The concept of “liberation movement” includes not only the revolutionary struggle, but also liberal opposition speeches, as well as all shades of advanced socio-political thought.
At the initial stage, the Russian liberation movement was dominated by representatives of the nobility, and later by the intelligentsia. This was due to the fact that in Russia, unlike other countries Western Europe, a broad “middle” layer of the population has not been formed - the so-called “third estate”, which could put forward its political programs and lead the struggle for their implementation.
A. N. Radishchev, N. I. Novikov, Russian enlighteners of the turn of the 18th - 19th centuries, Decembrists, A. I. Herzen, N. P. Ogarev, V. G. Belinsky, Petrashevites - these are the most prominent representatives initial stage liberation movement, called "noble". Let us note that they belonged to a very narrow circle of the most educated progressive nobility. The overwhelming majority of the nobility remained a serf-minded and conservative class loyal to the throne. The Decembrists were people of high morality, which distinguished them from the rest of the nobility, forced them to rise above their class privileges given to them by origin and position in society, to sacrifice their entire fortune and even their lives in the name of high and noble ideals - the liberation of Russia from serfdom and despotism autocratic power.
The sources of their “freethinking” were the ideas of the French enlighteners of the 18th century. and Russian "freethinkers" of the late 18th - early 19th centuries. The Patriotic War of 1812 had a great influence on the formation of the liberation ideas of the Decembrists. It is no coincidence that they called themselves “children of 1812,” considering it as the starting point of their political education. Over a hundred future Decembrists were participants in this war.
The foreign campaign of the Russian army in 1813 - 1814, in which many Decembrists participated, introduced them to the socio-political changes in Europe after the French Revolution of the late 18th century, enriched them with new impressions, ideas and life experiences.
The Decembrists felt the significance of the era in which they had to live and act, when, in their opinion, the “fate of Russia” was being decided. They were characterized by a sense of the grandeur of the events of their era, as well as direct involvement in these events, which served as the driving motive for their actions. They performed on the historical stage in the era of major military-political cataclysms: the Napoleonic wars, revolutions in different countries Europe, national liberation uprisings in Greece and Latin American colonies.
The Decembrists were closely associated with the liberal-opposition, or, as they say, “near-Decembrist” environment, on which they relied in their activities and which essentially shared the views characteristic of the Decembrists. These are prominent writers (for example, A. S. Pushkin, P. A. Vyazemsky, A. S. Griboedov, D. V. Davydov), statesmen and military leaders known for their progressive views (N. S. Mordvinov, P. D. Kiselev, M. M. Speransky, A. P. Ermolov). Therefore, the emergence of Decembrism and the activities of Decembrist societies, especially at their early stage, cannot be understood without connection with their liberal-opposition environment. One cannot discount the fact that the formation of Decembrist ideas and views was influenced both by the transformative activities and reform plans of the beginning of the reign of Alexander I, and by the later disappointment in the “reformer on the throne” that followed as a result of their actual abandonment.
The organizational and tactical principles of the Decembrists were significantly influenced by Freemasonry (more than 80 Decembrists, including all their leaders, were Freemasons), as well as the experience of secret societies in European countries.
Formation of ideology. The ideology of the Decembrists was formed on the basis of contemporary social thought, political and military events, and social reality in Europe and Russia. These are, first of all, the ideas of the French enlighteners of the 18th century. (Voltaire, Rousseau, Montesquieu, Diderot, etc.), as well as Russian freethinkers of the second half of the XYIII century. (A.N. Radishcheva, N.I. Novikova, etc.) and the peculiar “spirit of free thought” that dominated at the beginning of the 19th century. at Moscow University, 1st Cadet Corps and the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, where many future Decembrists studied. The formation of the ideology of the Decembrists was also significantly influenced by such factors as the unsightly Russian feudal reality, the reform plans of the beginning of the reign of Alexander I, and the disappointment in society that followed as a result of their implementation.
The real political school for the Decembrists was the Patriotic War of 1812 (115 future Decembrists were its participants) and the foreign campaigns of the Russian army of 1813-1815, during which they became acquainted with the socio-political changes that took place in Europe as a result of the French Revolution at the end of XVIII century and subsequent wars. Freemasonry had a certain influence on the ideology and tactics of the Decembrists (all the leaders of the movement and many ordinary Decembrists were members of Russian Masonic lodges), as well as the experience of secret societies created in European countries to fight the occupation of Napoleon - the German “Tugenbund”, Italian Carbonari, Greek Aetherists and Spanish conspirators of the early 1820s.
The main slogans of the Decembrists were the destruction of autocracy and serfdom. They were deeply convinced that these very realities of Russian reality were the main obstacle to the further development of the country. The Decembrists were united in defining the goal of their movement, but differed significantly on the question of the means of struggle to realize this goal. Some of them were supporters of a peaceful, reformist way of restructuring society, others defended the idea of the need for “decisive measures” in this matter.
It all started with the emergence in 1814-1815. among the officers of the first ideological comradely associations, which represented the early pre-Decembrist secret societies: two officer artels - in the Semenovsky regiment and among the officers of the General Staff (“Sacred Artel”), the Kamenets-Podolsk circle of Vladimir Raevsky and the “Order of Russian Knights” by M. Orlov and M. Dmitriev-Mamonov. The most numerous of them was the “Order of Russian Knights”. Despite the complex Masonic forms it adopted, it was a secret political organization, which pursued the goal of a coup d'etat and worked on a constitutional project.
35. Comparative characteristics of the early Decembrist organizations “Union of Salvation” and “Union of Prosperity”
"Union of Salvation". In 1816, six young officers - A.N. Muravyov, S.P. Trubetskoy, N.M. Muravyov, brothers M.I. and S.I. Muravyov-Apostles and I.D. Yakushkin - created the first secret Decembrist organization “Union of Salvation”. Members of the organization believed that Russia needed to be saved - it was on the brink of destruction. The “Union of Salvation” had its own program and charter (statute), recruited new members (by the fall of 1817 there were at least 30 participants), and animatedly discussed ways to transform Russia. Among his main programs was the struggle for a constitutional monarchy and the abolition of serfdom. In August 1817, the organization arose a plan for an immediate action, which for the first time was supposed to begin with regicide as one of the ways to change the existing political system (the so-called “Moscow conspiracy”). However, this plan met with opposition from the majority of members of the Salvation Union. Disagreements on tactical issues (regarding the correct “methods of action”) and the consciousness of the need to step beyond the narrow circle of conspiratorial officers led to the self-liquidation of the Union at the end of 1817.
"Union of Welfare". In January 1818, a new secret organization of Decembrists arose in Moscow - the “Union of Prosperity”, whose members were concerned, first of all, with the main idea - to create the prosperity of Russia, that is, a free and prosperous fatherland. It was a broader organization; it included about 200 people. It had its own charter (“Green Book”) and a program of specific actions. The task of forming “public opinion” was put in first place, which the Decembrists considered the most important driving force socio-political reorganization of Russia. To this end, members of the Union took an active part in various legal societies (Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, Society for the Establishment of Lancaster Schools, etc.), and were engaged in educational and charitable activities.
The Union of Welfare was a strictly centralized organization. Leadership was carried out by the Root Council, which included A. Muravyov, S. Trubetskoy, M. Muravyov, S. Muravyov-Apostol, N. Muravyov, P. Pestel, M. Orlov, D. Yakushkin, N. Turgenev and others, in total about 30 people.
Throughout the years of the Union's existence, heated discussions on issues of program and tactics did not stop. In January 1820, a meeting of the Union's Root Council was held in St. Petersburg, at which Pestel made a report on what kind of government should be preferred in the country. Most of the meeting participants spoke in favor of introducing a republican form of government in Russia. However, even after the meeting, many Decembrists spoke not for a republic, but for a constitutional monarchy. The split within the Union deepened and intensified.
The growth of radical sentiments among the Decembrists was facilitated by the soldier unrest of 1820 in the Semenovsky Life Guards Regiment, which created among a number of Union members an exaggerated idea of the army’s readiness to march, as well as the events of 1820-1821. in Spain, where the army was indeed the main force of the coup. Among them, the conviction of the need for violent measures to destroy autocracy and serfdom and that without a secret organization this coup, which was conceived exclusively as a military uprising, was impossible, became increasingly stronger.
The split within the Union actually brought it to the brink of crisis. In 1821, a new congress of the Union of Welfare in Moscow decided to formally dissolve it and create a new, more conspiratorial organization.
M. Publishing house "Thought". 1979. 288 p. Circulation 15500. Price 1 rub. 10 kopecks
The history of the liberation movement in Russia has always been the focus of attention of Soviet researchers. But, despite this, there are still questions that need further development, the insufficient knowledge of which cannot but affect the understanding of the problem as a whole. These include the important question of continuity in the history of the liberation movement in Russia. As is known, “the liberation movement in Russia went through,” according to V.I. Lenin, “three main stages, corresponding to the three main classes of Russian society that left their stamp on the movement” 1 . In order to determine continuity, it is necessary to have a complete scientific understanding of each of these stages in all the diversity and complexity of its constituent phenomena, the dynamics of their development and connections with other stages.
It is from this position that Doctor of Historical Sciences V. A. Dyakov (head of the sector of the Institute of Slavic and Balkan Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences) approached the analysis of the first stage of the liberation movement in Russia in his monograph. For the first time in Soviet historiography, the noble period of the revolutionary movement is considered as a whole - from the Decembrists to the end of the 1850s. Individual major social phenomena (Decembrists, Petrashevtsy, V. G. Belinsky, A. I. Herzen, etc.), constituting milestones in the history of the noble stage, are analyzed by the author from the point of view of identifying general patterns and features this stage. In this regard, the main task of the book was “to identify the main typological features of the liberation movement in Russia at the noble stage” (p. 246). The author explores the movement in the process of continuous development, showing the organic connection between the noble and revolutionary-raznochinsky stages, their deep continuity, reversing special attention to that new thing that, having originated in the nobility, is established at the next stage - the raznochinsky stage. One of the most important aspects problems - the question of the social composition of participants in the noble stage of the liberation movement. Lenin, as we know, based the periodization of the revolutionary movement on the class characteristic and social affiliation of its participants. The nobility, making up the bulk of participants in the liberation movement during the first half of the 19th century, determined the overall ideology, program and tactics of the revolutionary camp. “The advanced part of the noble class,” says the monograph, “was in 1826 - 1861 the main force of the bourgeois in its objective
1 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 25, p. 93.
direction of the Russian liberation movement" (p. 247). However, after the Decembrist uprising, the composition of the participants in the liberation movement began to change. If the Decembrists, as the author points out, "the overwhelming majority not only came from the nobility, but also represented, first of all, a fairly developed and wealthy nobility "(p. 48), then already in the 30s of the 19th century commoners penetrated into the revolutionary environment, the number of which increased at a fairly rapid pace, so that by the end of the 50s of the last century " specific gravity commoners exceeded 50%, as a result of which the commoner became the main figure in the movement" (p. 61). And this, in turn, should have led to profound changes in the nature of the liberation movement, for "quantity turned into quality: commoners not only made up the majority among the participants in the liberation movement, but also became its guiding force" (p. 246). The author rightly considers changes in the social composition of participants in the liberation movement at the noble stage as a reflection of profound socio-economic changes in the era of the crisis of the feudal-serf formation in Russia.
The question of the social composition of participants in the first stage of the liberation movement is closely related to main problem research - the problem of noble revolutionism. It is in the class affiliation of the participants in the movement that one should look for the roots of ideological development at this time. The work gives following definition noble revolutionary spirit: 1) fear of noble revolutionaries of “a decisive breakdown of the social foundations of the feudal-serf system, their desire to carry out bourgeois transformations with maximum regard for the interests of their class”; 2) “a clear preference for political goals and means of struggle”; 3) “a course towards a military conspiracy”, which gradually became obsolete, “for the experience of the struggle proved its groundlessness” (pp. 247 - 248). The noble revolutionism did not remain motionless; deep internal changes took place in it. The Decembrist movement is only the first period of the liberation movement at the noble stage, when they first appeared revolutionary organizations, the programs and tactics of the revolutionaries are being developed. However, as the author rightly notes, the traditions of the Decembrists turned out to be strong “throughout the entire noble stage of the historian of the liberation movement in Russia” (p. 18).
Much attention is paid to the relationship between revolutionary and liberal ideas throughout the development of noble revolutionism. V. A. Dyakov believes that “the presence and historical conditionality of liberal-educational or liberal tendencies in the liberation movement of the noble stage are completely undeniable” (p. 250). The question of choosing a revolutionary or reformist path to achieve final goals arose, as shown in the book, already before the Decembrists. The author notes “the complexity and contradictory nature of the process of genesis and development of Decembrist ideology” (p. 70). After the failure of the Decembrist uprising, during the first decade, revolutionary democratic and liberal ideas were intertwined in the liberation movement, which is clearly seen in the activities of various circles and societies that arose after 1825, which V. A. Dyakov conventionally divides into three main groups: democratic, democratic-educational, liberal-educational. He rightly draws attention to the fact that at that time there was no clear division into revolutionary democratic and liberal movements, that the views of participants in the liberation movement could “represent and often represented a differently dosed mixture of democratic and liberal ideologies” (p. 99 ).
At the same time, the author shows that even then the process of isolation of the liberal direction began, and this indicated the emergence of a process of demarcation within the general flow of the liberation movement. A new characteristic feature in the liberation movement after the Decembrist uprising was the spread and assimilation of the ideas of utopian socialism. The circle of A. I. Herzen - N. P. Ogarev played a big role in this. The work rightly notes that the perception of the ideas of utopian socialism “noticeably accelerated the ideological demarcation in the Russian social movement” (p. 103).
In the 40s - 50s of the 19th century. phenomena that had emerged earlier in the liberation movement begin to manifest themselves much more acutely and deeply. The struggle between the democratic and liberal directions is intensifying, while, as the author emphasizes,
“from the very first steps, the revolutionary-democratic trend opposed liberalism as a whole, that is, both Westerners and Slavophiles” (p. 112). Simultaneously with the process of an increasingly sharp demarcation between democracy and liberalism, the assimilation of the ideas of utopian socialism is expanding, and interest in socialist ideas is growing. By the end of the noble stage, that is, in the 50s of the 19th century, utopian socialism had already become widespread among participants in the liberation movement, but it became the “dominant ideological and political doctrine of Russian revolutionaries” only after 1861 (p. 251). At the same time, noting the growing interest in the ideas of utopian socialism in progressive circles, the author believes that the liberation movement “was dominated by a general democratic current” (p. 152).
V. A. Dyakov examines the connections between the national liberation struggle of the peoples of Russia and the Russian liberation movement, analyzes the nature of these connections, the possibility of their mutual influence in the fight against tsarism. For the first time, such a question as “the relationship between the social and national aspects of the liberation movement in Russia” is being explored (p. 252). The author comes to the conclusion that the national liberation movement was an important reserve of the revolutionary movement, that “advanced figures various peoples Russia had already begun to take an interest in each other’s liberation struggle, looked for and sometimes found ways for rapprochement and cooperation” (p. 199). Other conclusions of the author seem interesting: that the Polish national liberation movement in the first half of the 19th century “at its core social meaning was anti-feudal" (p. 167), that "the liberation struggle in Ukraine developed as an organic part of the all-Russian liberation movement" (p. 173), that the idea of interethnic cooperation was increasingly included among Russian, Polish and Ukrainian revolutionaries (p. 182).
The book shows the complex path of searching for revolutionaries in organizational and tactical issues. The tactics of the “military revolution” of the Decembrists already in the late 20s - early 30s of the 19th century. gives way to new ideas - the need to attract the people to a revolutionary upheaval. In this regard, the agitation activities of revolutionaries in various social circles begin. The author believes that “in an organizational and tactical sense, a great achievement and the pinnacle of the noble stage was a whole system of revolutionary circles, partly united in a federation, and partly acting independently” (p. 253). The development of organizational and tactical principles of noble revolutionaries organically led to the creation in the early 60s of the last century of the organization of commoner revolutionaries “Land and Freedom”.
However, the author's assertion that the noble stage of the liberation movement ends with the revolutionary situation of 1859 - 1861 raises doubts. It seems to us that it represented a transitional point from the noble to the raznochinsky stage, a line in which the features of raznochinsky revolution already prevailed. It was during these years that the theoretical and tactical signs of the mixed-democratic stage appeared most clearly. And what about the activities of N. G. Chernyshevsky and his associates - the ideological leaders and organizers of the revolutionary democratic camp? What about the revolutionary circles of the late 50s and early 60s? Didn’t they have a pronounced democratic character in their social composition, programs and tactical guidelines?
It would be necessary to more clearly emphasize the importance of the question of the origin of revolutionary democratic thought in the liberation movement and, in connection with this, show the role of V. G. Belinsky as the founder of Russian revolutionary democracy. His activities went beyond the scope of noble revolution. Insufficient attention has been paid to the personality of the great democratic critic. The question of the people, of involving them in the revolutionary struggle, was a qualitatively new and extremely important feature of the liberation movement already at its first stage. I would like the history of this issue to be traced more clearly both in the views of individual revolutionaries and in the ideological platforms of circles and organizations. This is directly related to the problem of succession, since the question of the people's revolution and the preparation of the uprising was one of the main ones in the program of revolutionary democracy.
1. The emergence of secret societies. Program goals of the Decembrists.
In concept "liberation movement" includes not only revolutionary war, but also liberal opposition speeches, as well as all shades of advanced socio-political thought. The liberation movement begins in the era of transition from feudalism to capitalism, that is, in the era of the breakdown of feudal-absolutist institutions and the rise of the bourgeoisie.
As is known, V.I. Lenin divided the liberation movement in Russia (before 1917) into three stages: noble, common and proletarian. Let us note the legitimacy, but inadequacy of this approach. Although at the first stage (approximately until the middle of the 19th century) nobles practically predominated in the liberation movement, even at its “raznochinsky” stage, people from the nobility continued to play a large role. Even at the “proletarian” stage, the democratic parties that led the revolutionary struggle and acted on behalf of the proletariat and peasantry consisted primarily of representatives of the intelligentsia, but not workers and peasants, whose numbers in these parties were negligible. The moderate wing of the liberation movement, led by liberal opposition parties, was almost entirely represented by the bourgeois and noble intelligentsia. Therefore, another criterion for the periodization of the liberation movement is more legitimate - nature of ideology(in Russia, the ideas of the Age of Enlightenment dominated - the theory of “natural rights of man and citizen”).
The Decembrists were people of high morality, which distinguished them from the rest of the nobility and forced them to rise above their class privileges given to them by their origin and position in society. Becoming “Decembrists” meant sacrificing your entire fortune and even your life itself in the name of high and noble ideals - the liberation of Russia from serfdom and the despotism of autocratic power.
Had a great influence on the formation of the liberation ideas of the Decembrists Patriotic War of 1812 It is no coincidence that they called themselves “children of 1812,” considering it as the starting point of their political education. More than a hundred future Decembrists took part in the War of 1812, 65 of those who would later be called “state criminals” heroically fought the enemy on the Borodino field.
The organizational and tactical principles of the Decembrists were significantly influenced by Freemasonry (more than 80 Decembrists, including all their leaders, were Freemasons), as well as the experience of secret societies in European countries.
The first Decembrist society - Salvation Union- arose in early February 1816. in St. Petersburg on the initiative of 23-year-old Colonel of the General Staff A.N. Muravyov (after the arrival of P.I. Pestel it received a new name - “Society of True and Faithful Sons of the Fatherland”). At the end of its existence it consisted of 30 people. In this Decembrist organization, although the main goal was defined - the introduction of a constitution and the abolition of serfdom, the means of achieving this goal were still unclear, and there was no program of political reforms.
In January 1818, another organization was created, which received the name Union of Welfare. During its three-year existence (1818–1821), the Union of Welfare made a major step in the development of organizational and tactical principles and program provisions of Decembrism. It differed from the Union of Salvation in its larger composition - it already had 200 members, in its detailed charter - the “Green Book” (“introduction of a constitution and legally free government”, “abolition of slavery”, introduction of “equality of citizens before the law, openness in state cases and in legal proceedings”, liquidation of recruitment, military settlements).
Members of the Welfare Union held different views and ideas about the ways and means of political change in the country.
In March 1812 it took shape Southern Society. Almost simultaneously in St. Petersburg N.M. Muravyov and N.I. Turgenev laid the foundation Northern society, which received its final organizational structure already in 1822. Both societies interacted closely with each other and considered themselves as parts of one organization. As early as 1820, the minds of the Decembrists began to become increasingly dominated by the idea of a military uprising without the participation of the masses in it—a “military revolution.” They proceeded from the experience of two types of revolutions: the French revolution of 1789, a revolution of the masses, accompanied by “unrest and anarchy,” and the Spanish revolution of 1820, “organized, without blood and disorder,” carried out with the help of a disciplined military force led by authoritative commanders— members of secret societies.
1821 - 1823 - the time of formation, numerical growth and organizational formation of the Southern and Northern societies. Southern society was dominated by Pestel, whose authority and influence were indisputable. At the head of the Northern Society was a council of three people - N.M. Muravyova, S.P. Trubetskoy and E.P. Obolensky.
The development of constitutional projects and specific plans for a military uprising constituted the main content of the activities of Decembrist societies after 1821. In 1821–1825. two political programs (each in several versions) of revolutionary transformations were created - “Russian Truth” P.I. Pestel And Constitution by Nikita Muravyov, and a plan for a joint performance by both societies was also agreed upon.
When developing their projects, Pestel and N. Muravyov relied on the constitutional experience of other states - the North American United States, and some countries of Western Europe.
Pestel’s “Russian Truth” proclaimed the abolition of serfdom, the establishment in Russia of a republic with firm centralized power, and the equality of all citizens before the law. When solving the agrarian question, Pestel proceeded from two premises: land is a public property, from which every citizen has the right to receive a land plot, but at the same time, land ownership was recognized as fair.
The previous class division was to be abolished; all classes “merged into a single class - the civil one.” Civil and political rights were granted to men who reached the age of 20. General conscription was introduced for men aged 21 and over for a period of 15 years. Military settlements were liquidated. “Russian Truth” declared freedom of speech, press, assembly, occupation, movement, religion, inviolability of person and home, the introduction of a new court, equal for all citizens, with public proceedings and the right to defense.
According to “Russian Truth”, the future Russian republic must be a single and indivisible state with strong centralized power. Pestel was an opponent of the federation. The highest judicial power belonged to the People's Assembly. The supreme control (“supervisory”) power was to be exercised by the Supreme Council.
Pestel’s “Russian Truth” is the most radical constitutional project of the Decembrists. But precisely because of his extreme radicalism, he carried within himself significant elements of utopianism. Pestel was guided by a harsh revolutionary dictatorship.
In contrast to Pestel’s “Russian Truth,” N. Muravyov’s constitutional project provided for the preservation of a monarchy limited by the constitution. In addition, N. Muravyov was an opponent of strictly centralized state power. According to his project, Russia should become a federation. N. Muravyov carried out a strict division of power into legislative, executive and judicial, which was supposed to become, along with the federal structure, a guarantee against the emergence of dictatorship in the country. Only men could enjoy the right to vote. A property qualification was introduced, which gave access to participation in the active political life of the country to the wealthy segments of the population. The project elaborated in detail the transformation of the judicial system.
N. Muravyov's project provided for the abolition of the class structure of society, proclaimed the universal equality of citizens before the law, protection of the inviolability of personality and property, broad freedom of speech, press, assembly, and free choice of occupations. Unlike Pestel, N. Muravyov provided for the inalienable right of citizens to create various types of associations and communities. The project solemnly declared the abolition of serfdom. N. Muravyov believed that in the future all land, including peasant allotments, should become the private property of their owners.
N. Muravyov's project, in comparison with Pestel's project, was more realistic, because it was more suitable for the conditions of Russia at that time.
1824 – 1825 marked by the intensification of the activities of Decembrist organizations. Their numbers have increased significantly, mainly due to military youth. The task was closely set immediate preparation for a military uprising.
In the autumn of 1825, the tsar received new denunciations, in which the names of some members of the Southern and Northern societies were reported. On November 10, Alexander I, while in Taganrog and being seriously ill, ordered the arrest of the identified members of the secret society. However, the death of the emperor that followed on November 19 somewhat delayed the start of the repressions; at the same time, it accelerated the actions of the Decembrists, who decided to take advantage of the interregnum that had created.
The news of the death of Alexander I came to St. Petersburg on November 27. He did not have a son (and two daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, died in infancy). By law, Constantine was supposed to rule. When Alexander's death became known, troops, government agencies and the population swore allegiance to him. However, Constantine, not accepting the throne, did not want to and formally renounced it. The reasons for this behavior of Constantine are one of the historical mysteries. A situation of interregnum arose.
On the same day, at a meeting with Ryleev, it was decided that if Constantine accepts the throne, then his formal dissolution should be announced to all members. But this did not happen, “there was hope for an immediate performance,” using loyalty to the oath to Constantine as an excuse.
The performances were scheduled for December 14 - the day when Nikolai Pavlovich was to swear allegiance. The Decembrists decided to withdraw the rebel troops to Senate Square and force the Senate to announce the introduction of constitutional government. It was supposed to capture the Peter and Paul Fortress, the Winter Palace, and arrest the royal family. S.P. was elected “dictator” (troop commander). Trubetskoy as “senior in rank” (he was a guard colonel), and “chief of staff” E.P. Obolensky.
On behalf of the Senate, it was supposed to publish a “Manifesto to the Russian people”, which proclaimed: “the destruction of the former government”, the elimination of serfdom of peasants, conscription, military settlements, corporal punishment, the abolition of the poll tax and tax arrears, the reduction of military service from 25 to 15 years , equalization of the rights of all classes, the introduction of elections for central and local authorities, jury trials with public proceedings, freedom of speech, occupation, and religion.
The morning of December 14th arrived. Members of the secret society were already in their military units and were campaigning against the oath to Nicholas I, in the name of maintaining loyalty to the legitimate Emperor Constantine. The total number of people gathered in the square 3 thousand soldiers and sailors with 30 officers(some of them were not members of the secret society and joined the uprising at the last moment). Trubetskoy did not appear on the square, and the uprising was left without a leader. Trubetskoy showed hesitation and indecision the day before. His doubts about success intensified on the day of the uprising, when he became convinced that it was not possible to raise most of the guards regiments that the Decembrists had counted on. Trubetskoy's behavior undoubtedly played a fatal role on December 14th. Participants in the uprising assessed this as “treason.”
However, there were many other reasons; which led to the failure of the uprising. From the very beginning, the leaders made a lot of mistakes that violated his entire plan: first of all, they failed to take advantage of the initial confusion of the authorities and capture the Peter and Paul Fortress, the Senate, the Winter Palace in the morning, and prevent the oath to Nicholas I in the troops, in which there was fermentation; secondly, they did not show any activity during the uprising, waiting for other units to approach and join. Before the defeat of the uprising, they had a very real opportunity to capture those few light guns that were brought to the square by Nicholas I and essentially decided the outcome of the uprising. They also did not turn for help to the St. Petersburg people gathered in the square, who clearly expressed sympathy for them and were ready to join them.
Nicholas I tried to influence the rebels with persuasion. He sent Governor General of St. Petersburg M.A. to them. Miloradovich, who was mortally wounded by P.G. Kakhovsky pistol shot. St. Petersburg Metropolitan Seraphim and Metropolitan of Kyiv Evgeny. The rebels very impolitely asked them to “leave.” While the negotiations were going on, Nicholas pulled 9 thousand infantry soldiers and 3 thousand cavalry to Senate Square. Nicholas I, fearing that with the onset of darkness “the riot could have spread to the mob,” gave the order to use artillery. Several buckshot shots at point-blank range close range caused great devastation in the ranks of the rebels and put them to flight. By 6 pm the uprising was defeated. All night, by the light of fires, they removed the wounded and dead and washed away the spilled blood from the square.
On December 29, 1825, the uprising began Chernigov Regiment, located near the city of Vasilkov (30 km southwest of Kyiv). The uprising was led by S.I. Muravyov-Apostol. It began at the moment when members of the Southern Society became aware of the defeat of the uprising in St. Petersburg. During the week S.I. Muravyov-Apostol with 970 soldiers and 8 officers of the Chernigov regiment raided the snowy fields of Ukraine, hoping for other regiments in which members of the secret society served to join the uprising. However, this hope was not realized. On the morning of January 3, 1826, when approaching Trilesy, between the villages of Ustinovka and Kovalevka, the regiment was met by detachments of government troops and shot with grapeshot, and S.I., wounded in the head. Muravyov-Apostol was captured and sent in shackles to St. Petersburg.
On December 24, 1825, another attempt was made to raise a military uprising, this time by the leaders "Society of Military Friends" Igelstrom and Vigelin. On that day, in the city of Bialystok, they organized the refusal of the allegiance to Nicholas I of the Lithuanian battalion and intended to raise other military units stationed in this area. The command managed to quickly isolate the rebel battalion, arrest the participants in the conspiracy and prevent the unrest that had begun in other units. 39 members of the Society of Military Friends and 144 soldiers were subsequently brought before a military court.
3. The fate of the Decembrists.
After the suppression of the uprising in St. Petersburg and Ukraine, the autocracy fell upon the Decembrists with all mercilessness. 316 people were arrested (some of them were arrested by accident and released after arrest). In total, 579 people were involved in the “case” of the Decembrists - this was the number of people included in the “Alphabet for members of a malicious society that opened on December 14, 1825” compiled by the investigation. Many suspects were investigated in absentia; others who left the secret society or were formally members of it were left “without attention” by the investigation, but were still included in this black list, which was constantly at hand by Nicholas I.
An investigative commission worked in St. Petersburg for six months. Commissions of inquiry were also formed in Bila Tserkva and at some regiments. This was the first broad political process in Russia. 289 people were found guilty, of whom 121 were brought to the Supreme Criminal Court (in total, 173 people were convicted by all courts). Of those committed to the Supreme Criminal Court, five (P.I. Pestel, K.F. Ryleev, S.I. Muravyov-Apostol, M.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin and P.G. Kakhovsky) were placed “out of rank” and sentenced "to death by quartering", replaced by hanging. The rest are distributed according to the degree of guilt into 11 categories. 31 people of the 1st category were sentenced to “death by beheading”, replaced by indefinite hard labor, 37 to various terms of hard labor, 19 to exile to Siberia, 9 officers were demoted to soldiers. Over 120 people suffered various punishments by personal order of Nicholas I, without trial: they were imprisoned in a fortress for a period of six months to 4 years, demoted to the ranks of soldiers, transferred to the active army in the Caucasus, and placed under police supervision. Special judicial commissions that examined the cases of soldiers who participated in the uprisings sentenced 178 people to punishment with spitzrutens, 23 to sticks and rods. From the remaining participants in the uprising, a combined regiment of 4 thousand people was formed, which was sent to the active army in the Caucasus.
“Your sorrowful work will not be wasted,” Pushkin wrote to the Decembrists. Their case was not lost. The Decembrist traditions and the highly moral image of the Decembrists inspired subsequent generations of freedom fighters. Participants in student circles at Moscow University in the late 20s and early 30s of the 19th century, A.I. Herzen and N.P. Ogarev, the Petrashevites - they all considered themselves heirs and continuers of the work of the Decembrists. The ideas of the Decembrists and their moral character also appealed to the revolutionaries of the 60s.
The first revolutionary uprising in Russia had a certain resonance in the political circles of Western Europe and made a huge impression on ruling circles Russia, primarily on Nicholas I himself, who always remembered “my friends of the fourteenth” (meaning the Decembrists). At his coronation, receiving foreign ambassadors, he announced the suppression of the Decembrist uprising: “I think I have done a service to all governments.” European monarchs, congratulating Nicholas on this “victory,” wrote to him that by doing so he “earned... the gratitude of all foreign states and rendered the greatest service to the cause of all thrones.”
The Decembrists made a significant contribution to the development of Russian culture. Russian culture in the broadest sense of the word was the spiritual and moral soil for the Decembrists. The ideas of the Decembrists had a huge impact on the work of A.S. Pushkina, A.S. Griboyedova, P.A. Vyazemsky, A.I. Polezhaeva. Among the Decembrists themselves were writers and poets (K.F. Ryleev, A.A. Bestuzhev-Marlinsky, F.N. Glinka, V.K. Kuchelbecker, V.F. Raevsky, P.A. Mukhanov), scientists and artists (N.I. Turgenev, N.A. Bestuzhev, A.O. Kornilovich, F.P. Tolstoy). The Decembrists, sent to hard labor and into exile, did not change their convictions; placed in “convict holes” outside of political life, they were connected with Russia by a thousand threads, and were always aware of all socio-political events both in Russia and abroad. Their contribution to the development of education and culture in general of the Russian and part of the non-Russian peoples of Siberia was great. This activity of the Decembrists after 1825 organically entered into the socio-political and cultural life of Russia in the second quarter of the 19th century. And upon returning from exile after an amnesty, many Decembrists found the strength to actively participate in the public life of the country: they appeared in print with their memoirs, published scientific works, participated in the preparation and implementation of peasant and other reforms as members of provincial committees for peasant affairs, world mediators, zemstvo leaders.
The moral values that were restored by these defenders of freedom and bequeathed to their descendants are enduring: true patriotism and international wealth, a highly developed sense of honor and camaraderie, consciousness of the high royal duty and readiness for selfless, selfless service to the fatherland.
On the night of June 12, 1812, Napoleon's troops invaded Russian territory. By this time, the French bourgeoisie had subjugated almost all of Europe and was preparing to establish world domination. Russia was supposed to become a market for French goods, sources of cheap raw materials and labor.
Together with the Russian people, who bore the brunt of the war, the peoples of multinational Russia rose up to fight. The Napoleonic invasion brought national enslavement and increased social oppression to all of them. During the war, in the ranks of the Russian regular army and the militias were joined by Caucasian peoples, detachments of Kalmyks, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Tatars, Mordvins, Mari, Chuvash.
The reasons for the patriotic upsurge of 1812 were that, by performing feats in the regular army and in partisan detachments, the people hoped for liberation from serfdom. During the war, numerous uprisings of serfs took place in enemy-occupied territory in Belarus, Latvia, and the Smolensk region. This patriotic upsurge had a huge impact on the growth of self-awareness of the peoples of Russia and caused the strengthening of the liberation movement in the country.
In September 1814, a congress of the victorious powers met in Vienna. His activities were based on the reactionary principle of legitimism, which implied the restoration of overthrown dynasties and the return of European states to the old borders that they had before the revolutionary wars. The policy of the participants in the Congress of Vienna, including Tsarist Russia, was aimed at preserving the old, monarchical and feudal orders, and at fighting the revolutionary and national liberation movement.
The noble stage in the Russian liberation movement. Decembrists.
The peasants who returned after the victorious end of the Patriotic War were again turned into serf slaves. Tsarism began to intensively plant military settlements. The settlers suffered both cruel serfdom and military-administrative oppression. Peasants were forbidden to dispose of the products of their labor, conduct trade, etc.
The reactionary policies of tsarism and the growth of feudal oppression caused a new intensification of the class struggle in the country. In 1796 - 1825, over 850 peasant unrest occurred. Discontent also gripped the army.
In the era of serfdom, more than three quarters of all participants in the liberation struggle were nobles and only one quarter were burghers, peasants and representatives of other classes. The spread of advanced ideas contributed to the emergence of secret revolutionary organizations in Russia. It was assumed that all secret societies would act in May 1826. However, the government found out about this - the Decembrists failed to carry out a military coup. They took a wait-and-see attitude that was disastrous for the uprising - Senate Square was surrounded. The Decembrists were arrested, the leaders were executed, and the rest were sentenced to various terms of solitary confinement in a fortress, hard labor, followed by lifelong settlement in Siberia.
Despite the failure of the uprisings, the Decembrist movement was of enormous historical significance. This was the first armed action in Russia, which aimed at the destruction of autocracy and serfdom.
During the reign of Alexander 1, a politically formalized revolutionary movement, led by the nobility, arose for the first time in Russia. It put forward the task of eliminating serfdom, autocracy, the class system and feudal-absolutist institutions. During these years, the Russian bourgeoisie had not yet formed as a class and therefore could not put forward independent demands. But even later, being mature, she never put forward revolutionary programs. Its close connection with tsarism and the feudal-landlord system was evident.
The ideology of the Decembrists and the factors of its formation
The ideological course of Decembrism was a direct result Patriotic War 1812 and the subsequent war for the liberation of Europe from Napoleonic aggression. Russian society and the army were on a high patriotic upsurge. A long stay abroad contributed to the familiarization of progressive-minded circles of Russian officers with the ideological and political life of European countries and their liberal constitutions.
Russian reality was in sharp contrast. This was the reality of Arakcheevism, military settlements and serfdom. The peasants' aspirations for freedom did not come true. The manifesto of August 30, 1814, in connection with the completion of the military anti-Napoleonic campaign, said: “Let the peasants, our faithful people, receive their reward from God.” In the summer of 1819, an uprising of military villagers broke out in Chuguev near Kharkov, which was brutally suppressed by Arakcheev. In 1820, unrest swept through 256 peasant villages on the Don. Fermentation began in the Semenovsky regiment and other parts of the capital's garrison. These events contributed to the radicalization of the views of the liberal opposition, which took shape in 1816-1820. Its moderate representatives increasingly broke away from the broad social movement. In secret societies, supporters of active revolutionary actions gained a numerical superiority.
