His biographical data is not known for certain, as are the circumstances of the campaign he led in Siberia. They serve as material for many mutually exclusive hypotheses, however, there are generally recognized facts of Yermak's biography, and such moments of the Siberian campaign, about which most researchers do not have fundamental differences. The history of the Siberian campaign of Yermak was studied by prominent pre-revolutionary scientists N.M. Karamzin, S.M. Solovyov, N.I. Kostomarov, S.F. Platonov. The main source on the history of the conquest of Siberia by Yermak are the Siberian Chronicles (Stroganovskaya, Esipovskaya, Pogodinskaya, Kungurskaya and some others), carefully studied in the works of G.F. Miller, P.I. Nebolsina, A.V. Oksenova, P.M. Golovacheva S.V. Bakhrushina, A.A. Vvedensky and other prominent scientists.

The question of the origin of Yermak is controversial. Some researchers deduce Yermak from the Permian patrimonies of the Stroganov salt industrialists, others from the Totemsky district. G.E. Katanaev suggested that in the early 80s. In the 16th century, three Yermaks acted simultaneously. However, these versions look unreliable. At the same time, Ermak's patronymic is precisely known - Timofeevich, "Ermak" can be a nickname, an abbreviation, or a distortion of such Christian names as Yermolai, Yermil, Yeremey, etc., and maybe an independent pagan name.

There is very little evidence of Yermak's life before the Siberian campaign. Yermak was also credited with participation in the Livonian War, robbery and robbery of royal and merchant ships passing along the Volga, but there was no reliable evidence of this either.

The beginning of Yermak's campaign in Siberia is also the subject of numerous disputes among historians, which is mainly around two dates - September 1, 1581 and 1582. Supporters of the beginning of the campaign in 1581 were S.V. Bakhrushin, A.I. Andreev, A.A. Vvedensky, in 1582 - N.I. Kostomarov, N.V. Shlyakov, G.E. Katanaev. The most reasonable date is considered to be September 1, 1581.

Scheme of the Siberian campaign of Yermak. 1581 - 1585

A completely different point of view was expressed by V.I. Sergeev, according to whom, Yermak went on a campaign already in September 1578. First, he went down the river on plows. Kame, climbed along its tributary. Sylva, then returned and wintered near the mouth of the river. Chusovoy. Swimming on the river Sylva and wintering on the river. Chusovaya were a kind of training, which made it possible for the ataman to rally and test the squad, accustom it to actions in new, difficult conditions for the Cossacks.

Russian people tried to conquer Siberia long before Yermak. So in 1483 and 1499. Ivan III sent military expeditions there, but the harsh land remained unexplored. The territory of Siberia in the 16th century was vast, but at the same time sparsely populated. The main occupations of the population were cattle breeding, hunting, and fishing. In some places, along the banks of the rivers, the first centers of agriculture appeared. The state with its center in Isker (Kashlyk - called differently in different sources) united several indigenous peoples of Siberia: Samoyeds, Ostyaks, Voguls, and all of them were ruled by the "fragments" of the Golden Horde. Khan Kuchum, from the Sheibanid clan, descended from Genghis Khan himself, seized the Siberian throne in 1563 and set a course to oust the Russians from the Urals.

In the 60-70s. In the 16th century, merchants, industrialists and landowners Stroganovs received possessions in the Urals from Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible, they were also granted the right to hire military people in order to prevent Kuchum raids. The Stroganovs invited a detachment of free Cossacks led by Ermak Timofeevich. In the late 70s - early 80s. In the 16th century, the Cossacks went up the Volga to the Kama, where they were met by the Stroganovs in Keredin (Orel-Gorodok). The number of Yermak's squad, which arrived at the Stroganovs, was 540 people.

Yermak's campaign. Artist K. Lebedev. 1907

Before setting out on a campaign, the Stroganovs provided Yermak and his warriors with everything they needed, from gunpowder to flour. Stroganov stores were the basis of the material base of the Yermak squad. The Stroganovs' people were also dressed up for the campaign to the Cossack ataman. The squad was divided into five regiments, led by elected captains. The regiment was divided into hundreds, those, in turn, into fifty and tens. The squad had regimental clerks, trumpeters, surnachs, timpani and drummers. There were also three priests and a fugitive monk who performed liturgical rites.

The strictest discipline reigned in Yermak's army. By his order, they made sure that no one “brought on himself the wrath of God by fornication or other sinful deeds”, whoever violated this rule was put “in iron” for three days. In Yermak's squad, following the example of the Don Cossacks, severe punishments were imposed for disobedience to superiors and escape.

Having gone on a campaign, the Cossacks along the river. Chusovaya and Serebryanka overcame the path to the Ural Range, further from the river. Serebryanki to the river. Tagil went on foot through the mountains. Yermak's crossing of the Ural Range was not easy. Each plow could lift up to 20 people with a load. Plows of greater carrying capacity on small mountain rivers could not be used.

Yermak's offensive on the river. The tour forced Kuchum to gather his forces as much as possible. Chronicles do not give an exact answer to the question of the number of troops, they only report on the "great host of the enemy." A.A. Vvedensky wrote that the total number of subjects of the Siberian Khan was approximately 30,700 people. Having mobilized all the men capable of wearing, Kuchum could put up more than 10-15 thousand soldiers. Thus, he had a multiple numerical superiority.

Simultaneously with the collection of troops, Kuchum ordered to strengthen the capital of the Siberian Khanate Isker. The main forces of the Kuchumov cavalry under the command of his nephew Prince Mametkul were advanced towards Yermak, whose flotilla by August 1582, and according to some researchers, no later than the summer of 1581, reached the confluence of the river. Tours in the river. Tobol. An attempt to detain the Cossacks near the mouth of the river. Tours failed. Cossack planes entered the river. Tobol and began to descend along its course. Several times Yermak had to land on the shore and attack the Kuchum people. Then there was a major bloody battle near the Babasanovsky Yurts.

Yermak's advance along the Siberian rivers. Drawing and text for "Siberian History" by S. Remezov. 1689

Fights on the river Tobol showed the advantages of Ermak's tactics over the tactics of the enemy. The basis of this tactic was a fire strike and combat on foot. Volleys of Cossack squeakers inflicted significant damage on the enemy. However, the importance of firearms should not be exaggerated. From the squeaker of the end of the 16th century, one shot could be fired in 2-3 minutes. Kuchumlyans basically did not have firearms in service, but they were familiar with them. However, fighting on foot was Kuchum's weak point. Engaging in a fight with the crowd, in the absence of any battle formations, the Kuchumovites suffered defeat after defeat, despite a significant superiority in manpower. Thus, Yermak's successes were achieved by a combination of squeaker fire and hand-to-hand combat using edged weapons.

After Yermak left the river. Tobol and began to rise up the river. Tavda, which, according to some researchers, was done in order to break away from the enemy, respite, and search for allies before the decisive battle for Isker. Climbing up the river Tavda approximately 150-200 miles, Yermak made a stop and returned to the river. Tobol. On the way to Isker were taken gg. Karachin and Atik. Having entrenched himself in the city of Karachin, Yermak found himself on the direct approaches to the capital of the Siberian Khanate.

Before the assault on the capital, Yermak, according to chronicle sources, gathered a circle where the probable outcome of the upcoming battle was discussed. Supporters of the retreat pointed to the many Kuchumians and the small number of Russians, but Yermak's opinion was that it was necessary to take Isker. In his decision he was firm and supported by many of his associates. In October 1582, Yermak launched an assault on the fortifications of the Siberian capital. The first assault failed, around October 23, Yermak struck again, but the Kuchumites repelled the assault and made a sortie, which turned out to be disastrous for them. The battle under the walls of Isker once again showed the advantages of the Russians in hand-to-hand combat. The Khan's army was defeated, Kuchum fled the capital. On October 26, 1582, Yermak entered the city with his retinue. The capture of Isker was the pinnacle of Yermak's success. The indigenous Siberian peoples expressed their readiness for an alliance with the Russians.

The conquest of Siberia by Yermak. Artist V. Surikov. 1895

After the capture of the capital of the Siberian Khanate, Yermak's main opponent remained Prince Mametkul, who, having a good cavalry, made raids on small Cossack detachments, which constantly disturbed Yermak's squad. In November-December 1582, the prince exterminated a detachment of Cossacks who went out to fish. Ermak struck back, Mametkul fled, but three months later reappeared in the vicinity of Isker. In February 1583, Yermak was informed that the prince's camp was set up on the river. Vagay is 100 miles from the capital. The chieftain immediately sent Cossacks there, who attacked the army and captured the prince.

In the spring of 1583, the Cossacks made several campaigns along the Irtysh and its tributaries. The farthest was the hike to the mouth of the river. Cossacks on plows reached the city of Nazim - a fortified town on the river. Ob, and they took him. The battle near the city of Nazim was one of the bloodiest.

Losses in the battles forced Yermak to send messengers for reinforcements. As proof of the fruitfulness of his actions during the Siberian campaign, Yermak sent Ivan IV a captive prince and furs.

The winter and summer of 1584 passed without major battles. Kuchum did not show activity, as it was restless inside the horde. Yermak took care of his army and waited for reinforcements. Reinforcements came in the fall of 1584. They were 500 warriors sent from Moscow under the command of the governor S. Bolkhovsky, not supplied with either ammunition or food. Yermak was placed in plight, because with difficulty prepared the necessary supplies for his people. Famine began in Isker. People were dying, and S. Bolkhovsky himself died. The situation was somewhat improved by the local residents, who supplied the Cossacks with food from their stocks.

Chronicles do not give the exact number of losses of Yermak's troops, however, according to some sources, by the time of the death of the ataman, 150 people remained in his squad. Ermak's position was also complicated by the fact that in the spring of 1585 Isker was surrounded by enemy cavalry. However, the blockade was lifted thanks to Yermak's decisive blow to the enemy's headquarters. The elimination of Isker's encirclement was the last military feat of the Cossack ataman. Ermak Timofeevich died in the waters of the river. Irtysh during a campaign against Kuchum's troops that appeared nearby on August 6, 1585

Summing up, it should be noted that the tactics of the Yermak squad were based on the rich military experience of the Cossacks, accumulated over many decades. Hand-to-hand combat, marksmanship, solid defense, maneuverability of the squad, use of the terrain - the most character traits Russian military art of the 16th - 17th centuries. To this, of course, should be added the ability of Ataman Yermak to maintain strict discipline within the squad. These skills and tactical skills to the greatest extent contributed to the conquest of the rich Siberian expanses by Russian soldiers. After the death of Yermak, governors in Siberia, as a rule, continued to adhere to his tactics.

Monument to Ermak Timofeevich in Novocherkassk. Sculptor V. Beklemishev. Opened 6 May 1904

The annexation of Siberia was of great political and economic importance. Up until the 80s. In the 16th century, the “Siberian theme” was practically not touched upon in diplomatic documents. However, as Ivan IV received news of the results of Yermak's campaign, it took a firm place in diplomatic documentation. Already by 1584, the documents contain a detailed description of relations with the Siberian Khanate, which includes a summary of the main events - military operations of the ataman Yermak's squad against Kuchum's army.

In the mid 80s. In the 16th century, the colonization flows of the Russian peasantry gradually moved to explore the vast expanses of Siberia, and the Tyumen and Tobolsk prisons erected in 1586 and 1587 were not only important strongholds for the fight against the Kuchumians, but also the basis of the first settlements of Russian plowmen. The governors sent by the Russian tsars to the Siberian region, harsh in all respects, could not cope with the remnants of the horde and achieve the conquest of this fertile and politically important region for Russia. However, thanks to the military art of the Cossack ataman Yermak Timofeevich, already in the 90s. XVI century Western Siberia was included in Russia.

Russian history: myths and facts [From the birth of the Slavs to the conquest of Siberia] Reznikov Kirill Yurievich

8.3. Sources about the "Siberian capture"

Early chronicles about the Siberian campaign of Yermak. Almost 40 years after the death of Yermak (1585) in the Russian chronicles did not appear any detailed description the capture of the Siberian kingdom by the Cossacks. Early entries were limited to a few lines, as in the Vychegda-Vym chronicle: “The same summer, Maxim and Grigory Stroganovs shelled Cossack vatamans and with them hunting people to fight the Siberian land and the Cossacks who marched for a single year fought the entire Siberian,” or they described the events extremely inaccurately, as in the Piskarevsky Chronicler, where Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich sends Cossacks to Siberia, and Yermak conquers the cities founded after his death. Such ignorance can be explained by the fact that the chroniclers had no time for Siberia.

From 1600, the Time of Troubles began, formally ending with the election of Mikhail Romanov to the throne (February 21, 1613), but in essence, it continued until the conclusion of a truce with the Poles in 1618. With the exchange of prisoners, Metropolitan Filaret, the father of young Mikhail, arrived in Moscow. In 1619 Filaret was consecrated Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia. Very soon, Filaret remembered Siberia, which, despite oblivion, was being settled and settled, and decided to create a Siberian diocese. He chose the Archimandrite of the Khutyn Monastery Cyprian as the Archbishop of Siberia.

"Synodik to the Ermakov Cossacks" and the chronicle of Savva Esipov. In June of the summer of 7129 (1621), Archbishop Cyprian arrived in Tobolsk and took possession of the Siberian diocese. Soon he saw that rich Siberia was suffering from spiritual poverty: the newly built churches were not consecrated, and the consecrated ones stand without singing, for there are no priests. Without pastors, few pagans acquire the Faith of Christ, and the newly enlightened cannot establish themselves in Christianity. Russian settlers - Cossacks and other service people - are worse than pagans. For the lack of Orthodox women, they sinned greatly: they kidnapped the daughters and wives of the pagans, lived with the Tatars as with wives, took away other people's wives by force and lost them to each other, abandoned their wives and took others. They even married blood relatives. And the shepherds looked at everything through their fingers and made illegal marriages.

The "good shepherd" mourned and hoped to correct the flock. He was an "enlightened and zealous man, a teacher teaching by his own example." Cyprian took up the eradication of vices: he improved morality among Christians, he converted many Mohammedans and pagans to Christ; built prayer houses, churches, monasteries, built a bishop's house and a wooden cathedral, in imitation of Novgorod called Sophia. In matters of faith and enlightenment, he was assisted by the monks who arrived with him in Siberia. Cyprian's thought went further: he planned to glorify the new diocese by canonizing local ascetics. Here the archbishop simply could not pass by Yermak and the history of the capture of Siberia.

Cyprian very soon realized how popular Yermak was in Siberia. Yermak was revered by both Cossacks and Tatars. They composed songs about him, told about the miracles that happened during his campaign. The archbishop set out to involve the memory of Yermak and his associates in the cause of glorifying Orthodoxy in Siberia. During the second summer of his stay in Tobolsk, he decided to draw up a synodik for the “killed” participants in the campaign: “Command to ask the Yermakov Cossacks how they came to Siberia, and where there were fights with the filthy ones, and where they killed the filthy ones in a fight. The Cossacks, having brought to him a writing, how they came to Siberia, and where they had battles with filthy ones, and where the Cossacks and what was their name were killed.

The writings of the Cossacks were collated and compiled "Synodik Ermakov Cossacks" (1622) - a brief synopsis of Yermak's campaign. The text of the Synodica is preserved in the Esipov Chronicle. At the same time, they also compiled a short annalistic “The Tale of the Siberian Capture” (“On the Capture of the Siberian Land as a Pious Sovereign Tsar and Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich of All Russia, God gave the Siberian state ...”). The text of the "Tale" in its original form has not been preserved, but has come down to us in the "Esipov Chronicle". The names of Yermak and the dead Cossacks were recorded in the cathedral synodion of Tobolsk Sophia, and Cyprian "commanded the names of the slain" every year on the week of Orthodoxy to the protodeacon "to openly call eternal memory." "Synodik" and "The Tale" were used in the "Esipov Chronicle" and in the "Stroganov Chronicle".

"Sinodic" retained the features of the Cossack writing. The conquest of Siberia is shown as the work of Yermak, who decided on this feat at the behest of God. The Synodica says: “... not from glorious men, nor from the royal command of the governor ... but from ordinary people, God chose and arm with glory and fighting and wavering Ataman Yermak Timofeev, the son of Povolsky, and bravely brave with a like-minded and kindly retinue." "Synodik" also contains a chronology of the capture of Siberia. It must be said that the chronology of Yermak's campaign is still the subject of discussion. In most chronicles, the same events coincide in days and months, but differ in years. How this happened can be understood if we turn to the Cossacks interviewed at the bishop's court.

Ermakov's Cossacks were a strong tribe: of the 90 Cossacks who survived the death of the ataman, many lived to a ripe old age. Most settled in Siberian cities, but their situation varied. Some, like Gavrila Ilyin, Ivan Gavrilov and Ivan Alexandrov, nicknamed Cherkas, the youngest and most competent ataman of the village of Yermak, served as centurions. Others - crippled and "who became impoverished with their eyes" - had no means of subsistence and sought refuge in a monastery. Cyprian forced the governor to write to Moscow a petition for the establishment of an almshouse for the Yermakovites, and the old people received shelter and food. When interviewing the Cossacks, it turned out that they remember many events vaguely and disputes arose between them more than once. Especially fiercely argued where the captain Bryazga died. The monks had to enter Bryazga twice in the Synodik.

Worst of all was with the reckoning of years. The Cossacks were not friends with the calendar, but they remembered the time according to events - the main ones were the “Siberian capture” and the death of atamans. When asked about the first year of the campaign, the Cossacks answered that they had been serving in Siberia for 40 years since the “Siberian capture”. Having counted 40 years from the arrival of Cyprian in Tobolsk in June 7129 (1621), the chronicler received that the “Siberian capture” took place in 7089, which, according to the modern calendar, corresponds to the period from September 1, 1580 to August 31, 1581. Much better, the Cossacks remembered the months (and even days) of events, timing them to the holy calendar. So, the battle near Chuvashov, where the Cossacks defeated Kuchum, and their entry into Kashlyk took place on the day of the great martyr Dmitry Solu (Selunsky), that is, October 26th.

In substantiating the reason for the "Siberian capture", Esipov followed the "Cyprian Code" ("Tales and Synodicus"). Yermak and his retinue are the instrument of the Lord, who turned His face away from the pagan kingdom: “God sent to cleanse the holy place [n] and defeat the Busorman king Kuchum and devastate the gods of the Mers and their unholy temples, but also the fire of the beast and the installation of the Sirin. God has chosen not from glorious men, the royal orders of the governor, and arm the ataman Ermak Timofeev's son and 540 people with him with glory and strife. Having subjugated many "tongues", Kuchum "exalted himself with thought", but "the Lord opposes the proud, gives grace to the humble." Yermak, on the other hand, is humble - "not from glorious husbands" - and decides everything "with comrades, trusting in God."

Esipov's chronology is more detailed than in Synodika. In the summer of 7089 (1580), the Cossacks came to Siberia, “in the month of October on the 23rd day” a battle took place between the Cossacks and the Tatars “near Chuvashev, on October 26, in memory of the Holy Great Martyr Dmitry Selunsky”, the Cossacks entered the city of Siberia, “on December in Day 5, the Tatars beat the Cossacks who were fishing on Lake Abalak. “The same summer, Yermak and his comrades sent an ataman and Cossacks to Moscow with a sounch” to inform the tsar about the capture of the Siberian kingdom. In the summer of 7091, Tsar Ivan Vasilievich sent his governor with military people to Siberia, but they died of starvation. Summer 7092 (1584), on August 5, Yermak, fleeing the Tatars who attacked at night, drowned in Vagai.

The Esipov Chronicle was used in writing later chronicles, in particular the Stroganov Chronicle and S.U. Remezov.

"The New Chronicler" and "The Stroganov Chronicle". The New Chronicler, the official chronicle of the Romanov dynasty, tells a different story about Yermak's campaign. Compiled in the 1630s, The New Chronicler opens with an article about the Siberian Capture. It says that the Cossacks robbed a lot along the Volga and other rivers - they smashed the sovereign's ships, the ambassadors of the "Kizilbash" and Bukharians, and many others, smashed and killed. Tsar Ivan, seeing their theft and evil disobedience, ordered the thieves to be seized and hanged; many were captured and executed, while others, like wolves, fled. Up the Volga, "six hundred people ran up, sent by Maxim Stroganov." At the head was the ataman, "recommended Yermak." Having reached Chusovaya, to the estate of the Stroganovs, the Cossacks asked the local inhabitants to which state that land belongs. They said that not far away there is the kingdom of Siberia, and Tsar Kuchum lives in it.

Yermak, taking the Cossacks and 50 local people, went up the Silver River. The Cossacks dragged the ships to Tagil and along the rivers reached the town where Kuchum roamed. And they fought with him for many days, and by the will of God they took the kingdom of Siberia. Ermak sent Cossacks with a seunch to the tsar in Moscow - Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich had passed away by that time - and he himself began to bring the Siberian land and many other states under the tsar's hand. Sovereign Fyodor Ioannovich granted seunches and sent them to Yermak and the chieftains with a great salary; and Yermak "ordered to write not as an ataman, but as a prince of Siberia." Meanwhile, Yermak received news that the Bukharians were coming, he, taking 150 Cossacks, went against them, but at night Kuchum attacked the Cossacks and killed everyone. The remaining Cossacks crossed "through the Stone" and came to Moscow. Tsar Fedor sent a governor with a new army to Siberia.

The New Chronicler has two important moments: firstly, the Cossacks are shown in it as "thieves" (according to the concepts of the 17th century), and secondly, the Cossacks, led by Yermak, fled to Chusovaya "by sending Maxim Stroganov." There is not a word about this in the Esipovskaya Chronicle: the clergy clearly did not want to make Cossack robbers and merchants Stroganovs an instrument of God's Providence. However, in the "New Chronicler" the idea of ​​conquering Siberia belongs to the Cossacks.

The Stroganovs provided them with supplies and gave them the opportunity to take 50 “eager people” with them. The version of the "New Chronicler" did not attract the attention of historians, although Skrynnikov came to a similar conclusion.

The Stroganovs themselves took up their rehabilitation. In the patrimonial patrimony of the Stroganovs, Salt Vychegodskaya, a chronicle "On the capture of the Siberian land ..." was compiled, better known as the "Stroganov Chronicle". There are different points of view about the time of its compilation (1630s and 1668-1673), the author is unknown, but the purpose of writing is obvious - to show the role of the Stroganovs in the conquest of the Siberian kingdom. The chronicle was created on the basis of the "Cyprian Code" and letters from the archives of the Stroganovs.

The Stroganov Chronicle begins with the history of grants by the sovereign Ivan Vasilievich to the industrialists and merchants Stroganov of possessions in the Perm land and a description of the Siberian raids on their possessions. For protection, the Stroganovs invite the Volga Cossacks:

“In the summer of 7087, April on the 6th day, I heard Bosiya Semyon, Maxim and Nikita Stroganovs from reliable people about the riot and courage of the Volga Cossacks and chieftains Yermak Timofeev with comrades, how on the Volga they beat Nagaitsov on the Volga and rob and beat Ardabazartsev. I., sending their people with writings and gifts by many to them, so that they would go to their estates in the Chusovskie towns and in the islands to help them against the unfaithful adversaries.

The Cossacks gathered a circle at the mouth of the Samara on a steep bank and began to think whether to go to help the Stroganovs. If you don’t help, then the tsar will “unwind” with the consequences colorfully described in the “Tolstoy list” of the chronicle: “And now we just won’t go to the aid of such honest people, and they will begin to write disobedience to Moscow against us ... and the sovereign the swindler tells us to take over and send us around the city and put us in prisons, and the sovereign tsar orders me, Yermak, to be hanged: because there is a great honor for a big man. If you go to the aid of the Stroganovs, “they will write merciful and favorable words about us to the sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich) of all Russia, and the sovereign tsar will be compassionate before us and will give us a fine of great guilt.”

Yermak was supported by Ataman Ivan Koltsov: “It is good for us to go to the aid of such honest people, but only the Lord God will have mercy on us and God will subdue the infidels under our feet, and we will take the Siberian state and set up a city and raise the holy churches of God and collect eternal glory and buy ourselves belly of the eternal and in the previous eyelids. Amen". It follows from the chronicle that the tsar can forgive the guilt of the Cossacks only through the intercession of the Stroganovs, helping the Stroganovs is a charitable deed, and the task of the Cossacks is to take the Siberian kingdom.

That same year, on the day of memory of the miracle workers Cyrus and John (July 11, 1579), the Cossacks sailed to the Chusovskie towns with joy and joy. Semyon, Maxim and Nikita Stroganov received them with honor "and gave them many gifts, and richly enjoyed their food and drink." Atamans and Cossacks stood against the unfaithful Agarians "violently and mercilessly", and in total they lived in the towns of the Stroganovs for two years and two months. In the summer of 1581, the insidious devil, from time immemorial hating the human race, encouraged the godless Vogul murza Begbeliya with the Vogul and Ostyak "assembly" to come stealthily near the Chusovskie towns. They burned villages and villages and took full, but "the good God did not allow the accursed to be arrogant." Soon, the Russians won a victory over them, godless, many were beaten, others were caught, and Murza Begbeliya was "taken alive." On September 1, 1581, the Stroganovs sent the Cossacks on a campaign against Kuchum:

“In the summer of 7090, September on the 1st day ... Semyon and Maxim, and Nikita Stroganovs sent ... to Siberia against the Siberian Saltan of atamans and Cossacks Ermak Timofeev with comrades, and with him gathered from the towns of their military and hunting all sorts of people: Lithuania and Tatars, and Russian violent and brave, kind warriors of 300 people, and let them go with them ... And the funeral service of prayer singing ... and satisfying them with bribes and robes, decorating them with fire weapons, cannons and quick-firing squeakers of seven-legged and stocks of many and with all of these you will vouchsafe them, and the leader, leading the Siberian path, and the interpreter of the Busurman language will give them and let them go to the Siberian land in peace.

Here, with the "Stroganov Chronicle" there was a chronological failure. In the hands of the chronicler was the royal letter of Stroganov dated November 16, 1582, written in connection with the complaint of the Cherdyn governor Vasily Pelepelitsyn, where he reported that on September 1 the Siberian Vogulichi besieged Cherdyn, and no help from the Stroganovs followed, because on that very day "Yermak and his comrades went to fight Vogulich." The chronicler did not dare to argue with the royal letter, and double dating appears in the chronicle. Not embarrassed, the chronicler continues the story: on September 9, 1581 (or 1582?), the Cossacks, having crossed the Stone, fearlessly came to the Siberian land, and on October 26 of the same year they captured the “city of Siberia”.

The exploits of the Cossacks in Siberia, their successes and sacrifices, coincide with the Esipov Chronicle, but a new motive appears. Ermak first writes about the victories of the Stroganovs. The Stroganovs wrote extensively to Moscow. And the sovereign-tsar granted the Stroganovs for their service and zeal with “big salt and little salt” and a letter with a red seal and ordered to trade duty-free. Then Ermak Timofeevich "with comrades" wrote to Moscow about the capture of the city of Siberia and the pacification of the Siberian lands. The sovereign granted the ambassadors of the Cossacks with money, and cloth, and "damask". And who are chieftains and Cossacks in Siberia, and so the sovereign sent his salary, and the governor let go with the service people to the "Siberian cities."

The sent people died of starvation during the winter. On the third summer after the capture of Siberia, Murza Karacha treacherously killed Ataman Ivan Koltsov. That same summer, on the fifth day of August, messengers came from Bukharian merchants who said that Kuchum did not let them through. Yermak went to the rescue and died along with his squad. The Cossacks who remained in the city, having learned that their initial chieftain "veleum Yermak" and his retinue were killed, wept bitterly for them. Ataman Matvey Meshcheryak and the Cossacks began to think about what to do next. Meshcheryak offered to leave the city and go to Russia, since such was the judgment of God: “And to those noble people, the Stroganovs, who sent us to this place and lent us all kinds of weapons and supplies, we will tell honestly about everything that happened, and they will write about everything to the sovereign - the tsar to Moscow, and about what the sovereign himself wishes.

And these words of Ataman Matvey Meshcheryak were to everyone's liking, and everyone went to Russia. ... As you can see, according to the chronicler, the faithful Cossacks remembered the Stroganovs even at the critical moment of Yermak's death and the collapse of their entire business. Here the Stroganov bard overdid it. But be that as it may, the "Stroganov Chronicle" enjoyed the full confidence of historians such as Karamzin and Solovyov, and entered the textbook descriptions of Yermak's campaign in Siberia.

Siberian History by Semyon Remezov. The author of the Siberian History, Semyon Ulyanovich Remezov (1642 - c. 1730) made a significant contribution to cultural development Siberia. A native of Tobolsk, the boyar son Remezov, following the example of his father and grandfather, he entered the sovereign's service and traveled all over Siberia. In the Siberian Prikaz, his artistic talent was appreciated and he was involved in the preparation of "drawings" (maps). Sent to Moscow, Remezov drew two drawings of Siberia there and learned the "structure of stone affairs." When he returned, he designed and built the Tobolsk Kremlin. Remezov created three remarkable collections of maps and drawings of Siberia, in particular, The Drawing Book of Siberia (1701) and the ethnographic work Description of the Siberian Peoples and the Facets of Their Land.

During his trips around Siberia, Remezov got acquainted with the legends and songs of the Cossacks and Tatars, collected their "tales", read documents. All this came in handy when compiling the Siberian History, also known as the Remezov Chronicle. "History" was compiled at the end of the 17th century, before the inclusion of the "Kungur Chronicler" in it.

Remezov found it in Kungur in 1703. The "Kungur chronicler" inserted into the "History" is written on a different paper, in a different handwriting, and contains drawings made in a different manner. Judging by the vocabulary, the Chronicler is a Cossack work. The original has not been preserved. The inserted text represents an editorial revision.

Having added the text of the “Kungur chronicler” to the “History”, Remezov introduced, in addition to the main title - “Siberian History”, the second title - “Siberian Chronicle, Brief Kungur”. Of the 157 chapters of the History, the Kungur Chronicler occupies chapters 5-8,49-52,73-80 and 99-102. Each chapter contains a short text and a picture. Speaking about the significance of the Siberian History, one should note its artistic merits and the value of the traditions, legends and details of the campaign contained in it. At the same time, all historians, with the exception of G.F. Miller, who opened the manuscript in 1741 in Tobolsk, believe that the "History", especially its chronology, is unreliable.

"Siberian History" begins with a story about how German Timofeev, the son of Povolsky, nicknamed Yermak, smashed ships on the Volga and on the "Khvalynsk Sea", and even in the "royal treasury sharpal". In 1578 and 1579 masterful howl "smashed the sovereign's state courts of ambassadors and Bukharans at the mouth of the Volga River." Then the pious Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich sent a strong army, ordering the Cossacks to be defeated, “and the initial ones, having caught, die, but not to have the treasury to break it and lock the way.” Upon learning of this, the Cossacks fled. Yermak ran up the Volga and along the Kama, reached Orel-gorodok, there he took supplies, weapons and guides from the Stroganovs and ran along Chusovaya and Silver to the portage. And he dragged the ships to the Tagil River. Approaching the source of the Tagil River in the tract Abagay, he stopped for the winter and fought the Pelym lands until the spring of 1580.

According to the Kungur Chronicler, the Cossacks ended up on Chusovaya in September 1578, but they "missed" and instead of Silver turned to Sylva, where they spent the winter. The next summer (1579) they returned to Chusovaya, took a “reserve” and weapons from Maxim Stroganov, reached the Tagil portage and wintered there. Help Stroganov was not from the heart. Maxim agreed to give out supplies, only on loan at interest, "asking for bondage": "When you return, on whom will you take those supplies at a price, and who will give them away, exactly or with interest." Then the Cossacks proceeded to Maxim with "gyz" (with threats). Ivan Koltsov “from the Yesaula screamer”: “Oh man, don’t you know you’re dead now, we’ll take you and shoot at the clock. Give me a receipt by name for plows for 5000 ... for each person 3 pounds of gunpowder and lead and guns and 3 regimental cannons, 3 poods of rye flour, a pood of crackers ... and regimental banners with icons. Maxim, obsessed with fear, opened the barns and gave the Cossacks day and night at their request for plows.

Further, the chronology of the Siberian History and the Kungur Chronicler coincides, but the course of events is interrupted by the history of the Tatar kings and stories about miracles. There was a vision in the kingdom of Kuchum before the arrival of Yermak. Two animals came out of the rivers on a sandy island at the confluence of the Irtysh and Tobol and began to fight. The Irtysh beast was white and huge, like an ox, like a wolf. “The same tobolny beast” is small and black, similar to a hound dog. When the small beast overcame the big one, threw it dead and began to go into the water, then the big one came to life and also went under the water. Kuchum asked the Magi: “What is the seer?” And they announced: “The big beast is your kingdom, and the small one is a Russian warrior, to be soon, and so kill you, and captivate, and drive away into plunder, and capture your cities.” Kuchum “ordered the conmi to razzle them across the meadow.”

The Cossacks felt the help of God. A great miracle happened near the Long Yar on the Tobol on July 26 at sunrise. Seeing a huge Basurman army on the shore, the Cossacks got scared, moored to the island higher than Yar and prayed to the Holy Trinity, the Most Holy Theotokos and other saints. And then the banner with the image of the Savior itself took off and went down along the left bank. The Cossacks followed her. The wicked, however, fired arrows without number, but the place saved by God, the Cossacks sailed so that not a hair fell from their heads. Then the banner itself fell into place. The Basurmans saw in the clouds, in a bright radiance, the majestic and most beautiful king, and many warriors flying and carrying His throne; and threatened the king with a drawn sword. The Basurmans were frightened and confused, and not only could they plot, but they could not look at the Cossacks. And when they told Kuchum and those close to him, they were very scared. And more than once the Lord showed his mercy to the Cossacks, and frightened the wicked.

Yermak fought slowly. After wintering on Abugay, the Cossacks seized the possessions of Prince Epanchi, then they took the city of Chingid-Tura, and killed King Chingiz. They wintered there. In May 1581, the Cossacks sailed down the Tura and Tobol. Remezov describes the victories of the Yermakovites. At Berezovy Yar, the infidels "like goads from their shelter" but with God's help they were defeated. At the Karaulny Yar tract, the Kuchumians blocked Tobol with iron chains, but the Cossacks broke the chain. In Babasany on the Tobol, they fought for five days with Prince Mametkul. They were cut so that the horses wandered up to their belly in blood. With God's help, we won. On August 1, they moved to the city of Karachin. Again the Cossacks and infidels saw the image of the Savior, the protector of Christians. In Karachin, the Cossacks captured huge booty. In September 1581, they went to the city of Kuchum, but, seeing a lot of troops, they went up the Irtysh and took the town of Murza Atik. And that night they spent the whole night without sleep in serious disputes - should they flee to Russia or stay? We decided to die bravely for the Christian faith.

October 23 began great battle on Chuvashev mountain. They fought for three days without sleep, relentlessly. The Cossacks shot down a lot of the wicked with guns. The wicked, forced by Kuchum, fighting against their will, wept as they died. On October 24, the princelings of the Ostyaks were the first to rush without looking back to their places, through dense forests. In the evening, the Voguls also fled for impenetrable swamps and lakes. On the night of October 25, Kuchum had a vision. Light, winged, armed and formidable warriors appeared and said: “Unholy son of the dark demon Bakhmet, depart from this land, for the Lord’s land and all Christians living on it are blessed, but you run to your habitats closer to the abyss of the damned demon Bakhmet.” And Kuchum trembled all over and said: “Let's run away from here, very scary place let's not die."

After that vision, Kuchum and all the Tatars from the city of Kashlyk, which is called Siberia, fled "to the Steppe, to the Cossack Horde." The Cossacks, having risen in the morning, prayed to God and the Great Martyr Dmitry of Thessalonica and entered the city without fear on the 26th day of October 1581. When they saw the abandoned property and huge booty and bread, they rejoiced and said: “God is with us!” And they listened to the great chime that arose by itself, as during the bright Resurrection of Christ.

It is easy to see that in the "Siberian History" the main differences from other chronicles fall on the beginning of Yermak's campaign. The closer the Cossacks are to the capital of the Siberian kingdom, the more the chronology coincides, and starting from the battle on Chuvashev Hill, the dates of the Siberian History and the Stroganov Chronicle coincide. "History" is interesting with Tatar legends about the funeral of Yermak and the story of the archer centurion Ulyan Remezov, the father of the chronicler, about Yermak's shells.

"Pogodinsky chronicler". Judging by the watermarks on the paper, Pogodinsky Chronicler dates back to the end of the 17th century. This late chronicle is close to the "Esipovskaya", but contains unique information. It reports that just before Yermak’s campaign, there was an invasion of the Urals by Tsarevich Aley, the son and heir of Kuchum: “Aley came to Chusovaya by war, and at the same time, ataman Yermak Timofeev came running from the Volga with his comrades (they robbed the sovereign’s treasury on the Volga and smashed the Nogai Tatars) and Chusova were not allowed to make war with the Siberians. The Chronicler reports on the brutal pogrom by the Siberians of Salt Kamskaya, but is silent about the siege of Cherdyn. The latter, according to Skrynnikov, means that the Cossack narrator (the primary source of the chronicler) had already gone on a campaign and did not know about the siege.

According to the Pogodinsky Chronicler, Yermak's Cossacks came to the Stroganovs from Yaik: through the upper reaches of the Big Irgiz they went to the Volga, there they transferred to plows and climbed the rivers - "from the Volga to the Kama River and the Kama River up the same." The Yermakovs did not linger at the Stroganovs: having beaten off Tsarevich Alei, they set out on a campaign on September 1, 7090 (1581), and already on October 26, Kuchum was “knocked down from the kuren”. The "Pogodinsky chronicler" gives a detailed description of the river route of the Cossacks from the Urals to Siberia. There are no multi-day battles that Remezov is fond of. Simply, without embellishment, it is told about the battle at the Chuvashev mountain, which decided the fate of the Siberian kingdom.

The narrative of the Chronicler is more accurate than in other chronicles. The embassy of the Cossacks to Moscow does not list the ataman Ivan Koltso (he did not travel at all), but Cherkas Alexandrov. The veracity of the record is confirmed by the income and expenditure book of the Kremlin Chudov Monastery. It is noted there that in February 1586, “Siberian Cossacks and Siberian chieftains - Savva Sazonov, the son of Boldyr, and Ivan Alexandrov’s son, and the nickname Cherkas” made a contribution with sables to the commemoration of the soul. The contribution was made before the departure of the tsarist army to Siberia, and the embassy Cossacks returned with it.

The awareness of the "Pogodinsky Chronicler" led Skrynnikov to the idea that the author had access to the burnt archives of the Posolsky Prikaz. Documents on the affairs of Siberia were stored there, including Cherkas Alexandrov's "inquisitive speeches" about the Siberian campaign. E.K. Romodanovskaya analyzed the text and concluded that the "Chronicle" goes back to the "Writing", handed over in 1622 to Archbishop Cyprian by the surviving Yermakovites. Its author, according to Romodanovskaya, was Alexandrov. A.T. Shashkov made a clarification, showing that the Pogodinsky Chronicler, through the protographer, goes back to the Chronicle Tale, created around 1601 by Cherkas Aleksandrov.

Diplomas, letters and ... a squeaky squeaker. Chronicle evidence of Yermak's Siberian campaign has a major drawback: they do not agree with each other chronologically. The arrival of the Yermakov Cossacks to the Stroganovs is dated 1578, 1579 and 1581, the beginning of the campaign -1579, 1580, 1581, 1582, the capture of the Siberian kingdom - 1580.1581 and even (in the Piskarevsky chronicler) 1585. In this regard, documents (letters, petitions, official correspondence) related to Yermak or his associates before the capture of Siberia are of particular value.

There is very little information about early Yermak. Everything that is in literature refers to folklore or author's fantasies. There is no data on the Christian name of Yermak. AT different time and various authors attributed seven names to him: Ermak, Ermil, Yeremey, Vasily, Timofey, German, Ermolai. There is no information about its origin. “The Tale of the Origin of Yermak” (30-40s of the 17th century), where Yermak is called Vasily Timofeevich Alenin from the family of Suzdal townsmen who moved to Chusovaya, is a reworking of folk legends. Among the legends is Yermak's participation in the capture of Kazan and his exploits in the first years of the Livonian War.

It is known that Yermak was a Cossack with experience and not a simple, but a Cossack chieftain. A letter of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich to the petition of the Tyumen Cossack Gavrila Ivanov from 1623 has been preserved. It mentions the “village of Yermak in the Field”, where Gavrila served for 20 years, took Siberia with Yermak and has been serving in Siberia for 42 years. Field at the end of the 16th century. included the steppe lands of the Don, the Middle and Lower Volga regions, so that Yermak could be the ataman of both the Don and the Volga. In the royal letter to the petition of Gavrila Ivanov, it is also indicated - "he served us with Ermak in the village." So, Yermak is a serving chieftain. He was not young - for 20 years he had been chieftain in the Field, but you still have to break out into chieftains. He was 45-50 years old.

Did Yermak "steal"? The question is subtle - how to turn. Theft in Russia in the XVI century. meant a variety of offenses - from robbery to disobedience to the royal will. The Cossacks, who lived in the no man's land between the possessions of the Russian sovereign and the Tatar khanates, inevitably turned out to be thieves, even if they did not smash the caravans of merchants. The tsarist authorities themselves encouraged their raids during the wars with the Nogais or Tatars, but demanded restraint from the Cossacks if Moscow made peace with the next khan. In real life, there were no differences between peace and war in the steppe: nomads and Cossacks did not miss the opportunity to steal horses from each other, cut down herdsmen, plunder a trade caravan, or, having ruined a village, take away yasirs, especially beautiful women.

The Cossacks more often won, and the offended steppes wrote to Moscow. In August 1581, the Nogai Khan Urus complained to Moscow that all the Murzas with their nomad camps had moved east of the Volga, beyond the Yaik: “Because the Volga has a fear of life from the Volga Cossacks of the war.” In Moscow, they pretended to sympathize, and promised to sort it out, but during the period of unkind relations they answered: “Today we can’t appease our Cossacks.” Among the complaints is a letter sent in July 1581 by the Nogai Murza Urmagmet, in which he demands that Yarmak be handed over to him: “Ahead of this, Yarmak drove sixty of my horses from the Volga, and in summer they drove a thousand horses from the Volga and killed my karachey Bytugay-baatyr.” In the Posolsky Prikaz they answered that they would launch an investigation about Yermak. Was Yarmak, the horse thief, Yermak Timofeyevich? Skrynnikov believes that yes, and that Yermak decided to get hold of horses before the campaign, but not to Siberia, but ... against the Poles.

On June 27, 1581, the Lithuanian commandant of Mogilev P. Stravinsky, in a report to King Stefan Batory, reporting on the raid of Russian troops on the rear of Batory in the area of ​​Dubrovna, Orsha, Mogilev, calls Russian military leaders, including Vasily Yanov "voivode of the Don Cossacks" and Ermak Timofeevich "Otoman Cossack":

“We bring to the attention of V. Kor. Great ... that Moscow people, enemies of V. Kor. Vel., having invaded the state of V. Cor. Vel. and everyone, starting from Dubrovna, betraying fire and devastation, came under the city of V.K.V. Mogilev on Tuesday June 27 (1581), at three o'clock in the afternoon, they burned the suburbs ... in the settlement above the Dnieper, which is called the settlement, they also burned up to 100 houses. The voivodes were in charge of these people: Kayterov [Katyrev], Khvorostinin, Baturlin ... the fourteenth Vasily Yanov, the voivode of the Don Cossacks, the 15th Ermak Timofeevich, a Cossack otoman.

Stravinsky's letter casts doubt on the reports of the chroniclers about Yermak's campaign in Siberia in 1581. Therefore, a version has been put forward that there were two chieftains of Yermak Timofeevich - one fought near Mogilev in 1581, and the other conquered Siberia. The assumption is possible, albeit with a stretch, but then we must admit the presence of twins among other participants in the campaign to Siberia.

In early August 1581, on the Volga, at the crossing near Pine Island, a major thieves' case happened: the Cossacks robbed the embassy of the Nogai prince Urus and the Persian and Bukhara merchants traveling with them and killed their guards Russian ambassador Vasily Pelepelitsyn, who accompanied the Nogais, left a description of an eyewitness. The caravan came “under Sosnovy Ostrov to the Volga, to the ferry, and on the ferry and on the Volga, the Cossacks Ivan Koltsov, and Bogdan Barbosha, and Nikita Pan, and Savva Voldyr and his comrades began to transport the Nagai ambassadors and tezikov according to the old custom.” Barbosha and Koltsov announced to the Russian ambassador that they "will transport the Tatar junk and half of the Tatars in advance." The Russian and Nogai ambassadors agreed. When half of the 300 Nogais of the convoy were transported to the other side, they were attacked from two sides by the Cossacks. The Nogai fled, they were pursued and most of them were killed. To the requests of Pelepelitsyn to spare the ambassadors and merchants, the Cossacks replied: "The Urus ambassador is alive, [and that's okay]".

The indignant Prince Urus demanded retribution. Tsar Ivan Vasilievich ordered to find and execute Ivan Koltsov (Koltso) and Bogdan Barbosha. But the Cossacks managed to annoy the Nogais once again. In the same August, on the same "stile", the atamans waylaid a Nogai detachment of 600 horsemen returning from a raid with booty from Temnikov and Alatyr. All Nogais were killed. According to Skrynnikov, not only the chieftains of thieves, but also Yermak's detachment, returning from the Polish front, where the fighting subsided, took part in this case (fair, by the way). Having defeated the Nogais, the Cossacks nevertheless preferred to get out of the Volga and went to Yaik, where, as Skrynnikov writes, the famous decision to march on the Stroganovs took place.

The most important document testifying to the campaign of the Yermakovites in 1582 is the disgraced letter dated November 16, 7091 (1582), copied into the Stroganov Chronicle. Pelepelitsyn, claims that the Cossacks went on a campaign "on the same day" (on the 1st day of September) when Pelymsky prince with Siberian people and Voguls laid siege to Cherdyny

“From the Tsar and Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich of All Russia to Chusovaya Maxim Yakovlev to his son and Mikita Grigoriev to his son Stroganov. Vasily Pelepelitsyn wrote to us from Perm that you sent from the prisons of your Volga atamans and Cossacks Yermak with comrades to fight Votyaks and Vogulichi and Pelynsky and Siberian places on September 91 on the 1st day, and on the same day the Pelynsky prince gathered with Siberian people and with Vogulichi, came to war on our Perm places, and approached the city to Cherdyn to the prison, and our people were beaten, and many losses were repaired by our people.

The year of the siege of Cherdyn (and the beginning of the campaign) is indicated here incompletely (91, not 7091) and is sometimes disputed, but it is difficult to imagine that the tsar sent the letter a year after Pelepelitsyn's complaint. Firstly, Ivan the Terrible did not launch any cases, especially denunciations of theft and treason. Secondly, the Cossacks sent seunches to the tsar in the spring after the "Siberian capture". The tsar received them in the fall of 1583, which is consistent with the capture of Siberia in 1582 and is clearly delayed (one and a half years!) When the kingdom was conquered in October 1581.

Finally, a squeaky squeaker is known, which was kept in the Stroganovs' palace in St. Petersburg. AT late XIX in. historian-paleographer V.V. Golubtsov examined the Stroganovs' weapons collection and drew attention to the cannon, on the barrel of which was the inscription: "In the city of Kergedan on the Kame River, I present Maxim Yakovlev son of the Stroganovs to Ataman Yermak in the summer of 7090." After the publication of the inscription of the squeaky squeak among historians who adhered to the then generally accepted views about the "Siberian capture" in 1581, doubts arose about Golubtsov's report, although he was an expert on Old Russian writing. During the revolution, the squeal disappeared, and it was not possible to find it.

In the 1980s Skrynnikov published a monograph, where he provided evidence that the Cossacks set out on a campaign on September 1, 1582, and on October 26 they already took Kashlyk. Skrynnikov was supported by specialists in the history of Siberia D.I. Kopylov and A.T. Shashkov. The dating of Yermak's campaign of 1582 was back in the 1870s. suggested N.I. Kostomarov, which does not detract from Skrynnikov's evidence base. Now the chronology of Skrynnikov is shared by many historians. However, not everyone agrees and believes that, having reached the pass, the Yermakovites stopped for the winter. Indeed, in less than two months, the Yermakovites had to overcome the river route of 1,500 km, of which 300 km - against the flow of the fast Ural rivers - Chusovaya and Silver, lay a drag in the taiga 25 versts, drag plows and loads along it, and fight on Siberian rivers with Tatars and Voguls. The schedule is too busy.

In the 1980s Perm University students traveled the path of Yermak in boats, but in four months. Skrynnikov explains the failure of the experimental verification by the fact that over the past 400 years the Ural and Siberian rivers have become very shallow. In addition, students are not Cossacks, and boats are not high-speed plows. Shashkov - also a supporter of the rapid capture of Siberia - pushes back the start of the campaign a little and writes that the Yermakovites set off on their journey "no later than mid-August 1582." As you can see, all versions of Yermak's campaign have weaknesses, but for all that, the chronology of Skrynnikov - Shashkov is consistent with the documents and will be taken here as a basis for describing the events of the Siberian capture.

This text is an introductory piece.

From the book Conquest of Siberia: Myths and Reality author Verkhoturov Dmitry Nikolaevich

A bit about the Siberian Khanate Along with the history of Yermak's campaign, the history of the Siberian Khanate was also subjected to strong mythologization. In practice, we can say that we do not know anything about the history of this khanate, and we do not want to know. It is in the famous work "History of Siberia with

From the book Sword Strike by Andrew Balfour

16. On the Capture of the Donna Bella Just as a flying fish, spreading its fins-wings, jumps over half a dozen ocean walls, so I must omit the description of our voyage to the west, including the siege of Santo Domingo 33, otherwise my story will continue indefinitely, a

From book Full course Russian history: in one book [in a modern presentation] author Solovyov Sergey Mikhailovich

"The Tale of the Capture of Ryazan" "And I heard Grand Duke Yuri Ingvarevich of Ryazan, that there was no help from Grand Duke Georgy Vsevolodovich of Vladimir, and immediately sent for his brothers: for Prince David Ingvarevich of Murom, and for Prince Gleb Ingvarevich

From the book 1612. Everything was wrong! author Winter Dmitry Frantsovich

On the Siberian front, the conquest of Siberia by Yermak is considered the only success of the second half of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, but even here everything is not so simple. In fact, the annexation of Siberia began in the first, "liberal" period of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, when

From the book The Conquest of America by Ermak-Cortes and the rebellion of the Reformation through the eyes of the "ancient" Greeks author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

22. Did Ataman Ermak die, allegedly drowning in the Siberian Irtysh? It turns out that no. He was saved by being pulled out of the water on the Mexican Lake Texcoco. We have already quoted ancient testimonies about the circumstances under which Yermak's body was removed from the water. He was pulled out of the river TATAR

From the book True History of Russia. Notes of an amateur author

Cossacks during the capture of Kazan Near Kazan in 1553, there are Cossacks in the Russian troops: “and Cossack hundreds of chosen fellows with bows” (Lyzlov, 1990. p. 92); "I commanded to be three thousand archers ... and all the chieftain of the Cossacks with the Cossacks ..." (Lyzlov, 1990. p.106). With whom were the Cossacks going to fight?

by Bayok Jessie L.

Written sources: "The Book of the Taking of the Land" and "The Book of the Icelanders" Specialists in Old Icelandic history and culture are very lucky - they have at their disposal an extensive corpus of the most valuable written sources. We will speak of laws and sagas in other chapters, but here

From the book Iceland of the Viking Age by Bayok Jessie L.

Appendix from the "Book of the Taking of the Land" Eyvind the Armourer and Roar the Red, the sons of Thorstein Thumper, came to Iceland from the island of Strind, near Thrandheim, because they had quarrels with King Harald, and each of them had his own ship. The roar was driven back by the storm, and

From the book True History of Russia. Notes of an amateur [with illustrations] author Guts Alexander Konstantinovich

Cossacks during the capture of Kazan Near Kazan in 1553, there are Cossacks in the Russian troops: “and Cossack hundreds of chosen young men with bows” (Lyzlov, 1990, p. 92); "I commanded to be three thousand archers ... and all the chieftain of the Cossacks with the Cossacks ..." (Lyzlov, 1990. p. 106). With whom were the Cossacks going to fight?

author Yanin Valentin Lavrentievich

Chapter 77. On the capture of the fortress of Santok At the same time and in the same year, the Pomeranians, who for a long time in the ancient fortress of Santok served the Silesian prince Heinrich and his son Boleslav, voluntarily gave this very fortress to Prince Przemysław.

From the book The Great Chronicle about Poland, Russia and their neighbors of the XI-XIII centuries. author Yanin Valentin Lavrentievich

Chapter 95. On the Capture of the Zbonshin Fortress At the time mentioned above, some robbers, leaving the Lubusz Fortress, came to the fields near the Zbonshin Fortress in order to profit. When they wanted to take away the cattle, some shepherd said: “What are you doing because of the small booty

From the book History of Armenia author Khorenatsi Movses

27 About how Arshakavan was built and destroyed, and about the capture of Ani. But Arshak dared to commit another reckless deed - he built a dzerakert - a gathering place for criminals - behind Mount Masis - and issued an order that anyone who enters there and settles there will be free from court and

author al-Qarahi Muhammad Tahir

The chapter on the capture of the Kizlyar fortress Then, during the autumn, Gazi Mohammed gathered troops. He was informed that the Russians were on their way to Kilbach. Then he went from Chechnya to Kizlyar, took him, took great wealth and many prisoners there. They tell from the words of one Circassian,

From the book Chronicle of Muhammad Tahir al-Karahi about the Dagestan wars in the period of Shamil [The brilliance of Dagestan drafts in some Shamil battles] author al-Qarahi Muhammad Tahir

Chapter on the Capture of the Ansal Fortress

From the book Historical description of clothing and weapons of Russian troops. Volume 27 author Viskovatov Alexander Vasilievich

10. IN THE SIBERIAN LINEAR COSSACK ARMY

From the book History of Siberia: Reader author Volozhanin K. Yu.

A word about the Siberian Khanate The Siberian Tatar Khanate (Siberian Yurt) appeared as a result of the collapse of the Golden Horde. In 1563, Kuchum, the son of the Uzbek ruler Murtaza, seized power in it. Kuchum overthrew the former rulers from the local dynasty, the brothers Yediger and Beybulat,

"Siberian taiga" - Taiga is home to wild animals and birds. Photosynthesis. Hundreds of thousands of hectares of taiga are cut down every year. Utilization of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Significance of the Siberian taiga. Taiga meaning. The meaning of the Siberian taiga. What happens if the taiga disappears? Siberian taiga. The Siberian taiga is one of the main sources of timber in our country.

"East Siberian region" - Sable. Republics within the East Siberian region: Iron ore deposits of Eastern Siberia: Gornostai. HPPs of the East Siberian region: Specialization. Power industry Provides more than 13% of the electricity in the country. The Selenga River Yenisei Angara. Cities of Eastern Siberia with a population of more than 500,000 people:

"Yermak's Campaign" - The legendary name of Yermak. Russian possessions came close to the borders of the Siberian Khanate. Who organized the trip to Siberia? A native inhabitant of the Urals Vasily Timofeevich Alenin. Don Cossack. The beginning of the way. October 26, 1582 - the capture of Kashlyk. The defeat of the Siberian Khanate. Koch is a small sea vessel.

"Yermak's Campaign to Siberia" - New taxes began to flow into the state treasury. Project theme: Campaign of Yermak's squad to Siberia. Main part. The march to Pelym was postponed. Now the main goal of the Yermakovites was Siberia - the capital of "Tsar Kuchum". The Volga Cossacks decided to answer the Tatars with blow for blow. Soon the families of the fleeing Tatars began to return to the city.

"East Siberian Territory" - Eastern Siberia- one of the wealthiest natural resources regions of the country. - 40% of the total timber reserves; Tuvans (4%), Buryats (6%), Khakasses (2%), Latvians (0.5%) and peoples of the North also live here. Population - 9.2 million people. Only the southern part of the East Siberian region is seismically unstable.

"Siberian Readings" - Worked as a teacher of biology, mathematics, of English language, singing. She graduated from school in Tebisse. The works of E. Yevtushenko have been translated into many foreign languages. Intra-school competition "Siberian Poetry Readings". Biography. Winter in the Irkutsk region. * Russian Soviet poet. Vladimir Balachan was born in 1939 in the Baraba village of Staro-Yarkovo.

Who only in Russia was not interested in the history of unknown Siberia. The Esipov chronicle was read and copied in different parts of the country. Savva Esipov himself hardly lived to see the time when a certain inquisitive scribe diligently copied his chronicle, supplementing it with many amazing details. This is how the Pogodin Chronicle arose, which is now kept in the Public Library in Leningrad.

The Pogodin manuscript poses many difficult problems for the researcher. Judging by the filigrees, it belongs almost to the time of Peter the Great. But this late manuscript contains a lot of unique information on the history of the Siberian expedition. The degree of their reliability is unclear to this day. Two or three mistakes made by the chronicler cast doubt on the authenticity of the monument as a whole.

Modern methods of studying texts are so perfect that they allow us to reconstruct in detail the history of their origin. One can imagine how the author of the Pogodinsky manuscript carefully copied the phrase from Esipov’s chronicle: “Ermak and his comrades sent to the sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich of all Russia with a seunch ( (news of victory. - R. S.)) chieftain and Cossacks". At this point, he stopped and inserted the phrase into the text: "the Cossack Cherkas Alexandrov was immediately sent because ... considerable, only 25 people."

The phrase has not survived in its entirety. This is explained simply. When the manuscript was bound, the sheet was cut off at the edges and several words were lost. However, what has survived provides the researcher with important material. The Pogodinsky chronicler knew one of Yermak's messengers by name, and besides, he apparently knew the total number of the Cossack village that arrived in Moscow. His recording is interesting not only for its factual data, but also for its stylistic features.

The construction of the phrase ("Ermak sent the ataman and the Cossacks, the Cossack Cherkas Alexandrov was immediately sent") was unsuccessful and betrayed the author's uncertainty. He clearly did not know what place the Cossack Cherkas occupied in the village that brought Yermak's letter to Moscow. According to the Esipov Chronicle, this village was headed by a certain ataman. Pogodinsky, the author calls Aleksandrov a Cossack three times.

Pogodinsky chronicler was not satisfied with Savva Esipov's brief remark that the remnants of Yermak's detachment went to Russia "through the Stone". He clarified the retreat route: the Cossacks "floated along the Irtysh river down and along the great Ob down and through the Stone they passed the Sob river. Empty lake, here (walked) the Cossack Cherkas Alexandrov."

Three years after Aleksandrov's arrival in Moscow, Ivan IV sent governor Sukin and Myasnoy to Siberia. Reporting this, Esipov noted: "many Russian people (went) with them." Clarifying this news, Pogodin's chronicler wrote that "many Russian people and Yermakov's Cossacks Cherkas Alexandrov and his comrades" returned to Siberia with Sukin.

Why did the early Siberian chronicles never mention Cherkas Alexandrov? Is this not an invention of an idle scribe who wrote at a later time?

The archival find made it possible to give a very accurate answer to the question posed. The Central State Archive of Ancient Acts in Moscow contains the original income and expenditure book of the Kremlin Chudov Monastery for 1586. Historians have turned to it more than once, but no one has looked for information about Yermak there. The true meaning of Chudov's records was discovered only after they were compared with the data of the Pogodinskaya chronicle.

The monks of the Chudov Monastery noted in their book that in February 1586 the "Siberian ataman" and "Siberian Cossacks" brought the souls of precious sables to the monastery and gave them as a memorial. The pious gesture of the Yermakovites is easy to explain. Just in February 1586, Governor Sukin completed preparations for the campaign. Together with him, the Ermakov Cossacks were to leave Moscow. They already knew about the death of Yermak and prepared for the worst. It was high time to think about saving the soul, and the Cossacks went to the Chudov Monastery.

The richest gifts were brought to the elders by the "Siberian Ottoman Ivan Alexandrov, son, and nicknamed Cherkas."

The record of his contribution leaves no doubt about the reliability of Pogodin's information, according to which Alexandrov headed the Cossack embassy to Moscow, and then was detained in the capital for three years, until the governor Sukin set out on a campaign.

When Cherkas Alexandrov brought Ermak's letter to Moscow, Ivan IV ordered that a response message be drawn up. By tradition, the royal message began with a detailed retelling of the letter that served as an occasion for the resulting correspondence. Savva Esipov retold the letter in one sentence. Yermak informed Ivan IV that the Cossacks "will defeat Tsar Kuchum and over there." The author of the Pogodin Chronicle cited a much more complete text of the Cossack replies. According to the chronicle, Yermak wrote to the tsar that he "won the Siberian king Kuchum and with his children with Alei and Altynai and Yshim and his howls; and the brother of Tsar Kuchum Tsarevich Mametkul was defeated".

How reliable is this detailed version of Yermak's letter? Was it not composed by Pogodin's chronicler himself? The report on the "Siberian capture", compiled by the clerks of the Posolsky Prikaz in 1585 and preserved in the original, helps to answer this question. Under the hands of the clerks were replies from Siberia. Using them, the clerks noted the following: "sovereign" Cossacks "took the Siberian kingdom, and the Siberian king Kuchum fled into the field", after which "Kuchyumov's nephew Mametkul Tsarevich, having gathered with people, came to Siberia to the sovereign's people", but those to his " beaten."

The embassy's report dispels doubts about the authenticity of Pogodin's version.

Chronicle stamps are alien to Pogodin's information. They also bear little resemblance to recording eyewitness accounts. To a greater extent, they resemble quotations from official documents. Here is one example: "The sovereign sent (to Siberia. - R. S.) the governor of his prince Semyon Volkhovsky, and the heads of Ivan Kireev and Ivan Vasiliev Glukhov, and with him a hundred people from Kazan and Sviyazhsky archers, and a hundred people from Permich and Vyatchan and one hundred other military men." It was in this style that the records of the Discharge (Military) order were compiled. This is undoubtedly the most complete category related to the Siberian expedition. Another question, can it be considered genuine? Some of its details are questionable. Why Siberian Chronicles and Bit Books of the 17th century. mention the campaign of only two governors - Volkhovsky and Glukhov? Why are there no references to Kireev in them? S. Remezov claimed that there were 500 people with Volkhovsky. In the Pogodinsky category, the figure is 300 people.

To check the discharge, you can use a genuine royal letter of January 7, 1584. Ivan IV sent a written order to the Stroganovs to build 15 plows "under the army" of Volkhovsky, Kireev and Glukhov, each of which could raise 20 warriors. From the letter it follows that Kireev was Volkhovsky's main assistant in the Siberian campaign and that the detachment consisted of 300 people. Additional information from the Pogodinskaya chronicle explains the reasons for the silence of Siberian sources about Kireev. This governor stayed in Siberia for a very short time. Yermak immediately sent him to Moscow. Kireev took the captive Prince Mametkul away from Siberia.

So, the Pogodin chronicler had more accurate information than the Siberian chroniclers who talked with the Yermakovites.

Obviously, he was holding in his hands a genuine discharge about Volkhovsky's campaign in Siberia.

The compiler of the Pogodin Chronicle found in Savva Esipov a mention that the Yermakovites went to Siberia "by the Chusovaya River and came to the Tagil River." Dissatisfied with such an inaccurate description, he included in the text the most detailed painting of Yermak's path to the Siberian land. It indicated not only the names of the rivers traversed by Yermak's flotilla, but also a lot of other information: where and where (to the right or left) the ships turned, where they went with the flow, where against. Obviously, such a painting had not so much a literary as a practical purpose. The governors assigned to the Siberian campaign needed a detailed road painting.

The author of Pogodinsky included in the text of his manuscript information about the circumstances that immediately preceded the campaign of the Cossacks beyond the Urals. Ermak Timofeev, he wrote, arrived from the Volga to Chusovaya at the very moment when the Siberian prince Alei attacked the Permian places with the Tatars, "and a year before that time ... the Pelymsky prince Aplygarym fought ... Great Perm."

In two decisive points, the given information completely coincides with the data of the royal letters of 1581-1582. They reaffirm that the two attacks took place a year apart and that Yermak's campaign began in the days of the second raid.

Neither the Stroganovs nor the Cherdyn voivode knew the names of the "Prince of Pelym" and the leader of the "Siberian people" who sacked the Perm Territory. The compiler of the Pogodin Chronicle had the best information. He knew that the first invasion was led by the Pelymsky prince Ablygerim, and the second - by the son and heir of Kuchum, Tsarevich Alei.

How can one explain the rare awareness of Pogodin's author? Where did he get his amazing information from? The text of the manuscript allows you to establish the source of its information. "Kuchum has three sons," the chronicler wrote, "and when they are taken, there is a letter to him in the Ambassadorial order." This means that the chronicler had access to the Siberian documents of the Ambassadorial order.

It is remarkable that it was this order that was in charge of affairs related to Siberia throughout the 16th century. All unsubscribes from the newly annexed region flowed into it, as into a reservoir. Yermak's letter also got into the Ambassador's order. There they also composed a response message on behalf of the king. Apparently, the clerks interrogated the messengers of Yermak, from their words they made a list of the route to Siberia and wrote down a "fairy tale" about the reasons for the campaign of the Cossacks against Kuchum.

Complementing the Esipov Chronicle, Pogodin's author wrote that the Tatar prince Alei severely destroyed Sol Kama and "repaired the Orthodox churches a lot badly." Solikamsk sources confirm this detail. Local residents remembered the Tatar pogrom until the 18th century. In memory of the victims of the raid, from 1584 until the time of Peter the Great, the population made a religious procession to the mass graves.

When reading the Pogodin Chronicle, the question involuntarily arises. Why did an informed author, mentioning the defeat of Kamskaya Salt, keep silent about Aley's subsequent attack on Cherdyn?

This is explained simply. On the day of the assault on Cherdyn, Yermak led his detachment from the Chusovoy towns beyond the Urals. This means that the Yermakovites did not know anything about the events that were taking place at that moment at a distance of hundreds of miles to the north. This confirms the assumption that the "fairy tale" about the beginning of the Siberian expedition, found by Pogodin's author in the Posolsky Prikaz, was compiled on the basis of the testimony of Yermak's messengers.

Can we assume that the author of the Pogodin Chronicle himself wrote down "the speeches of the Yermakovites, or that he should be identified with Cherkas Aleksandrov? Can we agree with those historians who call Aleksandrov "the official historiographer of Yermak's squad"? Mistakes made by the Pogodin chronicler refute such hypotheses.

The compiler of the Pogodin Chronicle did not know with what rank Cherkas Alexandrov arrived in Moscow. According to Savva Esipov, Yermak sent a chieftain chieftain to Moscow and he allegedly returned to Siberia along with the voivode Bolkhovsky. It followed from the writs that the shoun master, the Cossack Alexandrov, remained in Moscow for three years and was able to return to Siberia with the governor Sukin after the death of Yermak. Not noticing the contradiction, Pogodin's chronicler combined both versions. As a result, the following notes appeared in his manuscript: "And Yermak was killed at that time, while the shounists were traveling to Moscow"; "Prince Semyon Bolkhovskoy came to old Siberia ... and Yermak had already been killed before Prince Semyonov came."

At the end of their lives, Alexandrov and other Tobolsk veterans compiled "speeches" that formed the basis of the early Siberian chronicles. Although they did not remember the exact dates, they clearly imagined the sequence of major events. They knew that Volkhovsky arrived in Siberia during the life of Yermak, that the governor died during the days of winter famine, and then Ivan Koltso perished. Even later, Yermak undertook his last campaign against Vagay, where he was killed. Having lost their leader, the Cossacks immediately fled from Siberia.

The Esipov Chronicle reproduced all these events in their natural order. Having made a mistake in determining the time of Yermak's death, Pogodin's author destroyed the outline of the story. He had to re-describe the expedition. But, apparently, he was not very experienced in writing chronicles. If Yermak had died before the arrival of Bolkhovsky, then the latter would not have found a single Cossack in the capital of Kuchum, Kashlyk, because they all left Siberia immediately after the battle on Vagay.

Being unable to rewrite the history of Yermak anew, the author limited himself to inserting, by the way and inopportunely, several references to the death of the ataman into the text of the Esipov Chronicle he copied, which could only confuse the reader. In the chapter on ambassadors, he made the first note about the death of Yermak. In the next chapter, he noted: "The murder of Yermakov is spoken of after these." In the chapter on Bolkhovsky, he repeated again: "Yermak has already been killed." In the next section, he made a reservation: "How could Yermak still be alive." Talking about the battle on Vagai, the author was forced to repeat all the information about Bolkhovsky.

The above facts refute the hypothesis according to which the Pogodin Chronicle was compiled by the "official historiographer of the squad" Cherkas Aleksandrov.

The text of the Pogodinskaya manuscript helps clarify the question of its author. Talking about Genghis Khan, Pogodin's author called his middle name (Temir Aksak). At the same time, he referred to a certain Moscow chronicle: "he writes about it in the Indian in the Moscow chroniclers." Such a reference was quite appropriate in the mouth of a Moscow scribe, but not a free Cossack.

The funds of the Posolsky Prikaz were available only to a very narrow circle of people. If the compiler of the Pogodinskaya chronicle could use them, then it follows that he himself most likely belonged to the world of ordered people.

Pogodinsky, a history lover, made extracts from embassy documents and sometimes accompanied them with his “comments.” “Alei (Kuchum’s son. - R. S.), he wrote down, came to war on Chusovaya, and at the same time ataman Yermak Timofeev came running from the Volga with his comrades (they robbed the sovereign's treasury on the Volga and smashed the Nogai Tatars) and Chusova was not allowed to fight the Siberian. "The phrase about the robbery of the sovereign's treasury violated the temporal and logical sequence of the story. It was borrowed, obviously, not from the report" Cherkas Alexandrov on the beginning of the campaign. The commentary betrays in the author a person who is well acquainted with the legendary stories of the 17th century about the robberies of Yermak.

The original documents about Yermak's expedition were lost. Therefore, it is possible to judge them only on the basis of the extracts that the author of the Pogodinskaya Chronicle made from them. These extracts allow us to make a fairly accurate idea of ​​the "archive" of the Siberian expedition, which was formed within the walls of the Posolsky Prikaz.

Yermak's "archive" began to take shape after Cherkas Aleksandrov arrived in Moscow with Yermak's letter. The clerks carefully recorded the "speech" of the Cossacks about their campaign, made a list of their path. These documents, together with the royal message, formed the basis of the fund. They were accompanied by discharge paintings about sending three detachments to Siberia, a report about the death of the first detachment: and documents about the delivery of the captive Mametkul to Moscow, a "letter" about the recruitment of other Siberian princes.

The reconstruction of Yermak's "apxiva" made it possible to expand the extremely limited fund of reliable sources about the Siberian expedition, which made it possible to re-investigate the history of Yermak's campaign as a whole.

Who are you, Ermak Timofeevich?

I see the fallacy of some reports in every chronicle, and I do not consider any of them to be completely reliable from the first to the last word. There are no such chronicles and could not be ...

Dmitriev A. L. On the history of the Siberian issue // Perm region. Perm, 1895.

One of the most striking events of the time of the initial colonization of the Urals is undoubtedly the organization of the campaign "for the Stone" of the Cossack squad of Yermak. A campaign that ended in a crushing defeat of the army of the Siberian king Kuchum, which actually marked the beginning of the rapid Russian colonization of the Siberian expanses along their entire length - from the wooded Ural steeps to the very Pacific waters.

For four centuries, Yermak has been a universally recognized national hero of the Russian people. His deeds are included in the tablets of chronicles. A huge number of historians have rummaged through megatons of archival papers, hunting for the slightest mention of the details of his amazing Siberian epic. Writers, poets on the most different languages glorified his deeds. And what is probably above all, the grateful memory of the Russians and the wounded memory of the Tatars in countless songs and legends secured his place forever in the pantheon of the most significant figures of his time.

Several portraits of Yermak have survived to this day. They depict a dense black-bearded, self-confident man. Gleaming armor armor. A formidable weapon in strong hands.

In portraits, he is calm, his wide-set eyes are focused and wise. And mysterious. And this mystery was not invented by the painters. It is natural for a person about whom everests of thin and thick books have been written, but in which - what strikes readers most of all - descriptions of only the last year or two of his incredible fate more or less correlate. This has been written about. And to retell the details of the high-profile Yermakov campaigns and victories is inappropriate here. And let's talk about what still causes controversy among researchers and mutually exclusive conclusions of many readers of a multinational country.

Yes, Yermak sailed to the Irtysh - everyone agrees on this. Yes, in several cruel battles he scattered Kuchumov's rati. And no one doubts this. And before that?! Where did he come from, this hero? How did he get to the Urals?.. How did he get to Siberia?..

Historians do not have a single opinion on this. Even in the interpretation of the name, its specialists are defined as follows: “If, in the opinion of such and such, then ... but in the letter, such and such, he is named ...”

So, the paragraph of the greatest connoisseur of Russian chronicles and archives, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin, is understandable, with which he considered it necessary to preface the description of Ermakov’s Siberian epic in his “History of the Russian State”: on the imagination of people, they produced many fables that mixed up with the truth in legends and, under the name of chronicles, deceived the historians themselves ... "

Of course, it is impossible to review all these "deceptions" in one essay. Therefore, here we will try to touch on only a few aspects of the coverage in the annals of the personality of Yermak and his pre-Siberian life.

In science today there are four main points of view on the appearance of Yermak in the Urals. We present them in chronological order.

1. He was brought to Siberia by an indefatigable passion for pocketing other people's wealth, which he had previously successfully quenched by robbing everyone in the Lower Volga expanses. And where the warriors of Ivan the Terrible so pinched his tail that he was forced to urgently move to places more favorable for such cases.

2. He was called upon to protect his possessions from the raids of foreigners by the rich Stroganovs near Kama.

3. Cossack chieftain Yermak self-appointedly appeared on the Stroganov lands. And they, in order to get rid of the presence of a mighty gang of robbers and at the same time to get themselves a good profit, persuaded the ataman to go to Siberia, where the boxes burst from the riches of all the Tatars there, and they will help Yermak with both gunpowder and food, and conductors.

4. Ermak Timofeevich, one of the commanders of the Cossack formations in the government service, was urgently, according to the report of the Ural authorities, sent from the western front, where he fought with the Poles, to the eastern borders of the state, where the resistance of local residents to the Russian colonialists sharply escalated.

The first point of view is based on the oldest written source that has come down to us, describing the exploits of Yermakov, the so-called Esipov Chronicle. This chronicle was completed in 1636 in Tobolsk by the clerk Savva Esipov. He was ordered to do this work by Archbishop Nektary of Tobolsk. Vladyka ordered the deacon to question the surviving Cossacks, associates of the Yermakovs, to read the manuscripts of the Tatar chroniclers, and gave the synodnik of the Cossack squad for use. (This synodnik was compiled in 1622 by the Cossacks of the Ermakov squad at the request of the previous Tobolsk bishop, Kipriyan, who asked them at the same time to compile a “Writing” about how they “came to Siberia”.) Judging by the Esipov records, these Cossacks really have plenty they robbed on the Volga streams, and then the tsarist army sent them forced them to look for a new place for robbery, and after conferring, they decided - let's wave to Siberia, there the Moscow tsar will not get us, there we will roam again. The Esipov chronicle does not mention the Stroganovs at all. And only in one of her later lists does the phrase sound muffled that, they say, something like that is recorded somewhere. In general, the attack on Siberia by the Cossacks of Yermak is their personal idea and the annexation of Siberia is their personal merit.

This point of view has persisted. She had and still has supporters among the most famous pre-revolutionary and Soviet historians. Well, maybe that's how it was. Only painfully similar to an ordinary epic story.

The second point of view is substantiated, first of all, by the so-called Stroganov Chronicle and several royal letters, the texts of which are consistent with it. The main point of this chronicle is the message that on April 6, 1579, Maxim Yakovlevich Stroganov sent a messenger to the Lower Volga to the local Cossacks, inviting them to his service and promising all sorts of benefits for that. Again, compelled by the royal pursuit, the Cossacks gladly jumped at such an offer and almost immediately arrived in Stroganov's possessions. The Stroganovs received them very cordially, and not only greeted and fed them for two years and two months, but, according to some sources, having spent about 20 thousand rubles (a lot of money) on their equipment, giving them grub for the road and guides, sent conquer Siberia.

Everything stated in the version of the Stroganov Chronicle is very possible, and N. M. Karamzin, S. M. Solovyov, and a number of other prominent historians trusted her. And really, why not believe her? The Stroganovs really suffered from the raids of both the unsubdued local princelings and the warlike Siberian murzas. Indeed, the king did not have enough troops to securely protect all his possessions. The Stroganovs learned the lesson of 1552 well, when the inhabitants of Solikamskaya prayed to the sovereign for help from the Nogai Tatars who besieged the city. Then, in response to their request, the tsar sent ... a folding image of Nicholas the Wonderworker. He could not send them another defender.

So, when Chingizid Kuchum became the Siberian tsar, in 1571 he wrote to the Moscow tsar himself that, they say, you won’t receive more tribute from me, but how we live on, decide for yourself - we can fight, we can live peacefully, - the Stroganovs thought deeply about their safety.

Already in 1572, they formed their Cossack regiment of a thousand people, which was assembled by them with the permission of the tsar, but, however, was immediately sent by tsar's decree to the front near the Oka. Meanwhile, Kuchum continued to attack the Stroganov possessions and already in 1573 organized a powerful expedition there. Only the ultimate mobilization of their warriors by the Stroganovs allowed them to defend their towns.

It was then that the Stroganovs finally understood: peace will come to their lands only when they establish themselves beyond the Stone. They decided to ask the tsar for permission to own the lands near the Ob - and received it in 1574. So the Stroganovs wanted to solve all their problems - and even with a lot of welding. But in order to accomplish the plan, strength is needed. And there is nothing unusual in the fact that they decided to call the defenders from afar. It must be remembered that in 1578 the twenty-year period of exemption from taxes expired, which was granted to the Stroganovs and the people who settled on their lands in 1558. Starting in 1578, there began an outflow of mobile workers, especially men who did not want to pay the taxes presented to them. With whom did Stroganov have to go to fight the Tatars?! So from this side, both historical logic and the actual outline of events are correlated.

What confuses those who disagree with the version of this chronicle? Stroganov's participation is too prominent there. Up to that - how much, and how, and to whom Maxim gave, and how he selected guides, and so on and so forth.

In addition, there was no reason for them, according to some, to keep a horde (at least 500 people) of armed idlers for two whole years. The Stroganovs were not such fools to first invite people, and then figure out what to do with them. They probably would have immediately prepared and bought food for them, rather than wasting money on feeding them for two years.

In the summer of 1581, two very formidable attacks by the Pelym princes were made on the Stroganov possessions - first by Begbelia, and then by Kihek. According to the chronicle, both of these raids were repelled by warriors gathered by Maxim and Grigory Stroganov. Moreover, the second attack happened on the same day when the Stroganovs released Yermak to Siberia and he had just plunged into his boats. So no one sent him in pursuit to help, and then a great force fell upon the Stroganovs. Barely fought back.

And other facts...

For example, like this. They gave Yermak guides, who got lost after 9 days ...

In general, there are quite substantial doubts about the accuracy of the Stroganov Chronicle. As one critic of it stated, much of it was reworked "to glorify this family."

The third point of view is based on the understanding of both chronicles and some other historical documents.

So, the Kungur chronicler in the seventh section claims that “... and on the campaign Yermak, on the plows of his retinue from Maxim, taking with prejudice, and not at all in honor or on loan, but kill the hotesh and plunder his life and ruin his house and those living with him to the end, and proceed to Maxim giz. Maximus, however, admonished them by God and the sovereign that they should give the number of their reserves, and asking them for bondage: when you return, on whom were those supplies taken at a price and who would give back exactly or with interest? Of these, the troops, most of all, Ivan Koltsov shouting from the Yesaula: “Oh man! don’t you know, you’re dead now, we’ll take you and shoot you in pieces…”

Something does not look like this conversation on an amicable agreement. Yes, and the historian P. S. Ikosov (he was also the head of the estates of the Stroganovs and, therefore, was familiar with their closed archives) claims that the attacks on the Stroganov lands of the Pelymians were provoked by the excesses of the Ermakov Cossacks in those places. Maybe the Yermakov campaign was started in the pre-winter season, on September 1, in order to send them off as soon as possible. Indeed, in order to fight in Siberia, winter was not suitable for mounted Cossacks and was not entirely convenient for sailing on plows. The Stroganovs already knew for certain that "it is not possible to go to Siberia on horseback in the winter."

So it may well be that the collusion of the Stroganovs with the Cossacks was forced for the Ural rulers and rather unpeaceful.

The fourth point of view is not so common. She has very few supporters. But it is based on a documentary basis. In 1867, the published correspondence of the military leaders and the Office of Stefan Batory appeared in Russian. And there a report was found in which a certain pan Stravinsky informs his king that near Mogilev, where the Moscow rati opposed the Polish troops, among the Russian military leaders is “Yermak Timofeevich, Cossack ataman”.

True, supporters of all previous points of view attacked this message amicably. At first, they found fault with the fact that the ataman was not named that way, then they said that the report was dated June 27, 1581, and according to the Stroganov Chronicles, on September 1, Yermak had already sailed from the Stroganovs, it was unthinkable, they say, to move to such distances in such a short time. And, most importantly, such an understanding of Yermak's life path is in no way consistent with the annals.

Although the following information is also stored in the folklore tradition: Yermak Timofeevich fought, they say, for the tsar-father, both when he took Kazan and when he besieged Astrakhan. Yes, and it was necessary for the nobles of Ivan the Terrible to finally begin to respond to the pleas for the protection of the Stroganovs, and to the requests for help from the Cherdyn governor. Because the Kuchumov hordes began to disturb the entire eastern border of the Moscow state ...

In general, the issue requires further study.

Just like this one, however, rather small - but what is the name of Yermak Timofeevich?

Apparently, at first there was nothing unusual in that name. How many people are called. Moreover, when they dug into the Stroganov archives, Ermakov turned out to be not alone in all sorts of different things. So, the youngest son of Aniky Stroganov, Semyon, even had two Yermaks in the household according to the census of 1583 - Yermak Morok and Yermak-ezovshchik (fisherman). But since there was no such name in the Orthodox calendar, they began to recall that this is also the name of the cauldron in which the artels cook food. So, before the atamanship, Yermak was a cook. Then it turned out that this is how a millstone is called on the Volga. He then, it turns out, went from millers to robbers? ..

And then it turns out that the exploits of Yermak in Siberia were recorded in another chronicle, compiled in 1760 by the Tobolsk coachman Ivan Leontievich Cherepanov.

The Cherepanov Chronicle immediately became a sensation, because it was the first to be found in it - what would you think? - Pedigree of Yermak. It described in detail how his grandfather worked as a driver for the Murom robbers, for which he was caught and imprisoned. Then he fled with his wife and two children, who, after the death of their father, found shelter in the Stroganov estates. It turned out that Yermak is Vasily Timofeevich Olenin. And he still has a bunch of siblings and cousins.

In general, the thing is quite incredible. A Cossack - a robber, a person who actually lives outside the law, suddenly announces his relatives publicly, putting them under a certain blow. N. M. Karamzin called this "news" a "fairy tale", and the historian L. N. Maikov generally categorically stated in 1876: "... the chronicle of I. L. Cherepanov does not deserve to be printed ..."

But evidence suddenly appeared that the Cherepanov Chronicle was simply a conscientious compilation of many sources. And one of them - "The Legend of the Siberian Land" - was found by the famous Ural local historian, Alexander Alekseevich Dmitriev. In this "Tale" information about Yermak almost completely coincided with Cherepanov's.

Of course, critics immediately attacked A. A. Dmitriev as well. They accused the text he published of being “...representing a stupid and sometimes ridiculous fake for Slavic (language. - L.S.)…” and that it does not have the name of the compiler at all. However, Dmitriev also found defenders, who eventually proved that the same biographical data about Yermak was first recorded not so far from 1633.

On the one hand, this immediately strengthened the position of the Cherepanov Chronicle. But, on the other hand, voices began to be heard - perhaps too much conflicting information appeared at the same supposed time and in the same place. After all, Dmitriev found his "Tale" not just anywhere, but in the Solikamsk district.

In general, there are also considerable difficulties with the question of the name of the Siberian hero.

By the way, although the merits of this man before the Moscow state were recognized almost immediately - well, Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible himself granted him a fur coat from his shoulder - then his elevation to the rank of a national hero had his opponents.

The issue turned out to be so serious that it was even submitted to the meetings of the "Historical Department" of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences on June 3 and 6, 1748. Here is the information about that meeting that A. A. Vvedensky cites in his book “The House of the Stroganovs in the 16th-17th centuries”: “... in the minutes ... it is noted that “Mr. for the All-Russian autocrat, but this is true that he later bowed to the All-Russian monarch with it. For this reason, if these arguments, which are written about his affairs with some blasphemy, cannot be changed, it is better to throw them all out.

The academician was embarrassed that the protagonist of the events was a robber. V. K. Tredyakovsky, supporting M. V. Lomonosov, pointed out: “Negative decency and some political dangers and precautions require that the dishonest name of Yermak not offend readers, and especially Russian ones, who already have a great inclination towards him for the noble things he has done and a useful thing ... then ... the descriptions mentioned about him should be turned off, if they cannot be corrected and softened.

That's it. And you say: Orwell, Platonov... In Russia, combing the history of the Avon began even when they started. So we have yet to find out the whole truth about Yermak Timofeevich. But at the same time, most of us, I think, will be able to come to terms with the idea that today science does not know quite definitely how, when, at whose request Ataman Yermak showed up in the Urals. In the end, it is more important for posterity to know not how he got here, but what he did here.

It would seem that all researchers are united in this: he accomplished a brilliant feat. After all, as Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin put it, “...neither contemporaries nor posterity thought to deprive Yermak of the full honor of this conquest, magnifying his valor not only in chronicles, but also in holy temples, where we still solemnly pray for him ... "

We pray, of course, in Russian Orthodox churches.

But not everyone prays there.

This is evidenced, for example, by a letter published in Rodina magazine (No. 5, 1990, p. 75). The author of the letter, M. Kh. Khalitov, has a completely different attitude to “... the personality of a person nicknamed“ Yermak “...”. He believes that the ataman and his Cossacks who came to Siberia are simply “professional killers” who “... shot our ancestors like wild animals, drowned their resistance in blood. Accustomed to killing anyone who gets caught, killing "natives" ... was treated like training on targets. And the vast majority of Russian literature and the Russian people present such people as folk heroes, considering the seizure of foreign lands and the conquest of other peoples a holy deed, a feat. Until now, I have not yet met in the press, or on the radio, or on television, or in the cinema, a word of condemnation of the atrocities of these so-called "pioneers" and their chieftain. They are not pioneers, but pioneers ... ".

So harshly, sharply, M. Kh. Khalitov rejects the excellent opinion of N. M. Karamzin.

What can I say? One can simply dismiss the opinion of Khalitov, who, four hundred years after the Siberian events, is trying to settle accounts with the offender of "his ancestors." And you can think. And remember. He is not the first to raise his voice against the stereotypes established in history. And as for the quality of the assessments of the author of the History of the Russian State, we have the testimony of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin himself:

In his "History" elegance, simplicity

They prove to us without prejudice

The need for autocracy

And the charms of the whip ...

Indeed, the clash of such extreme assessments of the activities of Yermakov's army highlights one very difficult problem - the problem of assessing the Russian colonization of the eastern lands, or rather, what is there to hide - the problem of assessing Russian imperialism.

This problem has many aspects.

Here is one of them.

Almost all venerable Russian historians (both in bygone days and today) write "History" for our entire vast country from the standpoint of ... courtyards of the Grand Duke of Moscow. The possessions of which, however, have grown over time from the Baltic Sea to the Sea of ​​Japan and from the Black to the White. And they became a multilingual, multiform empire. And they - historians - continue to write the history of the Russian Orthodox possession according to the canon, instituted a long time ago. It was successfully stylized by A. S. Pushkin:

... How the prophetic Oleg is now going

take revenge on the unreasonable Khazars...

Our rulers are naturally knowledgeable, wise rulers (with a few exceptions!). And here they are - all sorts of Khazars there - at best, unreasonable, dark wicked.

What - these our historians are such simpletons that they did not notice the transformation of the principality into an empire? No, of course, all this is noticed and described. It is only described from the point of view of the “leaders” of this empire, instilled in them, historians, and the majority of the Russian population, who were also taught to believe that the most Christian Russian rulers, inspired by the Lord himself, should have used all the power of the growing Russian nation to accustom “non-Christians” to the light of the Lord. At the same time, it was as if it was not noticed that along the way they were cleaning up the hands and territory of these "infidels", that, in addition to their will and desire, churches were built there and "dark foreigners" were baptized.

So, in any case, it seemed to many scientists. And in many Russian heads, such a simplified understanding of the purpose of the Muscovite state, expressed by the brief formula "Moscow is the third Rome", took root. And the deeds of the Ermakovs also contributed to this.

Indeed, from the point of view of a Russian person, Yermak's victories on the banks of the Irtysh are nothing but a great fulfillment of the centuries-old aspirations of the Russian people. After all, Ermak managed to complete the last act of the great historical tragedy, begun by the massacre on Kalka in 1223, with a brilliant victory. This massacre was staged by the hordes of Genghis Khan (who, by the way, also created a world empire) suddenly fell on Russian lands. And here it is, a great retribution has been accomplished for more than three centuries of being in a state of humiliating fear, of life in anticipation of the daily possible devastating Tatar invasion. And when these invasions were carried out, there was no mercy for the Russians ...

This fear did not go away even after the Kulikovo field, because almost immediately after it, Moscow was burned by Tokhtamysh. And it did not evaporate after “standing on the Ugra”, because the formidable Tatar khanates continued to surround Russian lands from all sides. And from all sides, we repeat, one could expect raids, ruins, captivity, death from them. And no matter how happy the Russian people were at the defeat of the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates, how can one forget that it was worth many bloody efforts. And then suddenly, not numerous Russian ratis, but some kind of gang, a gang, an unknown gang before that, smashes, but how - utterly, the most formidable and most powerful Siberian Khanate, disperses his host, hundreds of times greater in number! The army, which in the battles was led by a direct descendant of Genghis Khan Kuchum. It was then that all the Russians truly believed: that's it, the Tatar danger is over!

And no one has the right to condemn the Russian people for this.

So with good reason, Yermak Timofeevich is a national hero of the Russian people. Execute him!

Just do not make him a hero of all the peoples of the empire. He cannot become a hero of the Tatar people, just as it is difficult to accustom the Poles to regard Suvorov as their national hero. Or Shamil - Russian.

Yes, it happened: we are the heirs of the creators and inhabitants of one of the greatest empires in the world. And we should not shy away from this word just because we were taught in kindergartens that the imperialists are bullies. And we were unaware that, having called the former Russian empire- The USSR, the Bolsheviks changed little in the imperialist essence of a huge country.

But what is imperialism? N. Berdyaev in “The Fate of Russia” offers the following interpretation of this term: “In the history of new mankind, a dual process takes place - the process of universalization and the process of individualization, integration into large bodies and differentiation into small bodies. Nationalism is the beginning of individualization, imperialism is the beginning of universalization. At the same time, as nationalism is inclined towards isolation, imperialism wants to enter the world expanse ... The imperialist will has shed a lot of blood in human history, but behind it is hidden the idea of ​​the world unity of mankind, overcoming any national isolation, any provincialism ... And that philosophy of history is very naive who believes that it is possible to prevent movement along this path of the world imperialist struggle, which wants to see in it not the tragic fate of all mankind, but only the evil will of certain clans, certain governments ... "

True, in Russian imperialism, according to the subtle observation of Harvard University professor Richard Pipes, the phenomenon repeated many times in history of the desire of many rulers to concentrate peoples and states around some one people or state had even more “subjective” explanations. The defining one, according to Pipes, is the poverty of the nature of the original Russian lands. But this factor was multiplied many times over by the envy of the Moscow rulers towards the way of life of the rulers and peoples of the surrounding countries. After all, the merchants brought to them the tender softness of Siberian sables, and the beauty of goblets, dishes of Arabic chased silver, and fine Cypriot wines, and so on, and so on, and so on ... And quite simple, militarily, of course, it seemed to them that they could get by land or water to any part of the then world where these riches were - to Europe, the Bukhara regions, Siberia and beyond.

That is why in Russian history the invader heroes are so revered (as in the history of imperialist Spain - Cortes and Pizarro, and in the history of the United States - the "pioneers" of capturing the western territories of North America from the Indians).

Of course, the great Russian philosophers also understood this. The same Nikolai Berdyaev states: “... Humanity is moving towards unity through struggle, strife and war. This is sad, it can cause our indignation, this is an indicator of great darkness in which the very roots of human life are immersed, but it is so ... "Nevertheless, he confidently declares:" But imperialism with its world claims does not necessarily mean oppression and extermination small nations...

Vladimir Solovyov, another great Russian philosopher, seems to supplement Berdyaev: "Every nationality has the right to live and develop its forces without violating the same rights of other nationalities."

And if they had a chance to clash in combat, then we must remember - after any fight, peace comes. And again you have to live nearby. And to understand - "... you can never say that in any struggle one people is entirely good, and the other is evil, one people can only be relatively more right than the other." (This is Berdyaev again).

That's all. The recipe is simple. And in it one of the main requirements is not to impose on others your lifestyle, your gods, your heroes. But what the great Russian philosophers comprehended was far from becoming the norms of the life of the Russian, and then the Soviet statehood. If many small peoples were sincerely drawn to the great, great culture of the Russian people, then state structures did everything to make this culture a monoculture. They replaced the Arabic alphabet with Cyrillic, introduced one compulsory state language for everyone, the same saints and heroes - St. Vladimir, Stepan Razin, Pavlik Morozov ...

It seems that with all the enormous moral and political significance for the Russians of what Yermak did, one should not make him a hero, say, of the Tatar people. He has Tokhtamysh, who is also not at all necessary to honor Muscovites ...