The article analyzes the personality of Ivan Bolotnikov in Russian historiography. I.I. Bolotnikov was a leader of the Peasant War in 1606-1607. The history of historical science was divided chronologically into three periods: pre-revolutionary, Soviet and post-Soviet. A feature of studying the uprising of I.I. Bolotnikov is the scarcity of sources. Therefore, the basis for portraying Ivan Bolotnikov was numerically small and incomplete data about him by his contemporaries, analysis of slogans put forward by I.I. Bo-lotnikov and his associates, as well as description of his activities. In the framework of classical historiography, the works of N.M. Karamzin, S.M. Solovyov, N.I. Kostomarov, V.O. Kluchevsky and S.F. Platonov were analyzed. To analyze I.I. Bolotnikov's portrait by historians in the Soviet period, the writings of M.N. Pokrovsky, I.I. Smirnov, V.I. Koretskiy, R.G. Skrynnikov, A.A. Zimin and V.I. Buganov were used. During this period, historians used the class approach and the leader of the uprising is characterized as a fighter for freedom and justice. It was during the Soviet decades that discussions unfold on the Peasant War of the early 17th century. In addition, historians of the Soviet period made the greatest contribution to the study of the details of the uprising and the search for new sources. Historiography of I.I. Bolotnikov's uprising in the post-Soviet period is represented by works of V.I. Ko-retskono, R.G. Skrynnikov, L.E. Morozova, A.M. Panchenko, L.A. Chernaya, A.L. Stanislavskiy, K.V. Tchistov and V.Ya. Maul. Historians of the 1990s 2000s began to abandon the ideological regime of the Soviet decades. During these years, works of classical historians were rehabilitated. Thus, evaluation of the personality and activities of I.I. Bolotnikov were ambiguous. This can be explained by several factors. Historians and classics like N.M. Karamzin, S.M. Solovyov, because of their views on the state system, characterized the leader of the uprising negatively, more like a robber. Kluchevsky characterized the economic motives of I.I. Bolot-nikov's actions and concluded that Ivan Bolotnikov sought personal wealth. Historians of the Soviet period expanded the source base of I.I. Bolotnikov's uprising research and were prone to the apologetics of Bolotnikov and his associates' actions. It is important to note that during the Soviet period studies appeared in which the authors attempted to establish the social status of I.I. Bolotnikov, defining him as a native of small nobles. The post-Soviet decades depart from the class principle; and researchers begin to use anthropological and cultural approaches. The search for unknown sources on the subject continues. I.I. Bolotnikov's social status is revised. Now Ivan Bolotnikov is presented as a native of the Cossacks, and his activities are no longer characterized with delight and approval.

История Смутного времени всегда привлекала внимание историков, и в первую очередь исторические личности этого периода заслуживают подробного и внимательного изучения. В статье рассматривается личность Ивана Исаевича Болотникова, который возглавил крестьянское выступление в 1606-1607 гг. Проводится анализ оценок личности И.И. Болотникова и определения его социального статуса историками в дореволюционный (классический), советский и постсоветский периоды. Выделяются факторы, влияющие на работу историка в разные исторические периоды.