CC BY
15Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences 1 (2011 4) 19-28
УДК 940
Debatable Themes Histories of Medieval Russia in Treatment P.A. Kropotkin
Oleg S. Safronov*
Military Aviation Engineering University (Voronezh) 54а Old Bolsheviks st., Voronezh, 394064 Russia 1
Received 3.01.2011, received in revised form 10.01.2011, accepted 17.01.2011
Given clause is devoted to the analysis of debatable themes of history of medieval Russia in treatment of the ideologist of the anarchy-communism, outstanding scientist P.A. Kropotkin. It is noted, that the ideologist anarchism estimated social movements only positively as saw in them permanent struggle of people against the state. It is investigated, that he considered the period of formation of the centralized state a stage of occurrence of «government». Up to XV-XVI centuries, in his opinion, in Russia existed the period of «free cities».
Keywords: Kropotkin, anarchism, historical sights, Russia.
Introduction
Peter Alekseevich Kropotkin in spite of the fact that about forty years has lived far from the native land, constantly studied history and closely watched events of modern Russia. In opinion S.Slatter, P.A.Kropotkin « ... was interested in social problems and everything that referred to them » (Slatter, 1995, P. 143). Close perusal of performances, reports, clauses and letters of the theorist of anarchism shows presence at his to the original historical concept. Meanwhile, we about it do not know. A considerable role to hushing up of his historical concept the governments as imperial Russia and Soviet state have played. States the ideology of the governments did not allow to investigate P.A.Kropotkin antiauthoritative doctrine. P.A.Kropotkin has not left after himself product in which his sights at all historical events of Russia would be regularly
* Corresponding author E-mail address: istoruss@inbox.ru
1 © Siberian Federal University. All rights reserved
stated. In this connection his interpretations of historical events of the country which were kept in archives and book funds are resulted and analyzed. Considerable aid for disclosing outlook of P.A.Kropotkin has rendered his monographers «Ideals and the validity in the Russian literature», and also «Mutual aid among animals and people as the engine of progress». His memoirs of «Note of the revolutionary» had great value also. His clause «Russian revolutionary party» is devoted to specially emancipating movement in Russia. Concerning history of Russia and emancipating movement in Russia was possible to find in P.A.Kropotkin's separate statements in products «Great French revolution 1789-1793», «Bread and Will», «Modern science and anarchy», «Ethics: the origin of morals».
It is necessary to note, that studying of a scientific and political heritage of P.A.Kropotkin
has begun in the beginning of XX century. Since then special interest of scientists and politicians causes his the concept antistateism. The scientific and political heritage of the ideologist of the Russian anarchism draws to itself attention as domestic (Ermashova, 1967; Baranchenko, 1995), and foreign researchers (Cai, 1992; Sakon, 1992). It is necessary to note, that basically, were studied his political (Blauberg, 1991; La Torre, 1993), philosophical (Hamilton, 1964), legal sights, and also the biographic facts of many-sided activity of the ideologist anarchism (Danilov, 1976; Slatter, 1994). Researchers have analyzed a significant part of questions of the anarchical doctrine and the theory of revolution of P.A.Kropotkin (Zateev, 2003), have tried to estimate his political (Pirumova, 1991) and ethical views (Mkrtichan, 1992; Kinna, 1995). At the same time, the theme of history of our country and emancipating movement in Russia in P.A.Kropotkin's estimation was not analyzed at all. E.V.Starostin marking is absolutely right, that «Clauses and books Kropotkin's in which he, anyhow, mentioned history of Russia, features of its historical way, history of revolutionary movement, etc., did not become a subject of close studying» (Starostin, 2005, P. 10).
As a whole, historical sights of an outstanding thinker of anarchical ideology have not received due attention from scientists-historians. V.A.Markin is absolutely right wrote «However not all the parties of extensive creative heritage Kropotkin's are known equally» (Markin, 1993, P. 154). Meanwhile, the detailed analysis of historical views of the ideologist Russian anarchism will promote an intensification of process of accumulation of historical knowledge. In connection with the special interest shown by a modern society to the decision of historical problems, the objective analysis of historical sights of P.A.Kropotkin is the ripened problem.
It is necessary to note, that P.A.Kropotkin has started to form the historical concept on the certain basis. The big influence on formation of his sights on medieval history of Russia was rendered by the ancestor Russian anarchism Michael Aleksandrovich Bakunin. In this connection, in clause are analyzed not only P.A.Kropotkin's sights, but also the basic positions of the anarchist historical concept developed by M.A.Bakunin.
The point of view
P.A.Kropotkin as well as the founder of Russian anarchism M.A.Bakunin began history of Russia with the period of the Kiev Russia. Considering history of Russia for a long time (till the period of formation of any government), M.A.Bakunin correctly marks, that «Slavs were on advantage a tribe peace and agricultural» (Bakunin, 1989, P. 330). He considered, that during this historical period Slavs had a brotherly communication oftribes, «operated, on patriarchal custom old men ... they had no and did not know nobility, had no even with itself a caste of priests, everyone were equal between themselves» (Bakunin, 1989, P. 330-331). Idealizing mentality of Slavic people, M.A.Bakunin considered, that peaceable disposition inherent in them has led to that «Slavs have been partly exterminated, big a part are subdued by Turks, Tatars, Magyars, and mainly Germans» (Bakunin, 1989, P. 331). Therefore, in opinion М.А. Bakunin, «from second half X of century» for Slavs « begins the martyr history of their slavery, but not only martyr, together with heroic» (Bakunin, 1989, P. 331). M.A.Bakunin emphasized the term «heroism» in relation to Slavs as considered, that they, having got in dependence, persistently and tirelessly struggled for freedom not regretting the blood.
The ideologist of anarchism allocated too a greater role during genesis of the state to the foreign policy factor. «It is doubtless, - proved
M.A.Bakunin, - that Slavs never by itself, their initiative of the state did not compose. Instead of they composed it because never were an aggressive tribe. Only people aggressive create the state and create it to by all means itself in favor of, to the detriment of subdued people» (Bakunin, 1989, P. 330).
M.A.Bakunin, characterizing the period of feudal dissociation, absolutely fairly marks presence of intestine wars which conducted Russian princes. And, the ideologist of anarchism marks, that intestine wars weakened ancient Russia, therefore «this torn apart internal difference of opinions the complex of large and fine princedoms has easily been crushed in fight on Kalka Tatars (on May, 31st, 1223) which have subordinated all to an identical yoke» (Bakunin, 1935, P. 410).
Peter Alekseevich did not allocate time of existence of the uniform state the Kiev Russia and a stage of feudal dissociation. It wrongly considered that in the ancient period of Russian history the principle of federalism was prevailing. «To Russia these traces, - wrote P.A.Kropotkin, -unfortunately, have disappeared, as destruction of independent cities-republics has begun in XIII century, with the Mongolian invasion. They have held on till XV century only in Novgorod, Pskov, their suburbs and their northeast colonies (Vyatka, etc.) » (Kropotkin, 1979, P. 147). Therefore P.A.Kropotkin has been assured, that the Old Russian state represented a network ofindependent city communities which have been incorporated by only homogeneous ethnos, territory, language, trade. In the rest these grounds were absolutely sovereign. However, these cities-republics coped princes, but their could choose. Time of their existence - X-XII centuries (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 17). P.A.Kropotkin drew a parallel with the West-European cities-republics (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 19). He considered, that owing to a principle of imitation medieval cities «adopted each other
political, religious and economic movements and them «charters of liberties» (Kropotkin, 1992, P. 21). He estimated the Kiev Russia according to the general historical sights. It is necessary to agree with A.A.Mkrtichyan's judgment, that « Russia he (i.e. Kropotkin. - O.S.) included in a modern western civilization ... So, was not, on his (Kropotkin. - O.S.) to opinion, the states in the medieval Europe» (Mkrtichyan, 1991, P. 53). Business in that, the Old Russian state in P.A.Kropotkin's general historical scheme is the period of free city communities.
In the given period, in P.A.Kropotkin's opinion, a legal proceeding has been based on a principle of equivalent punishment for harmed. This principle has integrally entered into a life of people during primitive or wild communities. In the period of rural communities, considered P.A.Kropotkin, the given principle became a basis of the sanction of social contradictions. The principle of punishment existed in the form of «patrimonial revenge, payment for harmed, -wrote Peter Alekseevich, - established in an epoch of communities» (Kropotkin, 1990, P. 8).
Peter Alekseevich considered that during the period of free city community's ethical categories of mutual aid and solidarity have most brightly proved. A.I.Rakutov written is absolutely right: «All history of a human society, according to Kropotkin, is history of mutual aid and as its carrier is people the history is creativity of broad masses, there is a creativity of mainly moral maintenance» (Rakutov, 1975, P. 66). With this statement N.M.Pirumova agrees also, who considered that «scientifically proved was the idea of mutual aid and the solidarity, become key position his (i.e. Kropotkin. - O.S.) the social theory» (Pirumova, 1992, P. 20). Researchers of creativity of P.A.Kropotkin, B.S.Itenberg and T.Sasaki, bearing in mind the doctrine about mutual aid, considered, that it «was one of elements Populist philosophies of the history
which has born as a result of connection of ideas of communal socialism with Darwinism and love to people» (Itenberg, Sasaki, 1994, P. 84).
P.A.Kropotkin, developing M.A.Bakunin idea, considered, that, the period of free cities X-XII of centuries is replaced by XV century by a stage of the state. Quite right researchers V.I.Prokopenko and V.P.Ponomareva have noted, that «Concept of the state he (i.e. P.A.Kropotkin. -О^.) considers not through a prism of a civil society, and as the form of an inequality between people, as means of restriction of the rights and freedom of citizens to please to a ruling clique» (Prokopenko, Ponomareva, 1994, P. 24). P.A.Kropotkin idealized Middle Ages as blossoming free city communities then have reached. However capture by the government of cities-republics has forced his to compare a policy hostage with «the worst from time to time the Middle Ages and religious wars» (Quotation on: Pirumova, 1989, P. 30). In his opinion, actually the state is wine in social contradictions, in this connection, to the state P. A. Kropotkin gave «special attention, as to a source of wars and monopolies» (Kropotkin, 1995, P. 151). M.A.Bakunin correctly recognizes a main role of Moscow during association of Russian princedoms. The ideologist of anarchism quite fairly marks, that Moscow princes, during the first stage of unifying process, have refused idea to combat against Mongols. They «played a role of the most devoted subject Tatar khans and have managed by flattery and groveling soon to achieve something like a role khans agents above Russian princes by virtue of which they should collect a tribute and have been recognized by arbitrators in internal princely contentions» (Bakunin, 1935, P. 410).
M.A.Bakunin considered that in origin of the state centralization in Russia admission Moscow princes and the Mongolian yoke. Moscow princes aspired, in fair opinion of the ideologist of
anarchism, to enrichment, to authority. However the Mongolian khans were not going to share the authority. Therefore Moscow princes used diplomatic dodges to strengthen the influence, not resorting to the open opposition with Mongolian khans. However not only Moscow princes were admission in the state centralization. Russian people, which image was idealize M.A.Bakunin, has agreed, in his opinion, to centralization «being is induced, so to say, by a presentiment of the great future forthcoming it» (Bakunin, 1935, P. 394).
People were under double oppression, correctly considered the ideologist of anarchism, under burden of princes and Mongols. But to struggle with two enemies simultaneously it was impossible, considered M.A.Bakunin. Therefore people, in opinion of the ideologist of anarchism, instinctively helped to become stronger Moscow princes. The introduction of Golden Horde during feudal dissociation also promoted clearing of the Mongolian yoke, quite right marked M.A.Bakunin. Finally, the aspiration of grand dukes to the authority, supported by people on the one hand and feudal dissociation of Mongols favorable for Moscow with another, has come to the end safely «at Ivan's III and IV (Terrible) with 1462 for 1584 by a gain of Novgorod, Pskov and other cities by full rout of princely sorts» (Bakunin, 1935, P. 410-411).
At the same time M.A.Bakunin fairly marked persistent struggle of Great Novgorod, Pskov and other areas against domination of the Moscow princes. Association of Russian grounds around of Moscow has led to a basic change of political value of this city and great Moscow princes.
P.A.Kropotkin correctly considered that process of occurrence of the centralized state was affected with a number of circumstances. The ideologist of anarchism could understand that the factor of external influence was prevailing, i.e. influence of a mongolo-tatar yoke has caused
aspiration of Russian people to be released from it. Except for external, Peter Alekseevich allocates the large reasons of internal development, namely - a role of church and princely authority. In P.A.Kropotkin's erroneous opinion, priests and princes, having taken advantage of difficult position of Russian people, have undertaken strengthening own authority (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 19). And in XV century ostensibly the federal principle of development was replaced by the centralized principle (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 38). P.A.Kropotkin marked that since XV century it is possible to speak about autocracy, but not earlier (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 291). According to his general historical theory of development, is time of change of the period of free cities a stage of the state XV century.
In Peter Alekseevich opinion, the period of the state was characterized by process of strengthening of authoritative authority (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 22). M.A.Bakuninconsidered, that oprichnina has occurred from the silent sanction of people which did not love boyars that they remained rough and severe misters. «Such by, - wrote M.A.Bakunin in «Russian affairs» (a picture of modern position)», - they promoted the destruction as in people the love to the tsars who have released it from Tatars was still strong, and diplomacy of Russian grand dukes has found the most resolute expression in Ivan Terrible» (Bakunin, 1935, P. 411).
The general feature of reforms of Ivan Terrible is their anti boyars orientation. Proclaiming reforms, Ivan's IV government represented them as actions, which purpose consist in liquidating consequences of seigniorial board and to strengthen economic and political positions of those social groups, whose interests it expressed and on which leaned, noblemen, landowners and tops city. «Hiding own aspiration to unlimited authority and to strengthening the power, - wrote M.A.Bakunin, - under mask cares of people, it at
triumph of the last in weights destroyed tyrants-boyars and thus has strengthened the authority terror and love» (Bakunin, 1935, P. 411). In Ivan Terrible M.A.Bakunin was involved with personal qualities as the reformer, but, as a matter of fact, to his reforms he disapproved.
P.A.Kropotkin correctly considered, that oprichnina was means which was used by tsar Ivan Terrible for strengthening the power. As a result the nobility has lost a significant part of the influence. It also truly saw Ivan Terrible tsar unite Russian grounds in a uniform monarchy. However activity of the first Russian tsar Peter Alekseevich wrongly represented, as the final, resolute effort undertaken by princely authority for destruction of last displays of a principle of federalism, existed during the period of free cities. Ivan's IV campaign to Novgorod was most a bright example of this struggle. Therefore Ivan Terrible Peter Alekseevich realized only the suppressor of the last of «the center of freedom».
In Peter Alekseevich opinion, despite of process of strengthening of authoritative authority, in XVI century freedom-loving, anarchical movement of people was observed also. According to the belief, P.A.Kropotkin considered as motive power of historical progress not the state and tsars, as representatives of the state historical school, and broad masses (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 38). Therefore he named N.M.Karamzin - the reactionary historian-statesman who sees only a role of the state (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 38). In this connection, P.A.Kropotkin quite legally marked, that in business of connection of Siberia a main role has played national colonization of edge (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 38).
Here it is necessary, obviously to mention cardinal idea in Kropotkin concepts of historical development. P.A.Kropotkin emphasized, that except for egoistical aspiration of a ruling class exists also mutual aid of broad masses. Historical development passes at struggle of these resisting
aspirations. But P.A.Kropotkin considered that class struggle is the reason of historical development. He has been assured, that at anarchical communism the egoistical aspiration of «chiefs» will disappear and there will be only a mutual aid of broad masses. Proceeding from the given postulate, Peter Alekseevich considered, that national colonization of Siberia has occurred because of altruism of people. By virtue of natural kindness Russian peasants peacefully colonized Siberia, not restraining interests of local population. «... In Siberia, the European settlement has been stopped in the movement along a southern fertile strip by strong native tribes, - wrote P.A.Kropotkin, - ... similarly to conquerors of Siberia, which have moved at first to the Yakut area to avoid collisions with strong tribes the Buryat, and have entered the Amur area from the north» (Quotation on: Luzyanin, 1994, P. 237). And only on already blazed road the state connection and nationalization of Siberia has gone. Egoistical aspirations of tsar and noblemen have led to planting of authority of «chiefs» on connection of territory.
Characterizing the beginning of XVII century, P.A.Kropotkin as well as M.A.Bakunin, marks the period of Vague time. M.A.Bakunin absolutely fairly marks struggle of a Russian Zemstvoes against the Polish king, Jesuits, the Moscow boyars. However he continues this number and considers, that during the Great Distemper there was a war «and in general against prevalence of Moscow» (Bakunin, 1989, P. 332). M.A.Bakunin always highly estimated Russian people masses.
Including it struggle for freedom, the ideologist of anarchism fondly believed, that the national home guard 1611 - «it was true revolt of people masses against tyranny of the Moscow state, boyars and church. The power of Moscow has been broken and the released Russian provinces have sent then the deputies who though
have chosen new tsar, but have forced it to accept the known conditions limiting its authority» (Bakunin, 1920, P. 106). M.A.Bakunin marks, that Michael Romanov's election on a throne passed with the conditions limiting his authority.
Quite fairly spoke M.A.Bakunin about end of process of enslaving of peasants in XVII century. In his opinion, peasants were free even before the Mongolian invasion. During the Mongolian yoke peasants still were free since feudal dissociation did not allow princes to be united in struggle against freedom of grain-growers. And only owing to strengthening position of the Moscow state to which was promoted by joint activity of the Moscow princes, boyars and hierarchs of church, «people great Russian, free up to the end of 16 centuries, has suddenly appeared attached to the ground, and all over again actually, and then and has legally become the slave to mister - the proprietor of the ground, granted to it the state» (Bakunin, 1920, P. 106).
In Peter Alekseevich opinion, process of strengthening of the government also has been expressed and in enslaving peasants. Concerning serfdom P.A.Kropotkin spoke the following. He correctly considered that enslaving of peasants was the long phenomenon which could not be made less than one imperial decree. The serfdom did not exist in independent republics (X-XII centuries), it began to be entered simultaneously with strengthening the centralized state. In Peter Alekseevich fair opinion, Moscow princes for conquest of the next princedoms and for clearing of a mongolo-tatar yoke military force was required. It could be generated only on basis of patrimonial facilities (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 292). And the last existed on the basis of forced labor of peasants. Thus, the need for strengthening military power has led to the serfdom (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 19).
Final enslaving of peasants, Peter Alekseevich not absolutely truly specified, has
been carried out during Michael Romanov's board (Kropotkin, 1907, P. 22). Chronologically process of introduction of the serfdom, in P.A.Kropotkin's opinion, was designated since XIII century - in Moscow a princedom, since XV century - in Russian state and till XVII century. As it was already spoken, Peter Alekseevich marked, that process of formation of the centralized state has been caused only by egoistical instincts of princes and churches which aspired to capture of authority. The serfdom has arisen because of need for the military force necessary princes. Therefore P.A.Kropotkin represented process of enslaving of peasants by generation of the state epoch. And it was one more argument strengthened his belief that the state bears one harm.
Conclusion
Thus, P.A.Kropotkin as well as M.A.Bakunin, analyzed debatable questions of Russian history from an anarchical position. It is necessary to note, that M.A.Bakunin political and philosophical sights have influenced his interpretation of the basic events of history of Russia. The ideologist of anarchism gave special attention to popular uprisings. He considered as the main reason of country performances hatred of people against the state system as a whole. In M.A.Bakunin opinion, the state appears in history of Russia only in XV-XVI centuries.
Till this period people lived freely, without the serfdom and the state pressure. Peter I, in his opinion, has strengthened the government, having added «the western bureaucracy». People, the ideologist of anarchism considered, repeatedly tried to dump hated authority of the state, but Stepan Razin and Yemelyan Pugachev attempts have not crowned success. Only in XIX century Decembrists have woken a public idea. M.A. Bakunin considered, that only to association of efforts of radical youth and a national revolutionary spirit there can be a final clearing of authority of the state.
As a whole, the general estimations of ideologists of Russian anarchism on many key questions of history of Russia are traced. In particular, they considered the period of formation of the centralized state the period of formation of «government». Up to XV-XVI centuries, in their opinion, in Russia existed the period of «free cities». Only Ivan III and Ivan Terrible have won free cities and have destroyed bases of a free life.
In the further, in the Russian history, ideologists of anarchism considered, there was a strengthening a position of the state due to reduction of freedom of broad masses. Introduction of the serfdom was significant step on a way of strengthening of a position of the state and an exclusive class.
References
1. Antonov V.F. Populism in Russia: a Utopia or the rejected opportunities // Questions of history. M., 1991. №1. P. 5 - 19, in Russian.
2. Bakunin M.A. Selected works. V. 3. SPb. - M., 1920. 286 p., in Russian.
3. Bakunin M.A. Collected works and letters 1828 - 1876. V. 3. M., 1935. 495 p., in Russian.
4. Bakunin M.A. Fragment from works «Addition» «A» to the book « Statehood and anarchy» and from the book «The Whip-German empire and a social revolution» // Native land. 1989. №5. P. 26 - 30, in Russian.
5. Bakunin M.A. Philosophy. Sociology. A policy. M., 1989. 430 p., in Russian.
6. Bakunin M.A. Corruption. - About Machiavelli. - Development of statehood // Questions of philosophy. 1990. № 12. P. 59 - 66, in Russian.
7. Baranchenko V.E. Death and P.A.Kropotkin's funeral // Questions of history. 1995. N3. P. 149154, in Russian.
8. Blauberg I.I. «The Choice - in your hands...» // Questions of philosophies. M., 1991. N11. P.64-71, in Russian.
9. Borisenok YU.A. Mad of an idea in mad to year: (Bakunin and views of Engels on Slavic peoples in 1848 - 1849) // Native land. M., 1993. №2. P. 109 - 111, in Russian.
10. Cai Yingtian. Some cognitive problems upon the relation between science and production // ^^croe aHb^ro = Philos. research. Pekin, 1992. N1.
11. Danilov B.H. A.A.Kropotkin - the Russian scientist and the public figure // Philosophies Sciences. 1976. N4. P.154-156, in Russian.
12. Ermashova M. The London letters of S.M.Stepnyak-Kravchinski // Questions of literatures. 1967. N4. P. 152-174, in Russian.
13. Hamilton W.Z. The genetically evolution of social behavior // J.Theor. Biol. 1964. N1. P.1-52.
14. Itenberg B.S., Sasaki T. Brothers Kropotkin's and Peter Lavrov // Native history. 1994. N4. P.79-90, in Russian.
15. Kinna R. Kropotkin's theory of mutual aid in historical context // Intern. zev. of social history. Assen, 1995. Vol.40, pt.2. P.259-283.
16. Kropotkin P.A. Ideal and the validity in Russian literatures. SPb., 1907. 345 p., in Russian.
17. Kropotkin P.A. Great the French revolution, 1789-1793. M.: Science, 1979. 575 p., in Russian.
18. Kropotkin P.A. Punishment a death penalty // Native land. M., 1990. №4. P. 8, in Russian.
19. Kropotkin P.A. Reference to working and advanced circles of the public of the Western Europe (1920) // Questions of philosophy. 1991. №11. P. 43-46, in Russian.
20. Kropotkin P.A. Reference of the Moscow league of federalists about problems of league. The charter of League of Federalists // Questions of philosophy. 1991. №11. P. 52-54, in Russian.
21. Kropotkin n.A. About current events (1919) // Questions of philosophy. 1991. №11. P. 46-48, in Russian.
22. Kropotkin P.A. Letters to S.P.Tyurin, 1917, 4 sent. // Questions of philosophy. 1991. №11. P. 54-55, in Russian.
23. Kropotkin P.A. letters to S.L.Milner, 1919, 6 febr. // Questions of philosophy. 1991. №11. P. 56-57, in Russian.
24. Kropotkin P.A. Modern position of Russia (1919-1920) // Questions of philosophy. 1991. №11. P. 48-51, in Russian.
25. Kropotkin P.A. Progress is necessary for moral // Native land. M., 1992. № 10. P. 21, in Russian.
26. Kropotkin P.A. Letters to M.I.Goldsmit [1905] // Native archives. 1994. № 1. P. 80 - 83, in Russian.
27. Kropotkin P.A. Letters to James Mejvor. 1903-1917 // Historical archive. 1995. №1. P. 144, in Russian.
28. La Torre m. Una fondazione naturalistica dell'anarchismo: Petr Kropotkin // Riv. intern. di filosofia del deritto. Milano, 1993.4 serie A 70, N2. P.179-202.
29. Luzyanin G.I. Canadian P.A.Kropotkin's travel // New and newest history. 1994. № 3. P. 235 -241, in Russian.
30. Markin V.A. International conference of memory of P.A.Kropotkin [M., deck. 1992] // Questions of history of natural sciences and technique. 1993. №2. P. 154-155, in Russian.
31. Mkrtichyan А.А. P.A.Kropotkin and the Western Europe // New and newest history. 1991. №2. P. 48-63, in Russian.
32. Mkrtichyan A.A. Kropotkin about revolutionary terror // The Bulletin of the Moscow State University. Ser.7: philosophy. 1992. N1. P. 30-35, in Russian.
33. Mndoyans S.A. M.A.Bakunin and the left Hegelianism // The Bulletin of the Moscow State University. Ser. 7: philosophy. 1986. №6. P. 39 - 47, in Russian.
34. Moiseev P.I., Bogatov V.V. About M.A.Bakunin's one half-forgotten product // The Bulletin of the Moscow State University. Ser. 8: philosophy. 1974. №2. P. 60 - 70, in Russian.
35. Moksin G.N. Peasant monarchism in M.A.Bakunin's interpretation // Bulletin VSU. Ser. 1: the humanities sciences. Voronezh, 1998. Issue 1. P. 162 - 167, in Russian.
36. Pirumova N.M. Letters and meetings // Native land. M., 1989. N1. P. 26-31, in Russian.
37. Pirumova N.M. Humanism and Peter Kropotkin's revolutionize // Questions of philosophy. 1991. №11. P. 38-43, in Russian.
38. Pirumova N.M. Multivariate world of Kropotkin // Native land. M., 1992. № 10. P. 20, in Russian.
39. Prokopenko V.I., Ponomareva V.P. Moral of a problem in P.A.Kropotkin's works // Teaching of history at school. 1994. № 3. P. 23 - 27, in Russian.
40. Rakutov A.I. Moral P.Kropotkin's concept // The Bulletin of the Moscow State University. Philosophy., 1975. №5. P. 63-71, in Russian.
41. Sakon Takeshi. On P.A.Kropotkin's archives // Дзимбун кэнкю: = Studies in the humanities. Осака, 1992. T.44, N2. P.1-16.
42. Slatter S. The correspondence of P.A.Kropotkin as historical source material // Slavonic a. East EuroP. rev. L., 1994. Vol. 72, N2. P.277-288.
43. Slatter S. P.A.Kropotkin's letters to professor James Mejvoru. 1903-1917 // Historical archive. 1995. №1. P. 143, in Russian.
44. Starostin E.V. P.A.Kropotkin - the historian of Russia // Peter Alekseevich Kropotkin and problems of modeling of historical and cultural development of a civilization: materials international scientific conference. SPb., 2005. P. 10-18, in Russian.
45. Zateev V.I. M.A.Bakunin and P.A.Kropotkin as founders and theorists of Russian anarchism // The Bulletin Buryat un-ty. Ser. 5, Philosophy, sociology, political science. Ulan-Ude, 2003. Issue 7. P. 153-169, in Russian.
Спорные темы в истории средневековой России в трудах П.А. Кропоткина
О.С. Сафронов
Воронежский военный авиационный инженерный университет Россия 394064, Воронеж, ул. Старых Большевиков, 54 а
Данная статья посвящена анализу спорных тем в истории средневековой России в трудах идеолога анархического коммунизма, выдающегося ученого П.А. Кропоткина. Отмечено, что идеолог анархизма оценивал социальные движения только положительно, так как видел в них постоянную борьбу народа против государства. Исследовано, что он считал период образования централизованного государства этапом зарождения «правительства». По его мнению, до XV-XVI веков в России существовал период «свободных городов».
Ключевые слова: Кропоткин, анархизм, исторические события, Россия.
