 1994 history PLSR was studied only in a context of the general sovetologicheskih researches, and special works were absent. Foreign, first of all English-speaking authors, as a rule, in the estimations were close to the basic conclusions of the Soviet historiography of a problem. And them one question - events in Moscow interested on July, 6-7th, 1918 only. An exception sights were levoeserovskogo, perhaps, make the people's commissar of justice I.Z.Shtejnberga. Concerning events on July, 6-7th, 1918 in Moscow I.Z.Shtejnberg strongly objected against their estimation as revolts against the Soviet power. He wrote: « Left esery wished to achieve only changes of those circumstances which conducted the country on road of ruins... They asserted, that Germany was able not renew war with Russia, and legitimacy of this statement has been proved by that fact, that Berlin did not react to murder with cruelty which would be shown in days of military power of Germany. (At this time Germany was already too close to defeat) »59. M.I.Geller, A.M.Nekrich, JI.Шапиро believed, that left esery have really lifted mutiny against Soviet власти60, and last even did attempt to justify Bolshevist terror against PLSR: «Mutiny also has strengthened the statement of Bolsheviks, that only one step separates opposition from armed revolt, and it justified in their eyes the regular red terror directed against political opponents» 61. L.Fisher in the book «Lenin's Life» (London, 1970) also has supported the version about mutiny left eserov. To the similar point of view adhered I.Deutscher63 and G.von Rauch64. The recognised version of events on July, 6-7th, 1918 in Moscow for the first time has been called by all in question in article of G.M.Katkova, * 59 I. Maria Spiridonova. London, P. 178. 60 Geller M, nekrich A.Utopija at the power. History of Soviet Union with 1917г. Up to now. London, 1982. С.63. 61 SHapiro of Soviet Union. Florence, 1975. С.269. 62 Fisher L.Zhizn Lenin. London, 1970. S.359-361. 63 I. The Prophet Armed. Trotsky: 1879-1921. Oxford University Press, 1979. P.403-404 64 Rauch, von G. A History of Soviet Russia. Sixth Edition, New York, 1976, P. 94-95. /:s Published in 1962 in the USA. A little bit later mistrust to the official Soviet point of view was stated also by other western historians. Stating an estimation to conclusions of the Soviet historiography of history of party left eserov, the foreign historians standing on traditional positions, wrote: «In the light of July destruction levoeserovskoj parties as political institute and then also leninsko-Stalin destruction of members PLSR, than other as mockery, the statement of Soviet historian K.V.Guseva that the block of Bolsheviks with party left eserov« has existed very not for long sounds, but historical experience of mutual relations of Bolsheviks and left eserov is of interest as the first experience of cooperation of communists with neproletarskoj and as the proof of the loyal relation of communists to the petty-bourgeois parties supporting socialism ». Last decade emigrants-researchers of the Russian revolution of 1917 again show interest to history of Party of the left socialists-revolutionaries. The reference to these subjects is in many respects connected with search of possible alternatives to the one-party dictatorship established in Russia. One of the most debatable aspects of work in this direction again is studying of events on July, 5,6,7th, 1918 in Moscow. Among the researches published in 1980-1990th it is necessary to allocate A.Rabinovicha and J.G.Felshtinskogo's works in which various aspects interesting us проблемы549 were mentioned. By present time there are various versions of murder of the German ambassador V.Mirbaha's column: from carefully developed provocation from Bolsheviks before plot left eserov, called or to break the Brest world, or in general to dethrone the Soviet power. Probably, in all these interpretations there is a true share though, in our opinion, the version offered is represented to the given most reason A.Rabinovichem. In its opinion, second half of June, 1918 is characterised by the accruing conflict of Bolsheviks and left eserov. RKP () and PLSR were going to give each other solving fight at V All-Russia congress of Councils. The basic attention of the Central Committee of both parties has been accented on formation of the arithmetic majority of the fractions. After the publication on June, 25th 1918г., estimation of delegates of congress the balance of party forces seemed so equal, that it was difficult to predict, for whom there will be a majority. Repeated calculation of delegates of the congress, taken place on July, 4th, 1918, has shown presence of 300 Bolsheviks to which resisted levoeserovskoe 68 Minority in 90 delegates. After the conflict in the credentials committee, ended revision of criteria Representations for left eserov in their advantage, chairman VTSIK J.M.Sverdlov declared data on party structure: 678 (!) Bolsheviks and 269 left eserov which ideologically adjoined 30 максималистов550. Actually Bolsheviks have got double quantitative advantage, and congress, according to A.Rabinovicha, has turned to the present nightmare for left эсеров551. Practically on all questions of their offer have been blocked by Bolsheviks, and all delegation left eserov has left a boardroom. The subsequent murder V.Mirbaha's column is in details enough described in the historical literature, including by the foreign. Thereupon the motivation left eserov becomes the main question. American historian R.Pipes considered left eserov as weak-willed helpers of Bolsheviks, «which have helped to finish off independent country movement», on July, 6th 1918г. They have laid down the aim «to force Bolsheviks to change the foreign policy» 552. A.Rabinovich has come to other conclusion: «Except for P.P.Proshjana's actions on capture of the Central telegraph, not authorised Central Committees left eserov, murder Mirbaha and all other steps undertaken after this action, corresponded 72 Only one purpose - to renewal of war with Germany ». The alternative version of events in Moscow was put forward on July, 5,6,7th, 1918 by American-Russian historian J.G.Felyptinsky. Originally he believed, that «there was a plot of one members of Central Committee PLSR unknown to others, for the purpose of murder of German ambassador Mirbaha. Some members of Central Committee RKP participated In this plot (-it is unconditional, Dzerzhinsky, and it is probable also Buharin with 74 Pjatakovym ». In J.G.Felyptinsky's later works has come to conclusion about existence of variety of plots these days.« First of all, it is a question of plot Dzerzhinsky, directed against ratification of the Brest peace treaty, plot Sverdlova, Lenin and, probably, Trotsky, directed on liquidation of party left eserov, the third - plot Bljumkina unknown to the majority of members of Central Committee PLSR, directed in Moscow against the German ambassador, and in Petrograd - against the German consul »553 was the second. As the adequate proof of an inconsistency of some theses of J.G.Felyptinskogo interview can serve at least V.I.Lenina of one of the Swedish newspapers on July, 1st, 1918 about conflict end lenintsev and «the left communists» 554. J.G.Felshtinskogo's essential contribution to illumination of mutual relations between two parties bolypevistsko - levoeserovskogo the block is conclusive. At the same time the analysis of these relations in the fundamental work L.Hafner published in 1994 in Германии555 is represented to more thoughtful. Let's sum up to the paragraph. The first impulse to development western "sovetologii" has been set memuaristikoj Russian emigrants. The majority of representatives of the first wave of emigration leant against the Euroasian theory which is a substantiation of a special antiwestern way of development of Russia. Some emigrant authors searched for an explanation of XX century of changes occurring in the beginning in religious philosophy, in messianic sights about special calling of Russia. To some extent their sights have been connected with attempt to find the compromise between the Russian revolution and former foundations of imperial Russia. Another were eseram were imposed by others religioznomisticheskie directions. To write history of the party to eseram-emigrants it was not possible, though in this direction they have made certain "reserve". At least, separate publications about the most important, from their point of view, history stages eserov, as well as about the people who have left a trace in revolutionary struggle, exist. Thus all subsequent foreign historians of socialists - of revolutionaries long enough were under influence eserovskih concepts of history PSR and eserov, left memoirs. The analysis of an emigrant historiography allows to draw some conclusions on results of studying of history of party eserov abroad. First, by researchers-emigrants it is established, that the phenomenon of occurrence PSR in many respects speaks social backwardness of the country in which prior to the beginning of XX century there were no basic conditions for the organised collective social protest at any level. Peasants, despite their spontaneous disorders, neither numerically insignificant and psychologically not generated proletariat, nor indifferent middle class to a policy could not be the social environment for origin of such protest. The intelligency which is keeping away from an autocratic system and not supported of wide social classes, has addressed to radicalism and was not in forces to promote civilised development of political culture of the country and to correct the main lack of the Russian statehood - absence of deep liberal tradition. Secondly, researchers-emigrants believe, that terror PSR has accelerated falling of a monarchy not only murders of large statesmen, but several thousand the lowest ranks. Thanks to terror the Russian revolutionaries «have managed to break a ridge to machinery of state, having wounded it both spiritually and physically, that has led to a power paralysis in days of last crisis of tsarism in March, 1917». Thirdly, according to emigrants, the Fighting organisation eserov aspired to possible bolshej independence of Central Committee PSR, preferring uncontrollable activity. Many of insurgents at all were not interested even in bases narodnicheskoj theories and endowed ideology for the sake of practical successes. Their sights varied from Christian ethics to anarchical hobby for destruction. Fourthly, PSR in struggle against autocracy it is characterised by emigrants as set of radical urbanistic groupings with a prevailing role of intelligency. Historians have drawn a conclusion on the structural "defects" initially inherent in party eserov. They have been appreciably connected with character of the autocratic form of board in Russia, absence of a civil society, the initial stage of formation of political institutes, their weak degree of influence among the population. Fifthly, historians-emigrants consider, that after autocracy overthrow esery together with menshevikami have appeared unexpectedly for itself almost unique "saviours" of a perishing civilisation, and also successors of empire and guarantors of a bourgeois society, that is executors of such role of which several months ago could not even dream. As believes the majority of historians-emigrants, esery were on the present mass party and could raschityvat on a full victory at free and democratic elections. They were as a matter of fact and unique party in which basis of the program has laid down not foreign, but the Russian concept of a social reorganisation of a society. But at eserov there was no armed force, and the party was in a condition of chronic split. Sixthly, historians-emigrants have drawn a conclusion about «fear and illusiveness» eserov which could lean against broad support of broad masses, take in head to operate they more resolutely. But socialists-revolutionaries invariably refused it for the reason, that similar struggle would strengthen forces of white reaction. Seventhly, causes of death PSR, according to an emigrant historiography, the apathetic mood of its members, the confusion dominating in a number of the regional organisations, tendencies to decrease in their number, Bolshevist and White Guard reprisals were absence of clearness of the purposes and an orientation of actions. Particularly it was shown and in disappointment of broad masses of the population by political processes in a society that has been caused amplifying in 1917 1918 prodovolstvenno - fuel crisis in the country. At critical stages of history of Russia socialists-revolutionaries broke up to competing fractions, which nejtralizovyvali each other. As a result they had to choose between Moscow and Omsk: Civil war imposed the laws. 6.2. An Eserovsky paradigm in researches of foreign historians In parallel with studying of history of party eserov to Russia the foreign historical science paying to this question the big attention actively develops. Researches have concentrated mainly in the USA where the largest function sovetologicheskie schools, and also in some other countries - the Netherlands, Germany, the Great Britain, Israel, Finland, France. Principal cause of steadfast attention of the western researchers to history of Party of socialists-revolutionaries, undoubtedly, was opposition of the Western world and its antipode in the name of the Soviet political system, the found reflexion in «cold war» which has begun right after the terminations the Second world. Though it is necessary to notice, that attempts to put and study separate aspects of a problem of history eserov in a context of wider research problems were undertaken and earlier. In particular, during the period of 1920-1930th the western historians have closely started studying of problems of the Russian revolution and white emigration, having considered including separate questions of history of Party of socialists - 77 Revolutionaries. In researches of the given period, certainly, • • 7Я Works H.Rimsha and W.H.Chamberlin dominate. German historian H.Rimsha has based on the monography the dissertation «Russian civil war and Russian emigration in 1917-1921». Using materials of newspapers «people Business","Will of the people», "Common cause", «Will of Russia","the Voice of Russia», H.Rimsha considered various emigrant groupings from the point of view of their foreign policy orientation in days of Civil war. It investigated the groupings which were guided at various times to Germany and France, England and America, Czechoslovakia and Poland. In its opinion, emigration after Civil war represented «monstrously motley picture"." The old parties which have arisen in perfect other conditions, - the author wrote, - continued to exist, though for this purpose there were no reasonable bases. H.Rimsha marked party disagreements in emigrant circles. They were too great, «each party with the big heat spoke about bankruptcy and decomposition another» 556. With a certain share of a regret the author ascertained absence at Russian emigres of the leader which could unite all these isolated political groups in struggle against the Soviet power. Subsequently the author has given «a terrible picture of decomposition Russian emigres »also has been compelled to recognise 80 «Grandness and greatness» socialism buildings in Russia. F the American historian and journalist W.H.Chamberlin, Representing to the research the short review of revolutionary movement in Russia, has noticed, that the first attempts of organizational formation PSR were undertaken at congresses eserovskih groups in Voronezh and Poltava in 1897 году.557 by Apogee of activity of socialists-revolutionaries there was their victory on elections in the Constituent assembly, where for them, under data ol The author, 20,9 million voters, or 25 % have voted, that considerably differs from modern calculations of results of voting. In defeat of socialists-revolutionaries the American historian has seen failure of democratic movement in Russia 83 In general. Causes of death eserovskogo governments Komucha became, in its opinion, absence of necessary support from peasantry which, being backward and "dark", could not operate meaningly. Socialists-revolutionaries, besides, have not dared to resort to the help of Czechoslovaks in struggle against the right reaction that has led to their defeat. Separate positions of concept W.H.Chamberlin have been developed in a foreign historiography during the period of "cold war». Abundantly clear, that socialists-revolutionaries interested western sovetologiju first of all as The political opponent of communism and totalitarianism, and obvious distortion of their history in the USSR provided to the western researchers essential advantage before the Soviet experts. The greatest contribution to studying of history PSR was abroad brought by the professor of the Texas university in USA O.Radkey (1909-2000). Representation about its activity gives the obituary signed by the President of university of the State of Texas ol L.R.Faulkner. Probably, there is a sense a little bit more in detail to stop on sources of scientific career of the researcher. Interest to Party of socialists-revolutionaries at O.Radkey has arisen under the influence of professor-emigrant M.M.Karpovicha. As wrote itself O.Radkey in the agonal autobiography, in its 1934 SH the supervisor of studies has suggested it to make travel in Europe and the USSR. M.M.Karpovich has given O.Radkey letters of recommendation to emigrant A.F.Izjumovu and his wife, the princess A.S.ShCherbatovoj living in Prague. Thanks to participation of the princess who have forbidden to it to speak in English, the young scientist has started to study Russian and then has started to work in Russian archive of the Czechoslovak Ministry for Foreign Affairs. The big role in the course of a theme choice professor J.Slavik, one of founders foreign sovetologii has played. It Of Has acquainted O.Radkey with «heaps of the Russian newspapers of 1917». Next year the young American historian has arrived to Russia. From Nizhni Novgorod by a steamship it has made travel to Stalingrada, and even hardly was has not sunk in Volga, and fishermen observing of it have made anything to help, arguing: «the god has given, the god took». From this fact The researcher has drawn a conclusion, that the human life in Russia has no price. Then O.Radkey has visited on caucasus and in Crimea. Thus, it has carried out at least three problems: has learnt Russian, has visited region of the future researches, has got acquainted with the richest collection eserovskoj the press. Having returned to the USA, the historian worked some time in Harward, and then became the leading expert in the Texas university. Since 1950th, O.Radkey it became known as the author of works on history of elections in the Constituent assembly in 1917 ОіГ And on party history eserov. A result of its researches of a steel two large monographies devoted to history PSR during the period from February by October, 1917, and also in the first months of the Soviet 87 The authorities. In the western historiography there were traditions in studying Histories of Party of socialists-revolutionaries, especially during the period 88 Its struggle against autocracy. Experience in studying of history PSR in days of the first Russian revolution has been saved up, the program purposes of party, means and methods are analysed 89 Its embodiments during a life. Thus foreign colleagues did not manage to avoid, in our opinion, to the full elements of apologetics and idealisation of socialists-revolutionaries. Works on party history eserov the period after Great Russian revolution it was created much less. Probably, interest to the history which have left a proscenium of party was in a captivity of traditional representations about elementary defeat eserov Bolsheviks. As the western experts in the field of political sociology believe, the main reason of occurrence revolutionary narodnicheskih groups in Russia consisted in comprehension by intelligency of that fact, that the Russian autocracy traditionally concerned the people exclusively as to citizens, and the Russian State acts in relation to the population exclusively from a position of the occupational 90 Mode. Foreign historians believed, that association various narodnicheskih groups in party eserov has occurred after merge of two directions of revolutionary movement - old narodnicheskogo, presented returned from exile E.k.breshko-Breshkovsky, M.R.Gotsem, M.I.Natansonom and student's youth - G.A.Gershuni and V.M.Chernova. The prompt achievement of a political freedom constitutional by was their nearest purpose, in the long term they dreamt of change of a political and social mode. Esery have inherited from populists of liking to peasantry and adherence to terror. At the same time, according to N.Verta, esery have realised, that the support by it is easier for finding in the city environment, among proletariat. In it, certainly, influence Marxist концепции558 was showed. Esery, unlike previous generation of populists, any more did not do the rate exclusively on peasantry and did not consider terrorism as unique means of struggle. Foreign historians believed, what the program eserov contained a lot of utopian, many aspects remained in a shade, for example, that will be with the industry? However admitted, that the program answered expectations of peasantry, and it wide popularity eserov in village spoke. According to M.Hildermeier, occurrence of Party of socialists - of revolutionaries is closely connected with «rational optimism» P.L.Lavrova who propagandised knowledge as motivation of forces of social development, and N.K.Mihajlovskogo, whose pessimistic concept of development of capitalism in Russia showed differentiation in a society and destroyed patriarchal character and obshchinnost Russian человека559. Growth of supporters "narodnicheskogo" socialism also was promoted by distribution of "scientific" socialism, or as the German historian writes, "Postmarxism" in Russia. Its followers denied any importance of intelligency and peasantry in a socialist reorganisation of a society, therefore populists have put to themselves a problem to create incorporated front for overthrow by all hated avtokratii and capitalism. As believes M.Hildermeier, they have entered the special term "working people" to concretise the social base. Estimating features PSR in the first years of its existence, the western historians have revealed one of the main things - the party eserov represented association of various opinions and directions. On the one hand, it was its advantage, a sign of internal party democratic character; with another - its weakness: PSR represented more likely not properly executed movement, than organised партию560. In a foreign historiography have found the illumination a number of aspects of a theme, interest to which in a domestic historical science was insignificant. Among them it is necessary to name national and working questions, participation problems eserov in anti-war movement. Most full and in details first question is analysed in work O.Radkey «Agrarian opponents of the Bolshevism. Promises and default by their Russian socialists-revolutionaries. February - October, 1917» (New York, 1958). So, according to the American scientist, esery in 1906 stood on a position «a full and unconditional recognition of the right of the nations on self-determination». But, wrote O.Radkey, «in 1906 they were the party which is not bearing responsibility. In 1917 they have found this responsibility. And when they reconsidered a problem of nationalities from a convenient position of governors of the state, they any more were not so are generous» 561, aspiring to limit the right of "not state nations» on self-determination. The historian has been convinced, that esery manipulated public consciousness, misled representatives of national movements of the non-russian people. In the solid research of German historian M.Hildermeier conceived as an istoriko-sociological cloth, the big attention it is given theoretical questions of a parity of "agrarian socialism» and "modernisation" 562. Based on the richest funds of archive of Central Committee PSR, personal funds of some participants of revolutionary process 1905-1917 in Russia, the monography has caused genuine interest as from western, and the Soviet scientific community. The main idea of research M.Hildermeier consists that not cadets and oktjabristy were «unique and present opponents of social democracy», and socialists-revolutionaries. The author gave reason for the conclusion number of party eserov in 1905-1907: from 42 to 45 thousand members, against 40 thousand at Bolsheviks and as much at меньшевиков563. And moreover - a victory eserov over sotsial - democrats on elections of II State Duma on working curia in St.-Petersburg. M.Hildermeier Has counted up, that at the largest factories and factories of Russian capital proletarians have submitted more voices for socialists-revolutionaries, and at the small enterprises, with quantity of workers less than 100 persons, - for Bolsheviks. The German historian writes: «This choice confirmed, that PSR really had deep roots in working class, and sotsial - the democrats preliminary believing, that the Petersburg proletariat on their party, have been compelled to recognise the error. Social democrats, V.I.Lenin openly recognised« real defeat »564. M.Hildermeier Has shown, as later, in 1917, socialists - revolutionaries continued to be the most significant and dangerous opponents of Bolsheviks. He has explained it to that in 1917 of party more to the right of cadets as politically independent size have quitted the stage after tsarism. Cadets, in its opinion, revolutions which have hopelessly lagged behind a course, in practice represented not the program of measures on country rescue, and only idea of long evolution of Russia on a parliamentary basis. The country should make a choice between proletarian socialism and public (meaning working class, labour peasantry and democratic intelligency). American historian M.Melancon has devoted the monography to questions of participation of party eserov in anti-war movement in 1914-1917 565 Considerable part of socialists - of the revolutionaries representing the left and centrist directions of party these years as believes M.Melancon, took steady internationalist positions; and some of them, in particular M.A.Natanson and B.D.Kamkov, have supported the resolutions accepted by socialists-emigrants in TSimmervalde and Kintale. Thus, the American historian has called in question a conclusion of the Soviet historiography about tsimmervaldskih resolutions, on the general democratic world without annexations and contributions, as exclusively Bolshevist. Finnish researcher H.Immonen has carried out the careful analysis of the factors promoting occurrence eserovskoj of the agrarian program, and also has considered its various variants, has allocated a number of stages of its formation - "chernovsky", "vihljaevsky", "rakitnikovsky". In its opinion, the main opponent V.M.Chernova among populists, A.V.Peshehonov, defended the idea of nationalisation for the first time proclaimed still narodovoltsami. A.V.Peshehonov named sometimes a community «a superfluous suit» 566. As believes H.Immonen, V.M.Chernovu should have boldness to refuse a variant offered cultivated in eserovskoj environment "narodovoltsami". The Finnish historian has preferred V.M.Chernova's project which tried, in its opinion, «to synthesise ideas of Russian populism and the West European agrarian reformism» 567. The historian has specified, that "chernovsky" the project most full corresponded to the basic country requirements: gratuitous transfer of all landowner, specific, state and monastic earths, their distribution between obshchinnikami on labour norm. As a result work of the Finnish author has brought the contribution to representation about the agrarian concept eserov, to its theoretical messages. English researcher M.Perrie believed, that «eserovskaja the party in 1905 has been anxious by that, as though short-term requirements of peasants of the earth have not threatened long-term socialist projects of socialists-revolutionaries» 568. Moreover, wrote the historian, eseram serious impact on country movement was not possible to make. The basic requirement of peasantry - gratuitously to give them all landowner earth - it is impossible to identify with socialism. And anything more peasants and not 102 t - ' Wanted. If the first thesis of the English author at us does not raise the doubts with the last to agree difficultly. It is represented, that peasants in 1917 wanted much bigger, than to receive only the landowner earth. As a matter of fact, in the spring - in the summer 1917г. It has been received by them as a result of self-captures. Now the labour peasantry insisted on ekspropriatsii the earths rich (in an English transcription - rich peasant) unearned peasantry, section of the property of "fists". This circumstance became one of the occurrence reasons in Party of socialists-revolutionaries of the left direction, of course, along with the relation to war, the coalition government etc. If the Party of socialists-revolutionaries, to be exact its centre and the right wing, remained on a liquidation position only landowner, imperial, monastic landed property, its left wing has demanded at the conference which have become I constituent congress PLSR, the earth redistributions, belonging to the peasantry, distinctly understanding its heterogeneity. For this reason representatives of a "traditional" direction of the western historiography constantly put forward the thesis about loan by Bolsheviks of the agrarian program eserov. Bolsheviks in 1917, confirmed D.Mitrany, ostensibly have gone on it owing to that «Marxism in general and the Bolshevism in particular had no such agrarian program which could 103 To satisfy country interests » The special research devoted to the revolutionary To terror in Russia, has appeared in Оксфорде569. The author, Israeli historian N.Schleifman in work «Secret agents in Russian revolutionary movement. Party eserov. 1902-1914» in detail analyzes a role which agents ohranki played revolutionary movement. The researcher has involved the materials stored in Archive of a foreign agency of Department of police, from Guverovsky institute, and also documents from Central archive PSR (Amsterdam). In work activity of department of police, its successes in struggle against revolutionary movement by means of introduction on his environment of the agents is highly estimated. One of heads of the monography is devoted struggle eserov with provokers in own numbers. Are in detail considered "has put" E.Azefa, N.Tatarova, A.Petrova. In the book the calculations showing number of provokers in эсеровских environment of the organisations, a social composition "dvurushnikov" are presented, the reasons of recruitment of provokers, first of all among insurgents are named. N.Schleifman Estimates E.F.Azefa as exclusively practical person, more all caring of the financial well-being. The historian believes, that the police department has been compelled to hire in the ranks of revolutionaries of the secret agents, and not to be exposed, it was necessary to take part in the largest acts of terrorism. So there were revolutionaries - provokers. According to the researcher, they more all were involved with idea of use of terror for the sake of the terror. Opposition parties out of a mass movement, and ohranka which actions practically were not accountable, as a matter of fact existed in the isolated world, betraying each other and spending acts of terrorism at own discretion, - does a conclusion the author. ^ Crash of an imperial mode has been predicted long before February 1917, and nevertheless all has occurred so unexpectedly, that has not taken unawares only the most acute people. Analyzing history eserov after autocracy overthrow, O.Radkey has concentrated the attention to studying of struggle PSR with Bolsheviks and left eserami for peasantry. The defeat reasons eserov, the historian wrote, steels split to the parties, weakened PSR, a Lenin agrarian policy and a position of the soldier's weight which were under the influence of Bolsheviks and left эсеров570. Socialists-revolutionaries have ceased to be revolutionary party while all country became such in the widest and deep sense of this word. Eserov has ruined the contradiction between the name of party and its essence, they could not overcome disagreements, have not solved a war and peace problem, behaved passively. In 1917 they became party of agrarian statistics. As a result nobody has made for triumph of Bolsheviks so much as socialists-revolutionaries, concludes O.Radkey. Concept O.Radkey was allocated against sovetologicheskih representations of 1950 th by the critical relation to activity PSR. Work «the Sickle under a hammer» has caused brisk and mainly negative reaction at foreign историков571. V.V.Garmiza's studying this question noticed, that R.Pipes, for example, believed, that conclusion O.Radkey about law of a victory of Bolsheviks in October, 1917 does not promote understanding of events of 1917. Other American historian A.Gershencron in the review of work O.Radkey wrote, that the author has actually drawn a conclusion on suicide eserov, laws of their defeat instead of showing martyr democratic opposition большевизму572. Such reaction was quite natural as research O.Radkey badly kept within the "traditional" model dominating then in foreign sovetologii and denying foreign law of Bolshevist revolution. Having addressed to studying of separate social strata and the groups making support PSR, O.Radkey has in many respects anticipated opinions of the subsequent generations of foreign historians 1980 - h — 2000 - h years. The critical approach is characteristic and for that part of work O.Radkey which is devoted the Constituent assembly. According to the historian, the majority right eserov in this representative body was fictitious as if it has gathered with its full complement socialists-revolutionaries would be resisted by the powerful block from Bolsheviks, left eserov and deputies from national areas in 400 voices. Owing to it the Constituent assembly could not is effective работать573. O.Radkey expresses a regret concerning Constituent assembly defeat, as a whole, however, underlining its incapacity. If with its position of character of the Constituent assembly, not managed to collect forces for the protection, it is possible to agree, with the thesis about fictitious majority PSR in it - нельзя574. According to last data of Russian historian JI.Г.Протасова, in the Constituent assembly it has been selected not less than 432 eserov, that allowed socialists-revolutionaries to supervise it работу575 even if at session there would be all 715 deputies (it was real them 407-410). It is necessary to notice, that in works O.Radkey there is also a number of errors of purely actual character. After the publication of its works many researchers of party eserov in the West began to consider, that «village councils in Russia were the organisations alien to peasants, hooligans sat at them» asotsialnye elements. Their position has challenged O.Figes, writing, that it concerned poor committees more likely: «in Councils chose local peasants, but not old, but young, with army experience, from a city, more competent and more arrogant». Concerning terrorist activity eserov in 1918, O.Radkey denies the fact of its existence. «Threat of application of terror, - writes it, - yet was not business. After three years of struggle against the Bolshevism the Central Committee has declared, that the party eserov never resorted to this extreme measure, and there are no reasons not to trust it» 576. Thus, O.Radkey has called in question participation PSR in attempts at V.V.Volodarsky and V.I.Lenina though specially this question did not consider. Value of works O.Radkey consisted that he has tried to write history PSR from critical positions, taking into account all errors and weaknesses of socialists-revolutionaries, not getting off on the simplified display of exclusively repressive policy of Bolsheviks on destruction democratic оппозиции577. Such approach prevailed in foreign sovetologii in 1950-1960th 578, was not replaced yet by more weighed analysis of history eserov. Books O.Radkey appreciably became the sample for historians of Party of socialists-revolutionaries, others leant against its conclusions исследователи579. Till now in a historical science there are no works on history PSR which would surpass works O.Radkey in width of the used material and depth of conclusions. From the beginning of 1970th the quantity of the researches published abroad, has considerably increased. The program, social structure of party, activity eserov among workers, soldiers, sailors, intelligency were studied. According to M.I.Leonova, «as the main the reality problem eserovskoj alternatives to the Bolshevism, revealings of sources of  destruction of this has been put 117 Parties ». The thesis about advantage« democratic was one of the basic conclusions of works of foreign historians Socialism »eserov over"proletarian"Bolsheviks (A.Borcke, 118 E.Oberlander), about a superiority in strength eserov in comparison with other parties in 1917 (M.Perrie) 580, about bolshem their influence in To army (J.Bushnell 581 environment. Activity of Party of socialists-revolutionaries in days of Civil war was more often considered in generalising works on history of revolution and Civil war in Russia. However like the Soviet historiography, marked M.Bernshtam, the western political science considered these events in Russia exclusively through "prism" of history of the CPSU, or at the best through "prism" of history of three socialist parties - Bolsheviks, social democrats and socialists - революционеров582. For a foreign science absolutely opposite judgements about a place and role PSR in days of Civil war, from categorically negative where esery were represented by predecessors of Bolsheviks, certainly, guilty of tragedy of the people, to frank apologetichnyh in which esery were characterised as unique supporters of democracy were characteristic. As arguments of the first statistical workings out of outstanding economists of the first quarter of XX century, as a rule, served L.N.Litoshenko, A.A.Kaufmana representing conservative and liberal directions in a domestic economic science. According to D.Mitrany, M.Bernshtama, in 1917 socialists-revolutionaries in every possible way delayed agrarian revolution for which before struggled. All earth offered to alienation, or already was at peasants, or was not an agricultural purpose - woods, a taiga and tundra. As believed M.Bernshtam, the party leadership eserov «knew this position long before revolution, but, pursuing uzkokastovye and ideological interests, carried out concerning the state and the people a role provocative, and objectively cleared away road W to Bolsheviks» 122. Positions of representatives of this direction, Thus, are close conservatively - guarding and White Guard. On the contrary, sights O.Radkey, M.Hildermeier, S.M.Berc, V.N.Brovkina, M.S.Frenkina characterise Party of socialists - of revolutionaries as intellectual, mainly urbanistic organisation for which the socialism and democracy were equally important which left wing underlined social character of revolution, right - did an emphasis on democracy. It is important to note and other side of the problem, namely - an estimation foreign historians of a social base of party. Certainly, the administrative board of party eserov has been presented by most politically active force of Russian society of revolutionary years - intelligency. On the whole it is estimated as left, with the negative relation and to white movement, and to the conservative past of Russia. Moreover, according to M.Bernshtama, «all Russian progressive intelligency 10'Х In economic sense was socialist »as has agreed with narodnicheskimi to translate problems peasantry through a community in socialism. The Russian peasantry on which propaganda campaign eserovskoj has been directed party, has with watchfulness met in essence intellectual, born in quiet and full Switzerland, projects of a radical reorganisation of a society enough. Foreign sovetologija problems 122 In the same place. С.29. 123 In the same place. С.28. It has appeared uniform in the conclusion about a social base eserov: in spite of the fact that PSR proclaimed itself the true defender of peasantry, to the last were alien both socialism, and revolution. Having received independently the earth of landowners and demanding ekspropriatsii the rich country economy, less provided peasantry, according to M.Perrie, and did not become a party social base eserov. The English researcher has noted: «the Party, which existence any more had no Social justifications, leant only against the dogmas and prozhekty »583. According to S.М.Веге, the author of one of few special publications on history PSR in days of Civil war, tragedy Komucha in that also consisted, that it had no effective support of social groups. Same concerns and all eserovskoj parties which has incurred «an ungrateful problem» followings by an "average" course during the revolutionary і lg Revolution. Position S.М.Веге has something in common with the statement of the Soviet historians about impossibility of "the third way» in the conditions of fierce class opposition. However the reasons of a failure of such policy eserov in the Soviet and foreign historiography differed. If the Soviet authors insisted on an inconsistency of bases eserovskoj doctrines foreign historians in the majority were inclined to explain defeat PSR by absence in the people of support of democratic institutes, indifference to intellectual squabbles, weaknesses and miscalculations of socialists-revolutionaries. Known historian E.N.Sagg in the work about the Russian revolution, for the first time published in 1950, noticed, that any opposition party in the Soviet Russia not namerena to be limited to frameworks законности584. In the relation eserov this statement is appreciably fair, as in Komucha representatives PSR supposed a serious withdrawal from 1 97 Democratic norms, resorting to ekzekutsijam and to executions. Interest of foreign historians to the final period of existence PSR in the Soviet Russia is indicative. In the Soviet historiography the definitive termination of activity during this period of the Russian political parties, including eserov and the one-party membership statement was proclaimed a logical result of refusal of these parties from acceptance of dictatorship of proletariat, and tactics of Bolsheviks played here an auxiliary role. In the western historiography, on the contrary, one-party membership formation in Russia spoke a course of the Bolshevist power on eradication of political opposition. The book of the Dutch historian of M. Jansen and others it The latest publications are specially devoted court history on 128 To business eserov. At the disposal of M. Jansen there were materials of archive of the International institute of social history (including hand-written reports on process), the emigrant and Soviet literature, memoirs. The Soviet newspapers became the main source of the book of M. Jansen, for lack of access to the shorthand report of process and investigatory affairs accused. Nevertheless, laborious source study work has allowed M. Jansen to create generalising work without which it is difficult to present modern studying of history PSR in 1920th years. Work in M. Jansen represents a consecutive chronological statement of all course of court, beginning from preparation and the message on forthcoming process up to destinies of its participants in a consequence. The basic idea of the book is reduced to that «the court over socialists-revolutionaries was 1 90 It is intended not to reveal the truth "." The Overall objective of Bolsheviks, - the historian, - most likely marks, was to finish opposition to the mode which proceeded from socialists »585. Leaning against the forged charges,"recognitions"were eserov G.I.Semenova and L. V.Konoplevoj, the authorities have spent litigation, using it as the tool of social education and excitation of a political hysteria. Though M. Jansen have been compelled to resort frequently to hypothetical constructions (about F.E.Kaplan's role in attempt on V.I.Lenina, chekistskom an origin of indications of G.I.Semenova and L.V.Konoplevoj) in view of absence of necessary documents, its assumptions have received development in the literature of 1990th years. Modern historians pay attention to communication of process of 1922 with the all-Russian campaign for liquidation 131/p Oppositional movement as a whole. The court over eserami became a part of this campaign including persecutions on other parties (menshevikov, left eserov, anarchists), prosecutions of priests, dispatch from the country of representatives of intelligency. The historiography of 1990th years, thus, has apprehended and has added the ideas of M. Jansen stated by it in the beginning & 1980th years. Participation in country revolts, in particular, a management of movement in the Tambov province was 1920 1921 one of the charges shown to management PSR on process on 1922. The western historians with doubt concerned these charges as, did not see for this purpose any serious bases. In 1976 book O.Radkey «Unknown civil war in the Soviet Russia has been published: Research of green movement in the Tambov province. 1920 1921». According to M.Bernshtama analyzing this work, O.Radkey has overestimated value of the fact of participation of Party of socialists - of revolutionaries in revolt. Participation separate eserov in insurgent movement cannot be interpreted as eserovsky sotsialistichesko - revolutionary character of revolt in целом586. As believed foreign istoriograf, the main thing in activity eserov in 1917-1922 - Their struggle with white and the objective help to communists, including aspiration to reorient spontaneous popular uprising on the left, against белых587. To similar opinion some Russian historians have come. In At Particulars, D.O.Churakov, analyzing events of 1918 in Izhevsk, has noted: «those could count on trust of socialists from officers who consisted in socialist parties only. Some socialists, were ready to go and further, considering, that is better the power of Bolsheviks,« than epaulets and usages of imperial army »which« were imposed »to insurgents from Siberia» 588. M.Bernshtam has drawn a conclusion that «socialists - revolutionaries have objectively played a role of the historical provokers who have weakened rebellion and not given to it to incorporate to white movement in uniform national force» 589. In variety of researches it has been convincingly proved, that insurgent movement in the Tambov province only sympathised PSR, but did not go eserami. In the review of book O.Radkey the Israeli historian M.Lewin has noticed, that the American researcher has made a basic error, considering war of the Tambov peasantry against Bolsheviks as the left, socialist movement, and on this basis has declared, that «results of work of the last disappointing» 590. Despite so negative estimation of judgements O.Radkey concerning "green" movement in the Tambov region abroad, in Soviet Union work has been specially published 138 I.P.Donkova about antonovshchine. Its purpose was to prove, that the party eserov accepted direct participation in «kulatsko - eserovskom mutiny» in territory of the Tambov province and consequently has incurred the deserved punishment. Thus, it is possible to assert, that working out of questions of history of "green" resistance to the Bolsheviks, conducted abroad, has served as direct stimulus of the reference to this problem in a domestic historiography. The closest to true, in our opinion, is the statement of the historian-emigrant of M.S.Frenkina, that «the party eserov has not risen officially at the head of the Tambov spontaneous movement, however the aspiration shown by insurgents to the organisation, their slogans spoke about deep influence of installations of socialists-revolutionaries» 591. M.S.Frenkin underlines, that could not be both speeches about a purposeful and effective management eserov country revolts, but former and operating socialists-revolutionaries have played them the most active роль592. As other historian-emigrant confirms V.N.Brovkin, original Civil war in Russia has begun only after armies of the white have been already crushed. War has poured out in collision of millions peasants with millions Red Army men, that is as a matter of fact the former peasants. The historian has specified, that in 1920-1921 was already too late: «At the risen seamen of Kronstadt, workers of Petrograd, rebellious peasants of Tambov and Siberia was no more chances of a victory, than at tsars at S.Razina and E.Pugacheva's insurgent armies» 593. History PLSR has appeared less developed theme in a foreign historiography. Till 1994 history PLSR was studied Only in a context of the general sovetologicheskih researches, and special works were absent. Foreign, first of all English-speaking authors, as a rule, in the estimations were close to the basic conclusions of the Soviet historiography of party left eserov. And them one problem - events in Moscow interested on July, 6-7th, 1918 only. J.Carmaicle subjects To doubt the official Soviet point of view. He writes: "Circumstances of murder Mirbaha remain extraordinary The mysterious... Left esery furiously denied any preparation for revolt though did not challenge the participation in act of terrorism and even boasted of It. However The discrepancies containing in this version, absolutely deny it... Lenin used murder Mirbaha as a pretext for destruction left eserov. Their notorious "Revolt" was no more than the protest against the Bolshevist "prosecutions", consisting that Bolsheviks have presented to their public, in particular to the German government, murderers Mirbaha. Eserovsky "revolt" was extremely childish invention... "594 Last decade foreign researchers of the Russian revolution of 1917 again actively show interest to history of Party of the left socialists-revolutionaries. The reference to these subjects is in many respects connected with search of possible alternatives to the one-party dictatorship established in Russia. One of the most debatable aspects of work in this direction is studying of events 5, 6, on July, 7th, 1918 in Moscow. Among the researches published abroad in 1990th it is necessary to allocate works E.Carra, D.Boffa, R.Pipes, E.Cinnella, L.Hafner in which various aspects interesting us проблемы595 were mentioned. Let's make a reservation, not all works of foreign researchers are executed at high professional level. So, monography R.Pipes which has left in 1994 in publishing house "РОССПЭН", has caused occurrence of variety of remarks of L.M.Ovrutskogo published by it in magazine «Domestic history» 596. The Russian historian has found out more than 50 discrepancies, distortions and the conjectures reducing scientific value of research. R.Pipes wrote, that after Central Committee PLSR session on June, 24th, 1918 left esery began to operate actively, ostensibly bypassed barracks, inducing soldiers to «new revolution» that actually was not. According to R.Pipes, levoeserovskaja fraction V Congress of Councils made 40 % of number of delegates though both foreign, and the Russian historians have established for a long time its number which is not exceeding 30 %. On July, 6th, 1918 left esery, under statement R.Pipes, prepared for storm of the Kremlin, and a number levoeserovskih delegates could arrest V.I.Lenina (!). The American historian was confused at all with that fact, that «grandiose mutiny» has been liquidated in 18 hours after its beginning. In 1980th under the influence of Anglo-American approaches to studying of political parties in a German historiography according to activity eserov not only from the point of view of political history and only on the basis of studying of documents of the central party structures, but also from the point of view of local history, turn was outlined in a foreshortening of history of daily occurrence. Most accurately in the German historiography this approach has been realised in monography L.Hafner devoted to party left eserov. In the historiographic review of the work the German historian has subjected to criticism an infinite train of "crashes", "bankruptcies", "defeats" and " destructions" without which axiomatic use in the USSR any article or the monography devoted to history oppositional Bolsheviks партий597 earlier did not manage. According to L.Hafner, eserovskaja the party has entered an initial stage of the disintegration after February, 1917. He gave reason for the thesis that in the spring of 1917 in the country developed active country movement against landowners, and moderate socialists have stood aside, and the left groups in socialist parties began to amplify, trying to head it. Left have developed criticism of management PSR, openly expressed the sights at press pages, at various level of party and country congresses. L.Hafner writes, that absence rigid tsentralistskoj structures in eserovskoj parties allowed them to do it successfully. The historian has come to opinion, that in the left groups considerably adjusted students, workers, average and small intelligency have united mainly esery, not having the big experience of the party activity. Indecision of the power in carrying out of reforms and amplifying in this connection discontent of the people in the conditions of proceeding war have made a policy of Provisional government unpopular in the opinion of a considerable part of workers, soldiers and peasants: «Meanwhile to the left of CHernova all voices of members of fraction left eserov, almost turned to independent party and firmly rejecting any coalition with bourgeoisie» 598 more loudly and more powerfully sounded. L.Hafner Writes, that in the beginning of August, 1917 on VII party council PSR of 40 % of delegates ranked itself to left крылу599. The historian has established, that since second week of September, 1917 left esery have established the control over eserovskoj the organisation of Petrograd, have begun campaign for convocation of the All-Russia congress of Councils, having developed propaganda for creation of the homogeneous socialist government. In an estimation of positions left eserov the day before and in carrying out of II All-Russia congress of Councils opinion L.Hafner coincides with A.Rabinovicha's estimation about left-centrist, instead of about Left-wing radical as confirms J.G.Felshtinsky, their character. Opposing Provisional government, left esery, on the other hand, there were against an establishment in Russia proletariat dictatorships. In particular, it was showed in their aspiration to create the homogeneous socialist power under the decision of the All-Russia congress of Councils, instead of to it. Tactics of Bolsheviks on capture of the power before II All-Russia congress seemed left eseram dangerous and inexpedient because, could make impression of political adventure, struggle not for the power of Councils, and certain political party. As marks L.Hafner, left esery, having received the invitation to enter into the government, have refused it, believing, that can act in a role of intermediaries between Bolsheviks and their opponents in interests of formation of the socialist government on 1А51 To wider basis. Coalition with Bolsheviks left esery, according to the German historian, aspired to strengthen the positions, rather shaky in the conditions of an accruing antagonism of political forces, to prevent civil war, to neutralise the most odious plans of Bolsheviks, to realise in a support on world revolution the platform. L.Hafner writes: «left esery, Being in the Soviet government, aspired to keep the independence not to discredit itself in the opinion of more moderate socialists »600. If in agrarian question PLSR, according to the researcher, has shown a scent of the skilled political player in catching of desires of the majority of agricultural population, it it is impossible to tell about their position of the world. Insisting on continuation of"revolutionary"war,« left esery with amazing persistence ignored weariness of peasantry from war »601. With German carefulness L.Hafner the structure of editions, the salary of employees considers such questions as number of organisations PLSR, circulations levoeserovskih newspapers, Cost of one number of the newspaper. The analysis of these materials is given on all regions. In comparison with the Soviet researchers studying only four problems of history PLSR: the block with Bolsheviks, agrarian, the relation to the Brest world, and at last, «July putsch», a step forward is studying by the German historian of such questions, as: genesis of left wing PSR during the First World War, educational level of members PLSR, their social status, age, the relation of party to trade unions and students, youth and female levoeserovskoe movement. The researcher also has entered into a scientific turn of data on budget PLSR. So, for example, in November, 1917 it made 6.630 rbl., from them 5.268 rbl. have arrived as donations, 1.262 rbl. - the receipt of newspapers. By estimates of L.Hafner, in April, 1918 in party left eserov consisted 62 thousand members, and at the moment of carrying out of III congress PLSR (July, 1918) - 100 thousand человек602. Analyzing the different parties levoeserovskih theoretical views, the researcher has stopped and has especially allocated the following: decentralisation of state institutes, General arms of the people instead of creation of regular army, negation of introduction of a death penalty on court, original understanding of a principle of federalism. Left esery as it was possible to show to the German historian, considered as the basic motive forces of world revolution country weights of the countries of the East, unlike the Bolsheviks who have counted on proletariat of Russia and Europe. According to left eserov, revolutionary peasants of Russia is the global geopolitical category, capable to change a life on a planet. On the basis of theoretical works V.E.Trutovskogo L.Hafner has drawn a conclusion, that left esery contrary to orthodox Marxism considered, that revolution will begin not in the advanced countries of the West with their weak socialist movement, and thanks to agrarian-revolutionary and national - F to emancipating movement in all мире152. Having analysed a number of theoretical documents PLSR, reports of committees and the organisations on a party social composition, the researcher has made also other conclusion: PLSR are the ordinary average Russian muzhiks frightened for the good, rukovodimye "dashing" left children at whom except passion to destruction and ease in thoughts anything is not present. «These intellectuals-radicals offer the Peasant who does not see further a village fence of the village, world revolution, but they protect them from Bolshevist prodotrjadov and 153 Poor committees ». Left esery - supporters of dictatorship of the working people (peasants, working, labour intelligency) unlike Bolsheviks - supporters of dictatorship of proletariat, suggested to balance in the rights of peasants and workers. In the spring of 1918 when, according to L.Hafner, in the people the disappointment has begun results of Bolshevist revolution, Central Committee RKP () has felt threat of transition of the power in hands "petty-bourgeois" PLSR. The historian asserts, that at all the relation to the Brest world, not introduction of food dictatorship which left esery, by the way, have supported, believing, that it will be carried out through country Councils, namely threat of loss of the power by Bolsheviks in the conditions of Civil war has led to the conflict on July, 6th, 1918. L.Hafner Has agreed with J.G.Felshtinskogo's opinion, that "mutiny" in full sense was not, as at "rebels" 152 Ibid. S.168. 153 Ibid. S.168-170. There was no plan or system of actions. «Arrest of fraction left eserov at V All-Russia congress of Councils and its attempt vyzvolenija has been given out for mutiny». In process of revolution development, specifies L.Hafner, Bolsheviks more and more became pragmatists, and left esery and remained romanticists of revolution. Their tragic element consisted that levoeserovskaja the alternative has not given, and could not, obviously to give in that situation of instant results which expected. Emergency measures of Bolsheviks have received more chances. However, according to L.Hafner, would be incorrect to accuse only one of the contradictory parties. Both Bolsheviks, and left esery aspired to the conflict, but were not able to make out historical prospect, see behind one-party dictatorship dictatorship of one person who has buried and that and other. «Without understanding of mysterious slavic soul, - does a conclusion the author, - any work about the Russian revolution will be partly defective» 603. As it is paradoxical sounds, but the most interesting - in sense of originality and netraditsionnosti a sight of research of history of Russia since the most ancient times were created by foreigners. Perhaps, business in severe impartiality of the western rationalism with its critical analysis of Russian life, or, at least, sincere desire «to understand Russia mind». It is impossible, certainly, to assert, that were «bourgeois falsifiers of history» suddenly have turned to the most objective and its acute interpreters, but as a whole foreign historiography PSR managed to present own concept of history eserov. First, in numerous publications have found the analysis of the reason of formation of party, estimations are given the program eserov, to its agrarian, national, working aspects. In the general lines program PSR is characterised by the western historians as synthesis of ideas of Russian populism and the West European agrarian reformism. It is noticed also, that eseram it was not possible to render serious influence on peasantry though party slogans, especially in the Russian revolution 1917-1922 were, undoubtedly, attractive. Among the basic tendencies of foreign historiography PSR, certainly, the aspiration to present Party of socialists - revolutionaries the true representative of interests of peasants and originally democratic organisation is important. Though and in the West a number of authors believes, that the Party of socialists-revolutionaries has played negative, and moreover, a provocative role of the predecessor of totalitarianism. It has accepted active participation in destruction of the Russian statehood, in kindling of fratricidal Civil war, having brought the contribution to the general tragedy of the people. Other researchers standing on so-called "revisionist" positions, on the contrary, underlined inherent PSR national character, showed offered eserami alternative Bolshevist a way of agrarian modernisation of the country. This estimation caused special aversion of the Soviet historical science. If on separate (sometimes essential enough) to questions of history PSR coincidence of estimations and conclusions in a concept estimation eserovskoj parties the Soviet authors always occupied a position of principle could be observed, underlining "petty-bourgeois" till 1917 and "counterrevolutionary" after, essence PSR. Secondly, the western historians deny application PSR of terror against Bolshevist leaders, state The proved doubts in participation of party in country revolts in Western Siberia, in the Tambov region, Kronstadt. They could present the best for today a sketch of history of Party of the left socialists-revolutionaries, show the reasons of their allocation from PSR, a social base, theoretical aspects of the program. The principal cause of defeat PLSR, as well as parties eserov, in their opinion, consists in inadequate perception of realities of political strike, an extreme disorganisation, permanent splits and crises, absence of a wide social base, and only then - Bolshevist and White Guard reprisals. Thirdly, among serious lacks of a foreign historiography eserov it is necessary to name the limited interest of researchers to history of national socialists, eseram - to extremists, many of which in 1920th have emigrated on the West. Business and with studying of a retaliatory policy of the Soviet state in relation to eseram not is better is. Work is conducted a little chaotically, without the thought over plan, but pleases that in the light of change of mutual relations between the Western world and Russia, the period termination «cold war», expansion istochnikovoj bases of the western historians, more dense contacts to the Russian colleagues, the foreign historiography of Party of socialists-revolutionaries has made last decade a considerable step to overcoming developed since the period of the first Russian emigration of stereotypes. A number of the brilliant monographies devoted PSR and party left eserov has come out. At the same time complication of a problematics of researches is observed also. Even more often the Party of socialists-revolutionaries is interpreted from a position not only political, but also social истории604. Even in works O.Radkey conclusions that esery, both left, and right also bear responsibility for the social disintegration of the Russian society shown in days of revolutionary accident contained. Now the western historiography is distinguished by the tendency to consider history PSR as object of a cultural history of Russia in the widest sense of a word.
<< | >>
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 6.1. The Russian emigrants about Party of socialists - of revolutionaries:

  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. Kononenko, Anatoly Anatolevich Istoriografija. of creation and activity of party of socialists-revolutionaries in 1901-1922 / the Dissertation / Tyumen, 2005
  5. 3.2. Studying of history of socialists-revolutionaries in the early thirties - the middle of 1950th
  6. Researchers about socialists - revolutionaries after autocracy overthrow
  7. the Third party beneficiary contract as the form of granting of property benefit to the third party
  8. § 1. Language features of documents of party (on a material of instructions and party decisions about the literature and art)
  9. Participation of the party of charge and the protection party at appointment and expert testimony in court manufacture in criminal trial
  10. § 2.2. The objective party of the crime provided by article 151.1 UK the Russian Federation
  11. § 2. The objective party of the corpus delicti provided by item 258.1 UK the Russian Federation
  12. § 1. Evolution of signs of the subjective party of the corpus delicti in the Russian legislation [1]
  13. Chapter 2. Participation of the third party in the obligation on the party of the debtor