History of Pugachev. The story of the Pugachev rebellion and fictional narrative in the novel A

Loginov Stepan

Work in the correspondence round of the Olympiad "Conquer Sparrow Hills" 2012 Pay attention to the introduction - this is exemplary justification for choosing a topic. The justification is what is required in the essays at the Pokori Sparrow Hills and Lomonosov Olympiads at Moscow State University.

Download:

Preview:

A. S. Pushkin on the causes of the Pugachev uprising (based on "The Captain's Daughter" and "Pugachev's History")

Introduction

The topic "A. S. Pushkin on the causes of the Pugachev uprising" seems to me especially interesting for a number of reasons.

Firstly , this is the need to analyze two different types of sources that came out from under the pen of one author - a research historical work ("The History of Pugachev") and a work of art (" Captain's daughter").

On the one hand, we have for analysis the work of the historian of the first thirds of XIX century ("History of Pugachev" was published in 1834 under the title "History of the Pugachev rebellion"), when there were no modern approaches to the study of historical events and processes, but there was already an understanding that the historian should rely on as many diverse sources as possible, analyzing and comparing them. Pushkin proudly responds to the criticism of his work: “I carefully read everything that was written about Pugachev, and moreover, 18 thick volumes in folio of various manuscripts, decrees, reports, etc. I visited the places where the main events of the era took place, I described by verifying dead documents with the words of still living, but already elderly eyewitnesses and again verifying their decrepit memory historical criticism". Pushkin drew documents for compiling his history state archives(for the first time, by order of Nicholas I, a private person was admitted to the state archives!), folklore sources, memories of eyewitnesses from various social strata. An interesting detail: in an effort to be impartial, Pushkin nevertheless succumbs to the charm of the heroes of his historical work. So, he hides in the "Pugachev rebellion" the fact that the commandant of the Lower Lake Fortress was drunk when he behaved courageously in the face of death. “I did not dare to say this out of respect for his courage and beautiful death,” Pushkin wrote in his “Remarks”, which he presented to Nicholas I ...

On the other hand, we have for analysis an example of artistic understanding of the theme of the Pugachev rebellion. The Captain's Daughter was conceived before the History, but written later and published in 1836. Based on his research, A. S. Pushkin, by the power of talent, sees the events of the recent past, gives a personal understanding of the characters of historical and fictional (but typical of the era) characters and the motives of their behavior.

In "The Captain's Daughter" and "The History of Pugachev" we have an amazing opportunity to obtain from the same hands both a document and an outstanding work. fiction. It is definitely attractive.

Secondly , in this topic attracts (no less than the nature of the sources, and perhaps even more), the personality of the author - the genius of Russian literature, one of the most educated and smart people of his time. The view of A. S. Pushkin on any event is extremely interesting, since this is the view of a person who knows how to think independently, interestingly, deeply. The look of a genius.

Thirdly , A. S. Pushkin refers in these works to one of the most tragic pages Russian history, to the most terrible social clash in Russia at that time - the Pugachev rebellion. Pushkin, in fact, is the first historian of the rebellion, the first to approach the topic, relying on a serious array of evidence and documents collected in the "History of Pugachev". And Pushkin was the first who seriously tried to comprehend Pugachevism in a work of art. "The Captain's Daughter" remains an unsurpassed literary masterpiece about the era.

Main part

Being a nobleman and a man of honor, Pushkin approaches the history of the peasant war from a position characteristic of a person of his class. Pugachev's "bastard" and "all sorts of rabble" does not arouse sympathy in him - both because of the extreme cruelty of the Pugachevites, and because of the violation of order, the guardian of which is the nobility. But being a person capable of thinking critically, Pushkin understands that the Pugachev rebellion, no matter how "senseless and merciless" it may be, has reasons, there are grounds. How else could it be that "the appearance of two or three villains was enough to revolt entire regions"? How could it be that, having remained with three hundred Yaik Cossacks in July 1774, already in August Pugacheva had an army of twenty thousand? Why "the inhabitants were looking forward to it"? ("History of Pugachev")

For Pushkin, it seems to me, the reasons for Pugachevism are obvious and, unlike modern historians, he does not single out these reasons as a separate topic either in The History of Pugachev, or, even more so, in The Captain's Daughter. A modern historian would not only single out a separate section in his monograph to study the causes of such a large-scale peasant war, but would also systematize these causes depending on the social and ethnic groups participants in the riot. For Pushkin, I repeat, the reasons are so obvious that he does not single them out in particular. (Of course, we must remember that in the Pushkin era, the format of historical research that is accepted in our time has not yet taken shape). What does Pushkin see main reason rebellion can be judged from the following passages.

In a chapter that was not included in the final edition of The Captain's Daughter, we can find Grinev's (Bulanin's) very revealing reasoning: "The fate of my parents did not ... horrify me ... I knew that mother was adored by peasants and courtyard people, father ... was also loved, for he was just and knew the true needs of subject people. If all the landowners were so reasonable and paternally caring towards the peasants, the uprising would be impossible. It seems to me that this is the opinion of Pushkin. This fiction"The Captain's Daughter" is connected with the documentary "History of Pugachev", where Pushkin repeatedly reports on the facts when peasants and soldiers saved their masters and commanders, interceded for them before Pugachev in those cases when the gentlemen were worthy people.

On the contrary, in the sixth chapter of The Captain's Daughter, a certain "Bashkir" is described, a participant in the uprising of 1741, whose nose, ears and tongue were cut off. This character causes horror and sympathy because of the cruelty shown to him.

Here it is - the most important reason, according to Pushkin - the cruelty and injustice of those who should be fair and "know the true needs of subject people." Pushkin puts the following words into Grinev's mouth: "Young man, if my notes fall into your hands, remember that the best and most lasting changes are those that come from the improvement of morals."

So, the first reason for the peasant war and its scale, according to Pushkin, is cruel morals nobility of the 18th century, their irresponsibility and injustice towards people under their control.

The second reason that Pushkin considers (he pays attention to it in The History of Pugachev) is the incompetence, corruption, deceit and meanness of officials. Russian Empire XVIII century. Especially at the lower and middle levels.

Pushkin speaks of this reason already in the first chapter of Pugachev: “from 1762 itself ... the Yaik Cossacks began to complain about the various oppressions they suffered from members of the chancellery established in the army by the government: the withholding of a certain salary, unauthorized taxes and violation of ancient rights and customs fishing. Officials sent to them to deal with complaints could not or did not want to satisfy them.

The next reason that can be seen in Pushkin's writings on the Pugachev rebellion is the charisma of the leader of the rebels, the strength of his character, the conformity of Pugachev's character to popular ideas about what a true chieftain who fights for "freedom" should be like. "You rebelled us," the Bashkirs tell him. Pugachev sends out "outrageous letters", which, according to Pushkin, are written in rude but very bright language: "the appeal was written in rude but strong terms and was supposed to make a dangerous impression on ordinary people", - Pushkin writes in "The Captain's Daughter." In remarks to "Pugachev" he notes: "Pugachev's outrageous appeal is an amazing example of popular eloquence, although illiterate."

Pugachev behaves like a real robber chieftain - if he is cruel, then to the extreme, if he is merciful, then in his mercy he is ready to spare anyone. He scatters money in front of the people, he drinks heavily and can bathe in the bath for the longest time, he "robs the treasury and the property of the nobles ... without touching peasant property," and he is elusive. The people see in him almost a folklore hero. Pushkin draws attention to the fact that even 60 years after the rebellion, the Cossacks are tied to the memory of Pugachev. “He is Pugachev for you,” the old man answered me angrily, “but for me he was the great sovereign Pyotr Fedorovich.” Pushkin writes down such a phrase behind an old Cossack.

So, in my opinion, Pushkin considers another reason for the uprising to be the personality of its leader - a bright, intelligent and cruel man.

Conclusion

Relying on the "History of Pugachev" and "The Captain's Daughter" as the main sources, the following conclusions can be drawn regarding what A. S. Pushkin thought about the causes of the Pugachev uprising.

Firstly , the cruelty of the landowners, officials and military commanders to their peasants and subordinates. Instead of ruling fairly and perceiving their high position as a duty to take care of inferior and dependent people, the nobility of the Catherine era reveled in their impunity (after all, even complaining about landowners was forbidden to serfs in 1767!) And for the most part it was cruel and unfair to serfs, Cossacks, Gentiles, who made up the bulk of the rebels. This cruelty and unreasonableness of the superiors was the reason for such a rapid and large-scale spread of the uprising.

Secondly , bribery, arbitrariness and injustice of officials (especially in the backcountry corners of the Russian Empire) served as another reason for the uprising. This fact was also noted by the authors of the 18th century, such as Fonvizin, Novikov, Radishchev...

Thirdly , the most important reason for the scale of the uprising was the presence of such a powerful and talented leader among the rebels as Emelyan Pugachev.

It is curious that, in general, Pushkin's conclusions coincide with the opinion of modern historians regarding the causes of the uprising. Interestingly, considering the uprising from the position of a nobleman and landowner, Pushkin turned out to be so observant and talented that he managed to develop an independent view of the causes of the Pugachev rebellion.

Pushkin's conclusion regarding the results of the uprising also absolutely coincides with what is written about the Pugachev uprising in our time: "The Pugachev rebellion proved to the government the need for many changes."

Thus, studying Pushkin's works related to the Pugachev uprising, one can find that Pushkin was a serious, thoughtful historian who was able to analyze historical events and draw correct conclusions from the analysis of historical sources. In his historical writings we also see an amazing combination of the talent of a historian and a great writer.

A Brief History of the Pugachev Rebellion

The Pugachev uprising took place in 1773 year and lasted almost two years. Emelyan Pugachev was the leader of the Yaik (Ural) Cossacks. In fact, it was a peasant revolt that grew into a war against Empress Catherine II. E. I. Pugachev himself was from the Don, but participated in many military campaigns, for example, in the Seven Years' War, in the war with Turkey. He was well aware of popular moods and discontent, therefore, taking on the role of king, he decided to free the common people from oppression.

Emelyan Pugachev distributed special letters (manifestos), in which he introduced himself as Peter III and expressed his readiness to protect the people. Wherever these letters appeared, uprisings and riots broke out. The Yaitsky (Ural) Cossacks reacted especially vehemently. Their rebellion grew into peasant war covering the entire Volga region. By the end 1773 Orenburg was under siege. The troops sent there were defeated by the Pugachev rebels, which only encouraged the peasants. Since then, uprisings have taken place in the Don, and in the Volga region, and in the Urals.

Catherine II lost several experienced generals in an attempt to suppress these uprisings, and only in 1774 year, regular troops still managed to defeat the rebels. Pugachev himself fled to Bashkiria, where he gathered a new army from the rebellious workers and replenished the arsenal of ammunition. Soon something happened that greatly frightened the authorities. Pugachev moved to the Volga region, replenished his troops with Udmurts and Chuvashs, and then headed towards Kazan. July 12, 1774 Kazan was taken by the rebels, terrible chaos began in the city.

Then the Empress resorted to emergency measures. She called the brilliant commander Suvorov for help, but General Mikhelson, who relentlessly followed in the footsteps of Pugachev, did an excellent job of suppressing the rebellion. He managed to defeat the rebel army near Tsaritsyn, after which the impostor fled across the Volga. The rebels themselves, disappointed in their leader, decided to catch him and hand him over to the authorities. Soon he was taken to Moscow and taken under arrest.

Catherine II ordered a thorough investigation of this case, as she believed that behind Pugachev were people of a higher rank, dissatisfied with her rule. However, no direct evidence was found. In January 1775 E. I. Pugachev, aka the false Tsar Peter III, was executed. His closest accomplices were also executed with him. This incident left a deep mark on Russian history. The country remembered for a long time about the Pugachev region and the fierce popular revolt.

Berdnikova Elena, gymnasium No. 13, grade 9

Historical fact and its artistic embodiment.
"History of the Pugachev Rebellion" and "The Captain's Daughter" by A.S. Pushkin

God forbid to see a Russian riot,
senseless and merciless!

A.S. Pushkin

Introduction

The writing of the “History of the Pugachev Rebellion” by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, of course, was prompted by the unsuccessful outcome of the Decembrist uprising, including his friends, as well as the unrest of peasants and military settlers in 1830, which again exacerbated the issue of serfdom. As a person and citizen, this could not leave Pushkin indifferent. Therefore, in 1833, he obtained permission for a four-month trip to the places of the Pugachev uprising - the Orenburg and Kazan provinces.
Pushkin traveled around the places of the Pugachev uprising, collecting data and interviewing old witnesses who were still alive. Then I drove to Boldino. Here he began to work on the "History of the Pugachev rebellion."
On October 20, Pushkin returned to St. Petersburg. “History…” was finished.
But he did not stop there, now his goal was to write a fictional novel with a gripping plot that affirms the connection between the two social groups. So in the same 1833, one of Pushkin's best prose works, The Captain's Daughter, was written. Pugachevshchina was supposed to be a warning to the nobility, which did not see the need for new forms of communication with the peasantry.

The Captain's Daughter, one of Pushkin's most perfect and profound creations, has repeatedly been the subject of research attention. In the extensive literature on the issue, a number of studies by Yu.G. Pushkin to “Notes of a Hunter” by I.S. Turgenev” and a chapter in the book by G.A. Gukovsky “Pushkin and the problem of realistic style”. Archival searches and publications of documents, as well as subtle analysis ideological content novel in the works of Yu.G. And if certain provisions of these works can become the subject of a scientific dispute, this does not detract from their importance as the basis for any further in-depth analysis of Pushkin's work. A number of deep remarks can be found in the works of B.V. Tomashevsky, V.B. Shklovsky, D.P. Yakubovich, E.N. Kupreyanova, N.K. .

This, however, does not mean that the problems of The Captain's Daughter have been fully explored. Moreover, many of the cardinal issues of Pushkin's position in The Captain's Daughter are still debatable. Such, for example, is the interpretation of the famous words about the “Russian revolt”. If Yu.G. Osman considers them a kind of tribute to censorship conditions, a reproduction of a protective point of view (equal to the views of Dashkova and Karamzin), exposed by the whole course of the narrative, causing reader sympathy for Pugachev, then another authoritative expert on Pushkin’s work, B.V. Tomashevsky, wrote: “Left in the text of the novel the maxim was by no means caused by the necessity of a presentation of events. As for the views of Grinev, as the hero of the novel, on Pugachev and the peasant movement, Pushkin perfectly described them in other clearer words and in the very course of the action. If he retained this phrase, it was because it corresponded to Pushkin's own system of views on the peasant revolution. Behind this phrase lies neither contempt for the Russian serf peasantry, nor disbelief in the strength of the people, nor any protective thoughts whatsoever. This phrase expresses that Pushkin did not believe in the final victory of the peasant revolution in the conditions in which he lived.

In "The Captain's Daughter" Pushkin used the facts collected during his work on "History ...". , with the only difference that simple presentation facts he made a narrative.

Part 1. Genre features works.

In 1831, Pushkin was enlisted as a "historiographer" and received permission to work in the archives. He persistently experiments with prose genres, tirelessly looking for new forms of literature. In a letter to V.D. He writes to Volkhovsky: “I am sending you my last composition, "History of the Pugachev rebellion". I tried to explore the military actions of that time in it and thought only about their clear presentation ... "Of course," History ... "is written in the genre of historical research, in a dry, compressed language. P.V. Annenkov testifies: “Along with his historical work, Pushkin began, at the invariable demand of artistic nature, the novel The Captain's Daughter, which represented the other side of the subject - the side of the mores and customs of the era. The concise and only in appearance dry presentation, adopted by him in history, found, as it were, an addition to his exemplary novel, which has the warmth and charm of historical notes.

In our comparative study, we will adhere to Pushkin's own definition of the genre of The Captain's Daughter as a novel, based on the definition given in The Big encyclopedic dictionary”: “A novel is a literary genre, an epic work of great form, in which the narrative is focused on the fate of an individual in his relation to the world around him, on the formation, development of his character and self-consciousness. The novel is the epic of modern times; in contrast to the folk epic, where the individual and the folk soul are inseparable; in the novel the life of the individual and public life appear as relatively independent, but the “private” inner life of the individual is revealed in him “epopically”, i.e. with the identification of its universally significant and public sense. A typical novel situation is a collision in the hero of the moral and human (personal) with natural and social necessity. Since the novel develops in modern times, where the nature of the relationship between man and society is constantly changing, insofar as its form is essentially "open". The main situation is each time filled with specific historical content and is embodied in various genre modifications. Begins in the 1830s classical era realistic socio-psychological novel". And although neither the name of A.S. Pushkin, nor his work “The Captain’s Daughter” is mentioned in the dictionary, we, based on the definition, clearly call A.S. Pushkin as the ancestor of the genre of realistic socio-psychological novel.

Part 2. Comparative analysis of the "History of the Pugachev rebellion" and the novel "The Captain's Daughter"

The appearance of Pugachev as historical person preceded by a revolt of the Yaik Cossacks. Let's spend comparative analysis episodes of the novel with the participation of Pugachev and the corresponding episodes of "History ...". Here is a small material from the "History ...". On the Yaik River in the fifteenth century, the Don Cossacks appeared, traveling around the Khvalyn Sea. They wintered on its banks, which at that time were still covered with forest and safe in their seclusion; in the spring they set out to sea again, robbed until late autumn, and by winter they returned to Yaik. Leaning upward from one place to another, they finally chose the Kolovratnoye tract, sixty miles from present-day Uralsk, as their permanent residence.
That is, they lived freely and were not oppressed by anyone, at the behest of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich they settled in the desert lands along the Yaik River and the adjacent steppes: “The Yaik Cossacks obediently carried out services along the lines of the Moscow order; but at home they retained the original image of their management. Perfect equality of rights; chieftains and foremen elected by the people, temporary executors of people's decrees; circles, or meetings, where each Cossack had a free vote and where all public affairs were decided by a majority of votes; no written orders.”
This continued until the reign of Peter the Great.

The following quotes briefly show the main reasons for the start of the Yaitsky Cossacks' rebellion, the behavior of the rebels and the suppression of the rebellion. Since the “History…” contains a very large volume of material devoted to these events, we have singled out only those quotations that, in our opinion, contain a story about the main events.
1) When comparing sources, it is clear that Pushkin softened true reason the start of this rebellion. After studying the historical document, it becomes clear that the state had a real intention to change social status Cossacks, and it was this that caused indignation among the Cossacks and led to this terrible uprising.
“Peter the Great took the first measures to introduce the Yaik Cossacks into the general system of state administration. In 1720, the Yaik army was transferred to the department of the Military Collegium ”“ The sovereign himself appointed the military ataman ” .
2) From that moment on, internal strife began in the Cossack environment, which the state tried to resolve by its intervention, but to no avail. Let us approach the beginning of the rebellion and the refusal of the Cossacks, at the behest of the sovereign, to pursue the Kalmyks, who decided to leave Russia and come under the authority of the Chinese government in order to avoid the oppression of the local authorities. “The Yaik army was ordered to set out in pursuit; but the Cossacks (except for a very small number) did not obey, and clearly turned out to be from any service. Further events took an irreversible character.
3) Here are some excerpts from the “Notes of Colonel Pekarsky on the Yaitsky riots, which are now the Urals, Cossacks and the impostor Emelyan, the Don Cossack Pugachev”, confirming our assumption:

“In 1770, it was ordered from Yaitsky, which is now Ural, Cossacks to form a Cossack squadron into the Moscow Legion; but they disobeyed, and therefore in 1771, to study and force the formation of that squadron, Major General von Traubenberg was sent to the Yaitsky town of the Orenburg Corps and Captain Mavrin from Petersburg Guards; the aforementioned Cossacks sent from themselves to Petersburg with a request of two Cossacks, to ask for the abolition of the formation of a squadron from them, whom they arrested there, and having shaved their beards and foreheads, sent in 1772 to Orenburg, to be assigned to the Alekseevsky Infantry Regiment ” .
Paying special attention to such a word as “coercion”, we understand that this is nothing more than an open desire of the authorities to finally subjugate the Cossacks. The government provoked aggression on their part by placing under arrest the Cossack ambassadors.
4) Here is another quote from “History…”:

“We found out that the government intended to make squadrons of Cossacks, and that they had already been ordered to shave their beards. Major-General Traubenberg, who was sent to the Yaik town for this purpose, incurred indignation” (I, 11).

In The Captain's Daughter, Pushkin described all these events so concisely that they fit in just two sentences:

“The reason for this was the strict measures taken by Major General Traubenberg in order to bring the army to due obedience” (I, 11).
That is, the phrase “the government had the intention…” in “History…” is replaced by “measures already taken by the major general” in literary work.

The Cossacks took revenge on the offenders, after which the mutiny was subdued. That is, we see that the author in a literary work, due to understandable circumstances, moved the center of the narrative from the actions of the government to the actions of the major general, so that this conflict looked like a conflict between the Cossacks and the official, and not between the Cossacks and the Empress. Further, in the description of Traubenberg's murder, there is also a desire to smooth out the sharpness of the conflict. This is how “History…” describes it:

"Traubenberg fled and was killed at the gate of his house."
and in The Captain's Daughter:

“The result was the barbaric murder of Traubenberg…”.

That is, in a literary work, Pushkin does not show the cowardice and flight of Traubenberg, but again uses exaggeration as a kind of artistic curtsy to those in power to show the cruelty of the Cossacks. So the Cossacks took revenge on the offenders, after which the mutiny was subdued. "History..." reads:

“Meanwhile, Major General Freiman was sent from Moscow to pacify them, with one company of grenadiers and artillery.”

“Freyman opened his way with buckshot…, a chase was sent for those who left, and almost everyone was caught” (I, 11).

The fact that the government was strongly opposed to the Cossacks is evidenced by the number of artillerymen who were sent to suppress the rebellion. Then the field teams consisted of 500 infantry, cavalry and artillery servants. In 1775 they were replaced by provincial battalions. But again, Pushkin in "The Captain's Daughter" replaced this quote with another: "Finally, the pacification of the rebellion is completed with grapeshot and cruel punishments." Namely, in this part, which tells about the uprising, one can see how often he “softens” the descriptions in comparison with historical source.»

This is how this rebellion ends. "Story…":

“The authorities were entrusted to the Yaik commandant, Lieutenant Colonel Simonov. In his office ordered to be present to the military foreman Martemyan Borodin and foreman (simple) Mostovshchikov. The instigators of the rebellion were punished with a whip; about one hundred and forty people were exiled to Siberia; others were given to the soldiers (all fled); the rest are pardoned and re-sworn. These strict and necessary measures restored external order; but the calm was precarious. "It's only the beginning!" the forgiven rebels said: “Are we going to shake Moscow?” - The Cossacks were still divided into two sides: agreeing and disagreeing (or, as the Military Collegium very accurately translated these words, into obedient and disobedient). Secret meetings took place in the steppe minds and remote farms. Everything foreshadowed a new rebellion. The leader was missing. The leader was found ”

In The Captain's Daughter there is material that also tells about the unrest of the people:

“Everything was already quiet, or seemed so; the authorities too easily believed the imaginary remorse of the crafty rebels, who were malicious in secret and were waiting for an opportunity to resume the unrest.

After such events, the Cossacks could not calmly continue their existence. In their souls and hearts there was a desire to free themselves and take revenge on the offenders, but it was impossible to act without a leader. This leader was Emelyan Pugachev. Here is what "History ..." says about the appearance of Emelyan Pugachev:

“In these troubled times, an unknown vagabond wandered around the Cossack courtyards, hiring himself as a worker to one master, then to another, and taking up all sorts of crafts. He witnessed the pacification of the rebellion and the execution of the instigators, went away for a while to the Irgiz sketes; from there, at the end of 1772, he was sent to buy fish in the Yaik town, where he was stationed at the Cossack Denis Pyanov. He was distinguished by the audacity of his speeches, denounced the authorities, and persuaded the Cossacks to flee to the region. Turkish Sultan; he assured that the Don Cossacks would not hesitate to follow them, that he had two hundred thousand rubles and seventy thousand worth of goods prepared at the border, and that some pasha, immediately upon the arrival of the Cossacks, should give them up to five million; for the time being he promised each of them twelve rubles a month's salary. Moreover, he said, as if two regiments were marching against the Yaik Cossacks from Moscow, that around Christmas, or baptism, there would certainly be a riot. Some of the obedient wanted to catch and present, as a rebel, to the commandant's office; but he hid with Denis Pyanov, and was already caught in the village of Malykovo (which is now Volgsk) at the direction of a peasant who was traveling with him on the same road. This tramp was Emelyan Pugachev, Don Cossack and a schismatic who came with a false written appearance from beyond the Polish border, with the intention of settling on the Irgiz River, among the schismatics there. He was sent under guard to Simbirsk, and from there to Kazan; and as everything related to the affairs of the Yaitsky army, under the circumstances of that time, could seem important, the Orenburg governor considered it necessary to notify the State Military Collegium of this by a report dated January 18, 1773.

Since then the Yaik rebels met at every turn, the Kazan authorities did not pay much attention to Pugachev. He was kept in prison along with other prisoners. But his accomplices did not forget about him, and on June 19, 1773, he fled.

“Once he, under the guard of two garrison soldiers, walked around the city to collect alms. At the Castle Lattice (as one of the main Kazan streets was called) there was a ready-made troika. Pugachev, approaching her, suddenly pushed away one of the soldiers accompanying him; the other helped the convict to sit down to the wagon and rode away from the city with him” (II, 14).

After that, for 3 months he hid in the farms from the chase, when in early September he ended up on the farm of Mikhail Kozhevnikov with his main accomplice Ivan Zarubin, who announced to Kozhevnikov that the great person was in their land.

“He urged Kozhevnikov to hide her on his farm. Kozhevnikov agreed. Zarubin left, and on the same night before light he returned with Timofey Myasnikov and an unknown man, all three on horseback. The stranger was of medium height, broad-shouldered and thin. His black beard was beginning to turn grey. He was wearing a camel coat, a blue Kalmyk cap, and armed with a rifle. Zarubin and Myasnikov went to the city to summon the people, and the stranger, staying with Kozhevnikov, announced to him that he was Emperor Peter --- that the rumors about his death were false, that with the help of a guard officer, he went to Kyiv, where he hid about year” (II, 15).

There are quotes in The Captain's Daughter that carry the same meaning, but have a different form.
1. History…":

“This vagabond was Yemelyan Pugachev, a Don Cossack and a schismatic…, announced to him that he was Emperor Peter ---…” (II, 15),

In "The Captain's Daughter":

“The Don Cossack and schismatic Emelyan Pugachev, who escaped from under guard, committing unforgivable insolence by assuming the name of the late Emperor Peter” (VI, 314).

We see that in the “History ...” the Don “Cossack and schismatic” is a clarification, but, as we noticed, this clarification is in the “History ...” after the name of Emelyan Pugachev, and in the “Captain's Daughter” before him, and therefore the same part These two sentences sound different. When the clarification is after the word being clarified, it is separated by a comma, respectively, when reading, a pause is formed, which makes the quote from “History ...” intermittent, and the quote from “The Captain's Daughter”, in which there are no pauses, is smooth and harmonious. The phrase “taking on the name of the deceased…” tells us about the use of high style in writing, which is one of the artistic techniques author.

The second part of the quotations, which refers to the adoption of the name of Peter, is distinguished by significant embellishment in the second case. When in the “History ...” there is a simple statement of the facts, “that he is Emperor Peter ---”, the text of the “Captain’s Daughter” is a narrative in which there are a lot of long and lofty definitions that are exclusively embellishing: upon himself in the name of the late Emperor Peter. Undoubtedly, Pushkin used such a turn to express his sharply negative attitude towards the act of the impostor.
Here it would be appropriate to recall A.S. Pushkin's poem "To Friends", written earlier, in 1828:

No, I'm not a flatterer when I'm king
I compose free praise:
I boldly express my feelings
I speak the language of my heart.
(Collected works in 3 volumes, M., "Artistic literature", p. 414).

What did Pugachev look like outwardly? Oddly enough, but in the "History ..." there is a rather brief description of the rebel's appearance. The people who describe him only mention his beard, height, and build. From this we can conclude that he did not have special distinctive features that distinguish him from the Cossack environment. Perhaps he himself understood this, sought in various ways to stand out from his kind. Here is his verbal portrait used by the author in "History ...":

“The stranger was of medium height, broad-shouldered and thin” (I, 15),and in The Captain's Daughter:

“he was about forty, of average height, thin and broad-shouldered” (II, 289)

These quotes are identical in meaning, but differ in the order of the words "thin" and "broad-shouldered". At first glance, there is no difference between them, but, comparing the sound of the last sentences, you can see that due to the rearrangement of words, the second one is softer to the ear than the first one: the long and difficult to pronounce word “broad-shouldered” comes before the shorter and simpler “thin ”, then when reading, having reached it, one involuntarily gets a slowdown in speech, while in the second quote the slowdown falls on the last word, and a characteristic decrease in intonation occurs.
Also hallmark was his beard. Here is how the author describes it in The Captain's Daughter:

“In his black beard graying was shown” (II, 289),

And in the "History ..." -

“His black beard was beginning to turn gray” (II, 15).

The literary text presupposes not so much the exact transfer of the hero’s appearance, but the impression that he makes, in this case, on Pyotr Grinev, the author uses the technique of replacing the phrase “began to turn gray”, possible in a continuing historical presentation, with “gray hair was shown” in order to convey the impression made by Pugachev on Peter, who threw a cursory glance at him. So a simple statement of facts turns into an artistic image.

We also come across a description of what Pugachev was wearing in his first meeting with Grinev.

“History…”: “He was wearing a camel coat…” (II, 15),

“The Captain's Daughter”: “He is wearing a tattered coat and Tatar trousers…” (II, 289).

Now we can say why in the chapter “The Counselor” Pugachev made an impression of a tramp on Grinev: the Armenian is “ragged”, the trousers, most likely, are strangers. Here is the second description of Pugachev’s “emperor” costume from The Captain’s Daughter:

“He is wearing a red Cossack caftan trimmed with galloons. A tall sable hat with golden tassels was pulled down over his sparkling eyes” (VI, 324).

The use of this contextual antithesis is one of the most effective techniques used by Pushkin.

After the “proclamation” of Pugachev by Emperor Peter and after giving them promises to fight for the Cossacks and those offended by the government, the rebels began to flock to him, multiplying his gang “from hour to hour”. As soon as Pugachev felt strength, he immediately moved to the Yaitsky town. His goal was to free the previously rebellious Cossacks, who would undoubtedly thank the impostor with their unquestioning obedience. Liberation began with the shedding of blood.
This is also confirmed in The Captain's Daughter, in a letter to Captain Mironov from the general:

“...Emelyan Pugachev...gathered a villainous gang, made an outrage in the Yaitsky villages...” (VI, 289).

The name of this man is associated with a large number of deaths. In The Captain's Daughter, Grinev dreams nightmare, in which Pugachev was, and with him a room filled with corpses, and bloody puddles ... Here is what Pushkin says about this through the lips of his hero:

“I had a dream that I could never forget, and in which I still see something prophetic when I reflect with him on the strange circumstances of my life” (II, 288);

And here is what he writes in the "History ...", in a note to chapter three:

“Pugachev was mowing hay on Sheludyakov’s farm. In Uralsk, there is still an old Cossack woman, who wore leotards of his work. Once, having hired himself to dig ridges in the garden, he dug four graves. This circumstance was later interpreted as an omen of his fate” (98).

During the Pugachev uprising, many people were killed, the "rebel" often won. In The Captain's Daughter, Pushkin notes with what courage and courage Captain Mironov defended his fortress, but she was taken. Here is how the commandant of the Belgorod fortress Mironov died:

“Which commandant-” the impostor asked. Our sergeant stepped out of the crowd and pointed to Ivan Kuzmich. Pugachev looked menacingly at the old man and said to him: “How dare you resist me, your sovereign-” The commandant, exhausted from the wound, gathered his last strength and answered in a firm voice: “You are not my sovereign, you are a thief and an impostor, you hear!” Pugachev frowned gloomily and waved his white handkerchief. Several picked up the old captain and dragged him to the gallows .... and a minute later I saw poor Ivan Kuzmich thrown up into the air” (VII, 324).

Each conquered city greeted Pugachev with a ringing of bells. In both works there is a mention of this.
"Story…":

“began to ring the bells…” (II, 20),

"Captain's daughter":

“The bell ringing has subsided; there was dead silence” (VII, 325).

Comparing these quotes, you can see that for the "Captain's Daughter" the author chose phrases that create a tense atmosphere of expectation: "The ringing subsided", "it came" not just silence, but "dead silence". It is known from history that the sovereigns were met in this way, and from the fact that Pugachev was also met in this way, we can conclude that the people paid their respects to the “tsar”, naively believing the impostor.

In the 18th century, the entire Russian people, from the upper classes to the lower, were deeply religious. Faith held a place of honor in their hearts. Not a single important event was complete without going to church: the birth of a child, christening, a wedding, the beginning of a new project, death ... Even when a child was born in the poorest family, there were ways to baptize him. Knowing about this attitude of the people to faith, Pugachev could use it for his own purposes. He understood perfectly well that if he once managed to force a person to swear an oath of faith, then under fear of God's punishment, he would recognize only him as king.
"Story…":

“The priest was expecting Pugachev with a cross and holy icons” (II, 20).

"Captain's daughter":

“Father Gerasim, pale and trembling, stood at the porch, with a cross in his hands, and seemed to silently beg him for the upcoming sacrifices” (VII, 325).

After several hours of the oath, Pugachev “announced to Father Gerasim that he would dine with him” (VII, 326).

Indeed, Pugachev liked to have a good meal after a tiresome oath. In the “History ...” there is a mention of how the impostor and his accomplices, after the massacre of the commander-in-chief of the Iletsk town, arranged a feast in their honor:

“Pugachev hanged the ataman, celebrated the victory for three days, and, taking with him all the Iletsk Cossacks and city cannons, went to the Rassypnaya fortress” (II, 16).

Most of the population, who swore allegiance to Pugachev, joined the gang and followed him.
"Captain's daughter":

“Pugachev left; the people rushed after him” (VII, 326),

“History…” (after the capture of the Rassypnaya fortress):

“The Cossacks changed here too. The fortress was taken. The commandant, Major Velovsky, several officers and one priest were hanged, and the garrison company and one and a half hundred Cossacks were attached to the rebels ”(II, 17).

The most important thing, in my opinion, the difference between a historical source and a literary work is that in The Captain's Daughter the author presents Pugachev as the only leader of the uprising, while in the History ... we found such interesting material:

“Pugachev was not autocratic. The Yaitsky Cossacks, the instigators of the rebellion, controlled the actions of the past, who had no other dignity, except for some military knowledge and extraordinary audacity. He did nothing without their consent; they often acted without his knowledge, and sometimes against his will. They showed him outward respect, in front of the people they followed him without hats and beat him with their foreheads: but in private they treated him like a comrade, and they drank together, sitting in front of him in hats and in only shirts, and singing burlatsky songs, "" Among the main rebels was Zarubin (aka Chika), from the very beginning of the rebellion, an associate and tutor of Pugachev. He was called a field marshal, and was the first in the impostor ... The retired artillery corporal enjoyed the full power of attorney of the impostor. He, together with Padurov, was in charge of writing for the illiterate Pugachev, and maintained strict order and obedience in the gangs of rebels ... The robber Khlopusha, branded by the hand of the executioner, with his nostrils torn out to the cartilage, was one of Pugachev's favorites. Ashamed of his ugliness, he wore a net on his face, or covered himself with a sleeve, as if protecting himself from the frost. These are the people who shook the state!” (III, 28).

These same Yaik Cossacks were very zealous about the favorites of the impostor. For example, at the beginning of the rebellion, Pugachev brought Sergeant Karmitsky closer to him, whom he took as a clerk. The Cossacks, when taking another fortress, drowned him, and when asked by Pugachev about him, they said that he had simply fled. Another example: after the capture of the Nizhne-Ozerskaya fortress, Major Kharlov was hanged, the bandit liked his young widow, and he took her to him. He became attached to her, fulfilled her desires. She alarmed the jealous villains, and Pugachev was forced to give Kharlova and her brother to them to be torn to pieces. They were shot.

It is not surprising that Pushkin mentions Pugachev's accomplices in The Captain's Daughter. In the chapter “Rebellious Sloboda”, he emphasizes that his accomplices do not want to leave Pugachev alone with Grinev, assuming friendly relations between them.

“Speak boldly in front of them,” Pugachev told me, “I don’t hide anything from them” (XI, 347).

Thus, historical materials allow us to conclude that, in fact, Pugachev was not autocratic to a certain extent, while Pugachev, a literary hero, seems to us to be powerful and independent.

In the environment of Pugachev, it was customary to assign the names of the elite of the Catherine's time to distinguished robbers. In "History ..." Chika was called a field marshal, but here is what mention of this is found on the pages of "The Captain's Daughter":

“My field marshal, it seems, is talking business,” “Listen, field marshal,” and this is how for the second time he turns to the quarreling Beloborodov and Khlopusha: “Gentlemen generals,” Pugachev proclaimed importantly. - “It’s enough for you to quarrel” (VI, 350).

But Pugachev conferred "titles" not only on robbers. Here is what material is available in the footnote to chapter 3 of “History…”:

“It seems that Pugachev and his accomplices did not consider this parody important. They also jokingly called the Berdskaya Sloboda - Moscow, the village of Kargale - Petersburg, and the Sakmarskaya town - Kyiv ”(102).

We know that Pugachev went with his gang from the Kirghiz-Kaisak lands, committing robberies and violence. The Orenburg fortress was the last in the chain of the Sakmara line, and it had more time to prepare for the attack of the robbers. This fortress was stronger and larger than others. She was an outpost of the state in the confrontation with the rebels, so it was so important for Pugachev to subdue her. All the events described in The Captain's Daughter take place during the siege of Orenburg. At this time, Pugachev settled down in the Berdskaya Sloboda. Here is how “History…” describes it:

“The autumn cold came earlier than usual. Since October 14, frosts have already begun; Snow fell on the 16th. On the 18th, Pugachev, having set fire to his camp, with all his burdens went back from Yaik to Sakmara and camped under the Berdskaya Sloboda, near the summer Sakmara gorge, seven versts from Orenburg. From then on, his patrols did not cease to disturb the city, attack foragers and keep the garrison in constant fear” (III, 25).

Berdskaya Sloboda was located on the Sakmara River. It was surrounded by strongholds and slingshots, there were batteries in the corners. There were up to two hundred households in it. Having settled here, Pugachev turned it into a place of murder and debauchery. Almost all the time while the siege of Orenburg lasted, the bandits were on its territory. Therefore, it is not surprising that a lot is said about her both in “History ...” and in “The Captain's Daughter”, and in the latter an entire chapter is named after her. This rebellious settlement was the meeting place of Pugachev and Grinev.
Seeing that Orenburg was strong, Pugachev decided to starve him out. The fact that Orenburg was in a difficult situation can be read not only in the “History ...”:

“The situation in Orenburg was becoming terrible. Flour and cereals were taken away from the inhabitants, and they began to distribute them daily. Horses have long been fed brushwood” (IV, 37),

But also in The Captain's Daughter:

“All the fugitives agree that there is famine and pestilence in Orenburg, that carrion is eaten there ...” (XI, 349).

Perhaps luck would have continued to accompany the impostor if the pacification of the rebels had not been entrusted to A.I. Bibikov. General-in-chief Bibikov, thanks to his military experience and knowledge of this matter, was able to free the dying Orenburg. General Freiman, Major Kharin, Major General Mansurov, Prince Golitsin, Lieutenant Colonel Grinev served under him ... Lieutenant Colonel Grinev and Pyotr Grinev, the hero of the story "The Captain's Daughter", are not the same person. In the missing chapter from The Captain's Daughter, which tells about the adventures of our protagonist, the names have been changed. The name of Grinev is in the name of Bulanin, and the name of Zurin is in the name of Grinev. This chapter was not included in the final version of The Captain's Daughter and is retained in a draft manuscript called The Missing Chapter. This chapter differs in the manner of writing from the rest, and it is also more like a pure statement of facts than a narrative. At first, A.S. Pushkin wanted to include it in the novel, but then he changed his mind, as confusion could have occurred in the minds of readers, and simply the whole novel would have turned into a second "History ...".
After a series of defeats, Pugachev, pursued by Mikhelson and Kharin, was forced to flee across the Volga, where his arrival led the people into confusion. Here are quotes about it:
"Story…":

“The entire western side of the Volga rebelled and turned over to the impostor” (VIII, 68),

"Captain's daughter":

“We were approaching the banks of the Volga; Our regiment entered the village** and stopped there for the night. The headman announced to me that on the other side all the villages had rebelled, the Pugachev gangs were roaming everywhere” (“Missed Chapter”, 375).

But, despite temporary luck, Pugachev's affairs went from bad to worse. Pursued by the troops, the impostor was wounded, many were taken prisoner, the bandits began to think about extraditing Pugachev to the government. The main defeat of Pugachev in "The Captain's Daughter" is said very briefly:

“Pugachev fled, pursued by Ivan Ivanovich Mikhelson. We soon learned of its complete destruction” (XIII, 364).

In the “History ...” a lot and in detail is written about this:

“Pugachev stood on a height, between two roads. Michelson went around him at night and stood up against the rebels. In the morning, Pugachev again saw his formidable persecutor ... The battle did not last long. Several cannon shots upset the rebels. Michelson hit them. They fled, abandoning their guns and the entire convoy ... This defeat was the last and decisive” (VIII, 75).

But Pugachev was not captured:

“Pugachev wanted to go to the Caspian Sea, hoping to somehow get into the Kirghiz-Kaisak steppes” (VIII, 76.

The Cossacks decided to surrender their leader to the government. Here is how it is described in “History…”:

“Pugachev sat alone in thought. His weapon hung to one side. Hearing the Cossacks entering, he raised his head and asked what they needed. They began to talk about their desperate situation, and meanwhile, moving quietly, tried to block him from the hanging weapons. Pugachev began again to persuade him to go to Guryev town. The Cossacks answered that they had been following him for a long time and that it was time for him to follow them” (VIII, 76).

So they betrayed their colleague. Having tied him up, they went to the Yaitsky town, where, upon arrival, under the supervision of Suvorov, they were transported to Moscow.
The execution of Pugachev is just as sparingly and reservedly described in The Captain's Daughter by the author. Not a word was said either about the repentance of the rebel, or about his quartering. What really happened is only mentioned in the “History…”.

“The sleigh stopped against the porch of the execution place. Pugachev and his favorite Perfilyev, accompanied by a confessor and two officials, had barely ascended the scaffold when an imperative word was heard: on guard, and one of the officials began to read the manifesto. When the reader pronounces the name and nickname of the main villain, as well as the village where he was born, the chief police chief asked him loudly: are you a Don Cossack, Emelka Pugachev - He answered just as loudly: so, sovereign, I am a Don Cossack, Zimovets village, Emelka Pugachev. Then, during the entire continuation of the manifesto, he, looking at the cathedral, was often baptized ... After reading the manifesto, the confessor said a few words to them, blessed them and left the scaffold. The reader of the manifesto followed him. Then Pugachev, having made a few prostrations with the sign of the cross, turned to the cathedrals, then with a hurried look began to say goodbye to the people; bowed in all directions, saying in a broken voice: forgive me, Orthodox people; let go, in which I was rude before you ... forgive me, Orthodox people! At this word, the executor gave a sign: the executioners rushed to undress him; plucked a white sheepskin coat; they began to tear the sleeves of a silk crimson semi-caftan. Then he clasped his hands, fell back, and in an instant his bloodied head was already hanging in the air...
The executioner had a secret command to reduce the torment of the criminals. The corpse's arms and legs were cut off, the executioners carried them to the four corners of the scaffold, they showed the head later and stuck it on a high stake” (VIII, 79).

“Thus ended the rebellion, started by a handful of disobedient Cossacks, which intensified due to the inexcusable negligence of the authorities, and shook the state from Siberia to Moscow, and from the Kuban to the Murom forests. For a long time perfect calm was not established. Panin and Suvorov whole year remained in the pacified provinces, asserting a weakened government in them, renewing cities and fortresses, and eradicating the last branches of the suppressed rebellion. At the end of 1775, a general forgiveness was promulgated, and the whole matter was ordered to be consigned to eternal oblivion. Catherine, wishing to destroy the memory of a terrible era, destroyed the ancient name of the river, whose banks were the first witnesses of disturbances. The Yaitsky Cossacks were renamed into the Ural Cossacks, and their town was called by the same name. But the name of the terrible rebel rumbles even in the regions where he raged. The people vividly remember the bloody time, which - so expressively - he called Pugachevism" (VIII, 80).

This is how Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin ends his “History of the Pugachev Rebellion”.

Conclusion.

After studying this material, it becomes clear that Pushkin did not take the position of either side. Seeing the split of society into two opposing forces, he realized that the reason for such a split lies not in someone's evil will, not in the low moral properties of one side or another, but in deep social processes that do not depend on the will or intentions of people. Therefore, a one-sided didactic approach to history is deeply alien to Pushkin. He sees in the warring parties not representatives of order and anarchy, not fighters for a "natural" contractual society and violators of primordial human rights. He sees that each side has its own, historically and socially justified "truth", which excludes the possibility for it to understand the reasons of the opposite camp. Moreover, both the nobles and the peasants have their own concept of legitimate power and their own bearers of this power, whom each side considers legitimate with the same reasons.
Pushkin clearly sees that, although " peasant king"borrows external signs of power from the nobility of the state, its content is different. Peasant power is more patriarchal, more directly connected with the ruled masses, devoid of bureaucrats and colored in tones of family democracy.
The realization that social reconciliation of the parties is impossible, that in the tragic struggle both sides have their own class truth, revealed to Pushkin in a new way the question that had long worried him about cruelty as an inevitable companion of social struggle.
The Captain's Daughter, one of Pushkin's most perfect and profound creations, has repeatedly been the subject of research attention.
By the time it was created, Pushkin's position had changed: the idea of ​​the cruelty of the peasants was replaced by the idea of ​​the fatal and inevitable bitterness of both warring parties. He began to carefully record the massacres perpetrated by supporters of the government. In "Remarks on rebellion" he gave a lot of examples that did not speak in favor of the latter.
Pushkin was faced with a phenomenon that struck him: the extreme cruelty of both warring parties often resulted not from the bloodthirstiness of one or another person, but from a clash of irreconcilable social concepts.

For Pushkin in The Captain's Daughter, the correct path is not to move from one camp of modernity to another, but to rise above the "cruel age", while retaining humanity, human dignity and respect for the living lives of others. This for him is the true path to the people.

Literature

1.Pushkin " complete collection works” volume 8-9, 16. M., Resurrection, 1995
2. Yu.M. Lotman “Pushkin”, St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, 1997
3. A.S. Pushkin, collection op. in 3 volumes, M., “Thin. literature”, 1985.
4. P.V. Annenkov. Materials for the biography of Pushkin. M. 1984.
5. TSB, M., 2000.
6. Yu.G. Osman. “From the “Captain’s Daughter” by A.S. Pushkin to "Notes of a Hunter" by I.S. Turgenev".
7. G.A. Gukovsky. Pushkin and the problem of realistic style.

"History of the Pugachev rebellion" and the novel "The Captain's Daughter" are dedicated to the same event - the Pugachev uprising, but these two works are very different from each other.

"History of the Pugachev rebellion" is a documentary work based on accurate data. The author examines in detail the appearance of Pugachev in the Ural steppes, the development of the movement of the rebels, his exact route. The information from the documents is presented accurately, dryly, without emotions. Pushkin also tells about the capture and execution of Pugachev. The novel "The Captain's Daughter" is written differently. It has history at the center of the story. fictional characters: Grineva, Shvabrina, Masha Mironova. But their personal events take place against the backdrop of historical events, to which neither the author nor the characters remain indifferent.

The meeting of Grinev and Pugachev happens by chance, during a snowstorm in the steppe. Pugachev traveled a lot, and such a meeting of heroes would be quite possible. But the portrait of the hero in the "History ..." and in the novel is completely different. The “History of the Pugachev Revolt” gives a standard verbal portrait: “forty years old, medium height, swarthy and thin; his hair was dark blond, his beard was black, small and wedge-shaped. And in the novel, the portrait of the hero is psychological, that is, it is possible to determine the character of the hero from it: “He was about forty years old, medium height, thin and broad-shouldered ... big eyes so they ran. His face had a rather pleasant, but roguish expression. Intelligence and cunning are visible in this portrait, in contrast to the documentary presentation.

The author also artistically plays with various details in the novel. Pugachev wandered a lot, inciting the Cossacks to revolt. Pushkin depicts an allegorical conversation with the owner of the inn, which deals with this preparation. It is known that Pugachev was illiterate. This is also depicted by Pushkin in the comical scene of filing a petition with Savelich. Pugachev turns the paper over in his hands “with a look of importance” and gives it to his “secretary”: “Why are you writing so cleverly? Our bright eyes cannot make out anything here. Finally, the author shows the character of Pugachev in the most different situations: during the capture of the fortress, at a feast with his "generals", in a conversation with Grinev and Shvabrin.

Everywhere Pugachev is shown as a living person, sometimes cruel, sometimes noble, sometimes an adventurer. And the author does not remain a dispassionate observer. Through the eyes of Grinev, he shows the devastation of Russian villages after the riot, the death of people, their suffering, and, as if on his behalf, says: “God forbid to see a Russian rebellion, senseless and merciless!” In emotionality author's position and there is the main difference between the novel and the "History of the Pugachev rebellion", a documentary work.

A. S. Pushkin collected historical material about Emelyan Pugachev for a long time. He was worried about the biggest question in Russian history popular uprising. In "The Captain's Daughter" historical material the fate of Russia and the Russian people is clarified. The work is distinguished by a deep philosophical, historical and moral content.
The main storyline of the novel is, of course, the uprising of Emelyan Pugachev. The rather peaceful course of the author's narrative in the first chapters is suddenly interrupted. The fate of the main characters is no longer determined by the love and will of the parents, but by a much more terrible force, whose name is "Pugachevism". The Pugachev rebellion is the most terrible and widest rebellion in the history of the Russian people. A. S. Pushkin immerses us in a special atmosphere that reigned then in our country.
At first, the image of the rebellious people arises very vaguely - only from fragments of conversations. However, events are developing quite rapidly. Very soon, what was only guesses, hints, events distant in time, suddenly arises clearly and clearly when Captain Mironov receives a letter about the beginning of the riot.
The people at that Time of Troubles he was agitated, murmured, but this murmuring could not find an outlet. It was during this period that Pugachev appeared, posing as the emperor Peter III. He was in the right place at the right time. Being endowed by nature with the qualities of a leader, Pugachev managed to lead huge masses of the people.
Pushkin very vividly describes the entry of Pugachev into the city after the capture of the Belogorsk fortress. People with bread and salt went out to meet Pugachev, bowed to the ground, bells rang. The leader of the rebels was greeted like a real emperor. Then the author describes the scene of the massacre with two old honored officers and the defenseless Vasilisa Yegorovna. The people do not condemn this murder. Although neither the Mironovs nor Ivan Ignatovich are to blame for anything, although they were known, appreciated and respected by many, no one showed them a drop of sympathy or compassion in last minute, no one regretted them. They were forgotten about immediately, rushing after Pugachev. The people accepted the massacre of the Mironovs as a legitimate and necessary measure. This event with particular force emphasizes the cruelty and ruthlessness of the uprising.
This is followed by a scene of drinking Pugachev with his comrades, in which Grinev is present. In this scene, the author affirms a very important idea: among the rebels there are strong relationships, camaraderie, they are united by a common goal and self-confidence.
Subsequently, Grinev will again witness the interpersonal relations of the rebels when he is present at the “council”, in which Pugachev, Beloborodov and the fugitive convict Khlopusha took part. Pugachev here manifests himself as a decisive and principled person, a defender of the people, Khlopusha - as an intelligent, prudent and far-sighted politician, not without peculiar ideas of honesty (he always "destroyed the opponent" only in an open duel). Beloborodov, on the other hand, shows himself to be an ardent opponent of the nobility, he proposes to execute all people noble origin that fell into their hands, regardless of the personal qualities of the nobles.
Creating images of the three leaders of the uprising, Pushkin showed them as bright personalities with their individual traits. But they are all united by a common understanding of what justice is.
The tragedy of Pugachev's fate and the doom of the uprising are emphasized in the chapter where Pugachev talks about his intention to march on Moscow. He confesses to Grinev that he is afraid of his people, since they can betray him at any moment. This is important for understanding Pushkin's idea: Pugachev sees the hopelessness of the struggle, but does not consider it meaningless. In Pugachev clearly manifested folk character, because he is the spokesman for the aspirations and hopes of the people.
Even if the rebellion is doomed to defeat, it is natural and cannot be avoided, because the truth of history is on the side free man. A freedom-loving people must fight for their rights. A. S. Pushkin not only does not condemn the rebels, but also admires them, emphasizing the poetry of the rebellion. However, it is important to remember that with all this the author is quite realistic. He does not hide dark sides rebellion: petty robberies, the possibility of betrayal in the ranks of the rebels, cruel reprisals, the senselessness of some acts, such as the murder of Vasilisa Yegorovna.
So, A. S. Pushkin, calling the rebellion "senseless and merciless", nevertheless understands it great value. He, perfectly realizing the role of the people in history, revealed it to his readers as well. This novel is one of the best works of art not only about the Pugachev uprising, but also about the Russian national character.