Age of Reason; flooded the university with Bibles; instituted a most severe discipline among the students, with such support as mutual spying and compulsory attendance at religious services; and proclaimed a double system of chronology, the one already in use and a new one dating from the reformation of the university. Magnitsky's fall swiftly followed the change of rulers, for in a secret report he had accused Emperor Nicholas, then a grand duke, of free thinking!

The Decembrist Movement and Rebellion

Disappointment with the course of Alexander I's reign played an important role in the emergence of the first Russian revolutionary group, which came to be known after its unsuccessful uprising in December 1825 as the Decembrists. Most of the Decembrists were army officers, often from

aristocratic families and elite regiments, who had received a good education, learned French and sometimes other foreign languages, and obtained a first-hand knowledge of the West during and immediately after the campaigns against Napoleon. Essentially the Decembrists were liberals in the tradition of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution; they wanted to establish constitutionalism and basic freedoms in Russia, and to abolish serfdom. More specifically, the Decembrist plans ranged from those of Nikita Muraviev, who advocated a rather conservative constitutional monarchy, to those of Colonel Paul Pestel, the author of the Russian Justice, who favored a strongly centralized republic along Jacobin lines as well as a peculiar land reform program that would divide land into a public and a private sector and guarantee every citizen his allotment within the public sector. While the Decembrists - 'our lords who wanted to become shoemakers,' to quote Rostopchin's ironical remark - included some of the most gifted and prominent Russian youth, and while they enjoyed the sympathy of many educated Russians, including such literary luminaries as Pushkin and Griboedov, they had little social backing for their rebellion. That the standard of liberalism had to be carried in the Russia of Alexander I by aristocratic officers of the guard demonstrates well the weakness of the movement and above all the feebleness and backwardness of the Russian middle class. Russian liberalism in the early nineteenth century resembled Spanish liberalism, not English or French.

At first the liberals who later became Decembrists were eager to cooperate with the government on the road of progress, and their early societies, the Union of Salvation founded in 1816 and the Union of Welfare which replaced it, were concerned with such issues as the development of philanthropy, education, and the civic spirit in Russia rather than with military rebellion. Only gradually, as reaction grew and hopes for a liberal transformation from above faded away, did the more stubborn liberals begin to think seriously of change by force and to talk of revolution and regicide. The movement acquired two centers, St. Petersburg in the north and Tulchin, the headquarters of the Second Army in southern Russia. The northern group lacked leadership and accomplished little. In the south, by contrast, Pestel acted with intelligence and determination. The Southern Society grew in numbers, developed its organization, discovered and incorporated the Society of the United Slavs, and established contacts with a Polish revolutionary group. The United Slavs, who pursued aims vaguely similar to those of the Decembrists and had the additional goal of a democratic federation of all Slavic peoples, and who accepted the Decembrist leadership, consisted in particular of poor army officers, more democratic and closer to the soldiers than were the aristocrats from the guard. Yet, when the hour of rebellion suddenly arrived, the

Southern Society, handicapped by Pestel's arrest, proved to be little better prepared than the Northern.

Alexander I's unexpected death in southern Russia in December 1825 led to a dynastic crisis, which the Decembrists utilized to make their bid for power. The deceased emperor had no sons or grandsons; therefore Grand Duke Constantine, his oldest brother, was his logical successor. But the heir presumptive had married a Polish aristocrat not of royal blood in 1820, and, in connection with the marriage, had renounced his rights to the throne. Nicholas, the third brother, was thus to become the next ruler of Russia, the entire matter having been stated clearly in 1822 in a special manifesto confirmed by Alexander I's signature. The manifesto, however, had remained unpublished, and only a few people had received exact information about it; even the two grand dukes were ignorant of its content. Following Alexander I's death, Constantine and the Polish kingdom where he was commander-in-chief swore allegiance to Nicholas, but Nicholas, the Russian capital, and the Russian army swore allegiance to Constantine. Constantine acted with perfect consistency. Nicholas, however, even after reading Alexander I's manifesto, also felt impelled to behave as he did: Alexander I's decision could be challenged as contrary to Paul's law of succession and also for remaining unpublished during the emperor's own reign, and Nicholas was under pressure to step aside in favor of his elder brother, who was generally expected to follow Alexander I on the throne. Only after Constantine's uncompromising reaffirmation of his position, and a resulting lapse of time, did Nicholas decide to publish Alexander's manifesto and become emperor of Russia. The entire labyrinthine entanglement of succession has been examined yet again very recently by Academician A. N. Sakharov with some surprising results, such as the involvement of Empress Mother Mary, who wanted power herself.

On December 26, 1825 - December 14, Old Style - when the guard regiments in St. Petersburg were to swear allegiance for the second time within a short while, this time to Nicholas, the Northern Society of the Decembrists staged its rebellion. Realizing that they had a unique chance to act, the conspiring officers used their influence with the soldiers to start a mutiny in several units by entreating them to defend the rightful interests of Constantine against his usurping brother. Altogether about three thousand misled rebels came in military formation to Senate Square in the heart of the capital. Although the government was caught unprepared, the mutineers were soon faced by troops several times their number and strength. The two forces stood opposite each other for several hours. The Decembrists failed to act because of their general confusion and lack of leadership; the new emperor hesitated to start his reign with a massacre of his subjects, hoping that they could be talked into submission.

But, as verbal inducements failed and dusk began to gather on the afternoon of that northern winter day, artillery was brought into action. Several canister shots dispersed the rebels, killing sixty or seventy of them. Large-scale arrests followed. In the south too an uprising was easily suppressed. Eventually five Decembrist leaders, including Pestel and the firebrand of the Northern Society, the poet Conrad Ryleev, were executed, while almost three hundred other participants suffered lesser punishment. Nicholas I was firmly in the saddle.

XXVI

THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS I, 1825-55

Here [in the army] there is order, there is a strict unconditional legality, no impertinent claims to know all the answers, no contradiction, all things flow logically one from the other; no one commands before he has himself learned to obey; no one steps in front of anyone else without lawful reason; everything is subordinated to one definite goal, everything has its purpose. That is why I feel so well among these people, and why I shall always hold in honor the calling of a soldier. I consider the entire human life to be merely service, because everybody serves.

NICHOLAS I

The most consistent of autocrats.

SCHIEMANN

As man and ruler Nicholas I had little in common with his brother Alexander I. By contrast with his predecessor's psychological paradoxes, ambivalence, and vacillation, the new sovereign displayed determination, singleness of purpose, and an iron will. He also possessed an overwhelming sense of duty and a great capacity for work. In character, and even in his striking and powerful appearance, Nicholas I seemed to be the perfect despot. Appropriately, he always remained an army man, a junior officer at heart, devoted to his troops, to military exercises, to the parade ground, down to the last button on a soldier's uniform - in fact, as emperor he ordered alterations of the uniforms, even changing the number of buttons. And in the same spirit, the autocrat insisted on

Вы читаете A history of Russia
Добавить отзыв
ВСЕ ОТЗЫВЫ О КНИГЕ В ИЗБРАННОЕ

0

Вы можете отметить интересные вам фрагменты текста, которые будут доступны по уникальной ссылке в адресной строке браузера.

Отметить Добавить цитату
×