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, Caucasian peoples, detachments of Kalmyks, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Tatars, Mordovians, Maris, and Chuvashs joined the ranks of the Russian regular army and militia.
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 politics of the participants in the Congress of Vienna, including Tsarist Russia, was aimed at preserving the old, monarchical and feudal orders, 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 had a huge impact historical meaning. This was the first armed uprising in Russia, which set as its goal the destruction of autocracy and serfdom.
They had a great influence on the further development of the liberation movement in Russia. The main slogans of the “firstborn of freedom” - the overthrow of the autocracy and the abolition of serfdom - retained their significance for the Russian revolutionary movement throughout the 19th - early 20th centuries. And after the fall of serfdom in 1861, feudal remnants continued to persist in the socio-economic relations of the tsar. The autocracy collapsed under the blows of the February Revolution of 1917, but it did not solve all the problems of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. Only the Great October Socialist Revolution, as they put it, “in passing, in passing,” put an end to all remnants of the Middle Ages in Russia.
When speaking about the influence of the Decembrists on subsequent generations of revolutionaries, one cannot mean only their ideological influence. No less important was the very fact of an open armed uprising against the autocracy in the Russian Empire.
Already for the contemporaries of the Decembrists, the significance of their progressive ideas and their struggle against the feudal-absolutist system in Russia was clear. The lines from his message to Siberia: “Your sorrowful work and high aspirations will not be lost” are evidence of a very deep and correct assessment of the role of freedom-loving ideas and the revolutionary feat of the Decembrists. The poet believed that the weapons that had fallen from the hands of the Decembrists would be picked up by a new generation of freedom fighters.
And this generation replaced the Decembrists. Its most outstanding representatives were A. I. Herzen and N. P. Ogarev. They grew up on the ideas of the Decembrists and continued their work, raising the revolutionary movement to a new, higher level. For Herzen and Ogarev, the Decembrists were a symbol of the struggle for the liberation of Russia from slavery and the oppression of the autocracy. “Polar Star”, “Bell” and other publications of the free Russian press, published by Herzen and Ogarev abroad, did a lot to promote the revolutionary ideas of the Decembrists. Lenin noted that the Polar Star “raised the tradition of the Decembrists,” and saw this as one of Herzen’s services to the Russian liberation movement. The cover of Polar Star featured profiles of five executed Decembrists.
In a laconic and expressive form, Herzen revealed with exceptional accuracy the historical meaning of the Decembrist uprising, emphasizing its close connection with the subsequent course of liberation in Russia. “The guns of St. Isaac’s Square,” he wrote, “awakened a whole generation.”
Herzen and Ogarev showed that the performance of noble revolutionaries was fundamentally different from the palace coups of the 18th century. “Until now,” Herzen pointed out, “no one believed in the possibility of a political uprising rushing with arms in hand to attack the giant of imperial tsarism in the very center of St. Petersburg. It was well known that from time to time Peter (III) and then Paul were killed in the palace in order to replace them with others. But there was nothing in common between these secrets of the massacre and the solemn protest against despotism, a protest proclaimed in the city square and sealed with the blood and suffering of these heroes.” Herzen identified the main reason for the defeat on December 14, 1825: the Decembrists on Senate Square lacked the people, he wrote.
Herzen and Ogarev, successors of the Decembrists who later became revolutionary democrats, personified live connection two generations of the revolutionary movement of Russia - noble and raznochinsky.
The Decembrists' speech against the autocracy, the death and torture they accepted for the triumph of freedom in Russia, were widely used for propaganda purposes during the first revolutionary situation in Russia (late 50s - early 60s of the 19th century). The proclamations of the 60s, which played a large role in the rise of the democratic movement, contained calls to follow the behests of the Decembrists and overthrow the regime hated by the people. The names of the Decembrists were especially often mentioned in proclamations addressed to the army. So, one of them (1862) said: “Officers! Brilliant legends are behind you - December 14, 1825 is behind you! The great shadows of Pestel, Muravyov and Bestuzhev call you to revenge!” The proclamation of P. G. Zaichnevsky “Young Russia”, which appeared in May 1862, called on the Russian army to revolt and expressed the hope that it would “remember its glorious actions in 1825, remember the immortal glory with which the martyred heroes covered themselves.”
On the eve of the first Russian revolution of 1905-1907. Revolutionary Social Democracy, in leaflets dedicated to the memorable dates of the Decembrist uprising, noted their struggle against the autocracy. Yes, flyer Southern group Social Democrats, discovered by the police on December 14, 1901 in Odessa, ended with the words: “Our first and important task is the task of the glorious Decembrist fighters - the overthrow of the autocracy, the achievement of political freedoms. With the blood of our hearts, let us write down the names of Pestel, Ryleev, Kakhovsky, Muravyov-Apostol, Bestuzhev-Ryumin.” The 1904 leaflet emphasized that lessons must be learned from the defeat of the Decembrist uprising. The main one is that “the liberation of the people can only be the work of the people themselves.”
I.A.Mironova“...Their case is not lost”
The beginning of the noble stage in the Russian liberation movement. Decembrist revolt
The novel “Northern Lights” by M. D. Marich gives a broad picture of social and political life Russia in the 20s - 30s of the 19th century. It tells about the emergence of secret societies of the Decembrists, their uprisings in St. Petersburg and in the Kyiv province. The images of noble revolutionaries Pestel, Ryleev, Muravyov, Kakhovsky and others are vividly recreated.
The passage below paints a gloomy picture of the feudal-serf system in the country, established by the tsar and his temporary worker Arakcheev.
Russia was ruled by Arakcheev...
Alexander could not help himself: he constantly felt the danger imminently threatening him. Everywhere he imagined conspiracies and disturbances. In any joke he found a hidden hint, a disguised discontent, a reproach... St. Petersburg became hostile and alien to him, and he moved to Tsarskoe Selo." The Tsarskoe Selo Palace became his favorite residence. Here he did not feel that secret fear that crept behind him in St. away from the gloomy Mikhailovsky Castle, from the cold shine of the Neva, from the high state rooms of the Winter Palace.
Russia was ruled by Arakcheev, who saw it as a huge military settlement, in which people had to think, feel and act according to the very “articles” that were introduced in his own domain.
Having decided that only iron hand Arakcheev is able to suppress manifestations of public discontent, Alexander gave the temporary worker forms with his signature, sanctioning in advance everything that Arakcheev, hated by everyone and hating everyone, would like to put on a blank paper. All representations of ministers, all decisions of the Senate, Synod and State Council, all explanatory notes of individual members of these state institutions and their personal letters to Alexander reached him only at the discretion of Arakcheev.
And while Gruzine and the gloomy house of Arakcheev in St. Petersburg on the corner of Liteinaya and Kirochnaya served as a harsh school of “humiliation and patience” for everyone - from field marshals and governors general to sergeant majors and petty officials; at a time when all of Russia was groaning under the blows of sticks, and neither the gray hairs of old age, nor childish weakness, nor feminine modesty prevented the use of this means, and beating flourished in schools, in villages, on the trading floors of cities, in landowner stables, masters' porches, in sheds, in barnyards, in camps, barracks - everywhere a stick, a spitzruten and a rod walked freely along the backs of people - in the Tsarskoye Selo Palace, surrounded by a shady park with crystal clear ponds, along which majestic black and white swans silently swam, reigned peace and quiet*.
*(M. Maric. Northern lights. M., Goslitizdat, 1952, pp. 171, 172.)
Question. What was Alexander I afraid of and by what means did he fight against the danger that threatened him?
The great Russian poet A.S. Pushkin painted a gloomy picture of the life of the serf peasantry at the beginning of the 19th century and the arbitrariness of the landowners in his poem “Village.”
Here the wild lordship, without feeling, without law, has appropriated for itself with a violent vine the labor, property, and time of the farmer, bending over an alien plow, submitting to the whips, Here skinny slavery is dragged along the reins of an inexorable owner. Here, with a painful yoke, everyone is dragged to the grave, Not daring to nourish hopes and inclinations in the soul, Here young maidens bloom For the whim of an insensitive villain. The dear support of aging fathers, Young sons, comrades of labor, From their native hut they go to multiply the Yard crowds of exhausted slaves. Oh, if only my voice could disturb hearts! Why is there a barren heat burning in my chest And the fate of orbit has not given me a formidable gift? Will I see, oh friends, an unoppressed people And slavery, which has fallen due to the tsar’s mania *, And over the fatherland of enlightened freedom Will a beautiful dawn finally rise?**
*(In the author's text of the poem it was written: “And the slavery of the fallen and the fallen king.” The text was corrected by P. A. Vyazemsky for censorship reasons. See: A. S. Pushkin. Complete Works, Vol. II. M.-L., publishing house of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1949, p. 1055.)
**(A. S. Pushkin. Selected works. M., Detgiz, 1958, pp. 51 - 52.)
Think, what outraged the poet in the life of his contemporary village and what he saw as a way out of the situation created there.
Soldier's song about military settlements
Life in a military settlement is a real torment, but not for everyone! The villagers are starving, but the authorities are doing very well! For the regiments here there is imprisonment, Hunger, cold, exhaustion - Worse than in the Crimea. Here they give barley to the lancers, and hide the rye in their pockets - ............................. That's the way it is. District, regional, All the swindlers are like you won’t find, Treasurers, auditors* And quartermasters - all thieves............................. Clerks are capitalists. Cantonists are dropping like flies. The air, you see, is like that! State-owned bread will not be born, But your own will be spoiled, There is nowhere to put it! The infirmaries are terribly bad, But the caretakers have nice carriages! Life in a military settlement is a real torment, but not for everyone. On paper everything is fine, but in reality it’s so terrible, don’t even say ***"
*(The auditor is a military official.)
**(Cantonists are children taken from their parents and sent to military settlements to train future soldiers.)
Riot of military villagers in Staraya Russa
Elijah's day was approaching. Osip received news that a riot had begun in Staraya Russa, that many officers had already been killed...
The next day the riot did not subside. They caught officers hiding in the forests and fields, beat them and dragged them to the headquarters in the guardhouse.
Near the fourth company settled there lived a landowner who treated his peasants cruelly. The villagers came to him, they brutally flogged him, and they killed and broke everything in the house and drank the entire supply of wine.
On the same day, a riot began on the other bank of the Volkhov in the settled battalion of the king of the Prussian regiment and, like a fire, it went on and on. The villagers also moved to Gruzino, the estate of Count Arakcheev, but he rode off to Tikhvin...
The riotous people had not yet calmed down; armed groups continued to travel around, many acquired guns and sabers, collected in officers' quarters...
On Elijah’s day, at the very mass, all the owners were demanded to the headquarters. Count Orlov arrived with his retinue, but without an escort. When all the villagers had gathered in the arena, they brought there the arrested officers who might have come.
Count Orlov, in stern terms, exposed to the villagers all the ugliness of their riot and announced that one of these days the Emperor himself would be visiting them, and he escorted all the arrested officers, without exception, to Novgorod...
Finally the sovereign arrived. The sovereign expressed his displeasure in strong and energetic terms to the villagers gathered in the arena, but in conclusion he said: “Give me the guilty, and I forgive the rest”...
The authorities arrived in large numbers, an investigation began, and arrests began. Morchenko was taken first, and after him the lancers and Cossacks began to take dozens of rebels and send them under escort to Novgorod. Mikheich also did not survive; the villagers pointed out to him that he had betrayed his master...
Soon the trial began, which ended even sooner... The punishment took place at headquarters. They were driven through the line along the green street, and as soon as someone fell from exhaustion, they were taken to the hospital and, after recovery, they continued to be driven again. Some were driven this way three times. They beat with a whip on the parade ground, this punishment was carried out completely at one time and the executioner often counted the blows on the dead body*.
*(Nikolai Bogoslovsky. Old orders. A historical story from the life of watered settlements. St. Petersburg, ed. N. G. Martynova, 1881, pp. 130, 143 - 147.)
Questions. Who were the rebels targeting? What was missing from their performance?
In 1820, soldiers of the Semenovsky Guards Regiment rebelled in St. Petersburg. The teacher uses the text from O. Forsh’s novel “The Firstborn of Freedom” to concretize his story about the growing class contradictions in the country on the eve of the revolutionary uprising of the Decembrists.
Uprising in the Semenovsky regiment
At the insistence of Grand Duke Nicholas, who found that the commander of the Semenovsky regiment, Yakov Alekseevich Potemkin, had disbanded his regiment, Colonel Schwartz, who had previously commanded an army regiment, was appointed to “bring up” the soldiers. Rumors spread widely among the troops about his truly brutal cruelty. In the place where he stood with the regiment, they pointed out a certain hill, under which the soldiers he killed were buried. That's what this big hill was called - Shvartsev's grave. Under the former commander Yakov Alekseevich Potemkin, the joyless soldier's life softened somewhat. And it was all the more offensive for the soldiers when Schwartz, who replaced Potemkin, restored all the hated Prussianism, the entire official inhuman system.
Finally, Schwartz’s cruelty became unbearable to the soldiers, and in order to remove him from his post, they decided to do something unheard of in terms of military subordination. On October 16, 1820, the soldiers without permission, at the wrong hour, went out into the corridor and told Sergeant Major Bragin that they most humbly, but immediately demanded the arrival of company commander Kashkarov to convey their request to him.
There was no insolence, but the soldiers showed such unyielding persistence that prompted the sergeant major to call the company commander, who in turn called the battalion commander. The soldiers demanded that Schwartz be removed and any other commander appointed.
We no longer have the strength to endure the bullying of Colonel Schwartz.
The battalion commander went to Schwartz so that he would personally reassure the people and consider their complaints.
Schwartz, who knew so many sins before the soldiers, was frightened and flew with a report about the riot in the Semenovsky regiment directly to Grand Duke Mikhail, the brigade commander.
Young Mikhail, who surpassed Nikolai himself in his zeal for frugality and subordination, held the company for several hours under interrogation: who is the instigator? Who are the “callers” into the corridor, especially at the wrong time?
The soldiers did not give up the “callers”.
In the evening, Adjutant General Vasilchikov lured the unarmed first company to the corps headquarters, declared it under arrest and sent it to the Peter and Paul Fortress.
Having learned about this event, the Semenovites rushed into the yard shouting:
“The first company is in the fortress, and should we go to sleep? We all have the same end, to die together!”
Alarmed by the arrest of their company, the regiment did not want to return to the barracks. Anger raged against Schwartz, because of whom, they understood, hundreds of innocent people would now die a painful death under the spitsrutens.
Some platoon rushed to Schwartz’s apartment. And it would have been the end of this colonel if he had not decided to escape from a well-deserved death in... manure: in the courtyard of his house they were cleaning the stables, and he buried his head in a huge pile. They didn’t think to look for him there.
The soldiers found Schwartz's dress uniform somewhere, raised it on a stick and, subjecting it to all sorts of desecration, tore it to shreds.
A courier was immediately sent to Alexander, who was sitting at the congress in Troppau, with a report of a hitherto unprecedented event in the Russian army - a mutiny of an entire regiment. How will he order to deal with him?
They expected a wise solution to this issue from the king...
Deciding that the riot in his Semenovsky regiment was caused, of course, by the “secret Russian Carbonari”, whom he was so afraid of, Alexander did not hesitate to send a courier with a cruel sentence:
“The first company should be judged by a military court in the fortress! The other battalions should be distributed among army regiments and garrisons.”*
*(O. Forsh, Firstborns of Freedom. Collection works, vol. V. M.-L., 1963, pp. 14 - 19.)
Question. What caused and what was evidenced by the uprising of the soldiers of the Semenovsky Guards Regiment?
The story of N. A. Zadonsky “Mountains and Stars”, written on the basis of documentary materials. N. N. Muravyov was a participant and witness of such historical events as the Patriotic War of 1812, the Decembrist uprising, and the Crimean War of 1854 - 1856. The book provides many striking examples of selfless love for the Fatherland, courage and nobility of advanced Russian people.
The creation of a secret political organization in the pre-Decembrist period is described in the given passage. The text is used to prepare a dramatized reading in person.
"Sacred Artel"
One day, when they got together, Nikolai suggested: “What, my dears, if we create an artel?” Let's rent a comfortable apartment, keep a common table and continue self-education, this is cheaper and more pleasant for us in all respects..
A few days later, an apartment for the artel was rented on Srednyaya Meshchanskaya Street. We pooled money, purchased the necessary furniture and utensils, and hired a cook. At dinner, the artel workers always had room for two guests, and these places were never empty, and in the evenings they had more guests.
Friends and comrades were attracted by the comradely ease that reigned in the artel: here one could read foreign newspapers, which were subscribed by the artel workers, over a glass of hot tea, or play chess, but most of all, they were seduced by the opportunity to talk without embarrassment about the Arakcheev order being introduced in the country and causing general indignation, about the senseless despotic actions of the two-minded king. Liberal-minded young people, in front of whose eyes great historical events had just happened, found the empty court life unbearable and painful to serve under the command of mediocre and cruel paraders*. There were many topics for conversation. And the disputes in the artel became more and more heated day by day.
*(Paradiers are the organizers of parades.)
Nikolai Muravyov’s artel winter evenings will forever remain in the memory of Nikolai Muravyov. And in the artel living room it is warm and unusually cozy.
Yakushkin, pacing around the room, says excitedly:
The slavery and Arakcheev order that we have are incompatible with the spirit of the times... I recently saw how soldiers were tortured with spitzrutens... An unbearable sight! And what about the situation of the unfortunate peasants, who remain the property of landowners ossified in ignorance and cruelty? The whole world admires the heroism of the Russian people, who liberated their fatherland and all of Europe from the tyranny of Bonaparte, and what reward did their ruler, Emperor Alexander, prepare for the heroes?
“Haven’t you read the Tsar’s manifesto?” Matvey Muravyov-Apostol sneers and proclaims in a church manner: “Let our faithful people receive their reward from God!”
“Well, that’s the only thing,” Yakushkin grins. - Reward from God! Nothing but false promises and beautiful gestures! In Europe, our tsar is almost a liberal, but in Russia he is a cruel and senseless despot!
Consider the decree recently signed by the sovereign on the creation of military settlements! - reminds Peter Kaloshin. - Arakcheev is sinking his claws deeper into the body of the people...
Nothing new seemed to be said, the artel workers more than once spoke out for the need to abolish serfdom, but the power of conviction, the passion with which Alexander Muravyov spoke always captivated the artel workers, and, as usual, his last words were drowned in the roar of excited voices:
It is unthinkable to endure the yoke of serfdom any longer!
Eternal shame for us and contempt for posterity if we do not do everything in our power to free ourselves!
The autocracy rests on serfdom; it is useless to rely on the tsar!
Violent disputes broke out, passions ran high*.
*(N. Zadonsky. Mountains and stars. M., Voenizdat, 1965, pp. 75 - 76, 85 - 89.)
Question. What did the advanced noble youth condemn and what political goals did they set for themselves?
The teacher will find exciting, full of dramatic material about the Decembrist uprising on Senate Square in St. Petersburg in the novel “The Firstborn of Freedom” by O. Forsh. Below is an excerpt from the novel. Used in an emotional story by a teacher or to prepare a student's message.
Uprising on Senate Square
Mikhail Bestuzhev's company moved first, followed by Shchepin-Rostovsky's company. They realized that there was no regimental banner ahead. They came back for him. When they all moved together to the gate with the banner, the regimental commander and the brigade commander had already appeared. They stopped the soldiers at the gate and tried to calm them down and return them to the barracks. Shchepin, whom Mikhail Bestuzhev had been inflaming all night with his speeches about freedom, pulled out a saber and hit regimental commander Fredericks with it. And another general, who took part in detaining the army at the very exit from the barracks, was grabbed flat below the back by Shchepin. The soldiers laughed loudly when the overweight general, raising his hands, ran shouting: “They killed me!”
Finally, eight hundred people broke out onto the Fontanka and, with a loud “hurray,” moved to Petrovskaya Square.
When the Moscow regiment approached Petrovskaya Square, it was still empty.
Muscovites also occupied the entrance to the Senate from St. Isaac's Square.
Having made his way through the crowd with great difficulty, Miloradovich drove up to the right front (flank - Ed.) and stopped about ten steps from the rebels. He loudly commanded “Smir-r-but” five times...
Obolensky invited Miloradovich to leave and, in order to rein in his horse, jabbed him with a bayonet, hitting the governor-general’s leg in the process. However, Miloradovich, confidently taking the tone of his father-commander, continued to exhort the soldiers and had already forced many to listen sympathetically to him. Then Kakhovsky shot at Miloradovich. The bullet pierced the blue St. Andrew's ribbon and the chest, hung with orders. Miloradovich fell from his horse, caught by his adjutant.
Meanwhile, Nicholas learned that more troops were moving to help the rebels, and he urgently, as his last hope, sent the clergy to the square.
Urged on, the spiritual fathers gathered hastily, taking with them two deacons...
The Metropolitan got out of the carriage and moved towards the rebels...
The Metropolitan still tried to speak, but they did not listen to him at all; they muffled his voice with a drum. The pressing crowd roared menacingly.
Suddenly, an enthusiastic “hurray” echoed across the square: reinforcements arrived to the rebel Moscow regiment - it was Lieutenant Sutgof who led his life grenadier company straight across the ice of the Neva.
The huge crowd of people was a true participant in the events...
St. Isaac's Cathedral was under construction. At its foot lay piles of logs and granite slabs. The people climbed onto the stones and stacks of logs, vigilantly observed the unusual behavior of the army and very soon understood the essence of what was happening in the square.
The events were interpreted in their own way:
According to Alexander’s will, freedom should be given to the people, but they strive to conceal it!
Meanwhile, on the orders of Nicholas, government troops were increasingly concentrated on Senate Square.
Orlov ordered the first two ranks of horsemen to attack.
The Reitars rushed forward, but people from the crowd fearlessly rushed towards the horsemen, grabbing the horses by the bridles... Four times the squadron went on the attack and four times was stopped by shots from the rebels and a living avalanche of people.
Nikolai galloped up to the corner of the boulevard, wanting to take command himself. From the crowd they shouted at him with rude abuse:
Come here, impostor... We'll show you!
Nikolai turned his horse.
And every time the king tried to approach the monument to Peter, stones and logs flew from the crowd. Having broken the front garden opposite the cathedral, people armed themselves with stakes, frozen clods of earth and snow.
Ryleev rushed about in search of Trubetskoy.
Trubetskoy hid, sparrow soul! - Pushchin responded contemptuously.
Nicholas launched an attack not only from the horse guards, but also from the cavalry guards and the horse-pioneer squadron.
The forced inaction of the rebels, in addition to chilling secret sympathizers, gave strength to the enemies. Nicholas managed to encircle the rebels with his troops.
To Nicholas’s repeated offer to surrender, broadcast throughout the square, the rebels gave one answer:
Firing guns in order! Buckshot! Right flank, begin!
But there was no shot, although the order was “first!” - was repeated by the battery commander. The soldier on the right gun did not want to put down the fuse.
Your honor!..
The officer grabbed the fuse from the fireworks and fired the first shot himself.
In response, a rifle volley rang out from the direction of the monument to Peter.
People were wounded, clinging to the eaves of the Senate house, around the columns, and on the roofs of neighboring houses. Broken glass flew out of the windows with a ringing sound.
It became completely dark, and flashes of gunfire instantly, like lightning, illuminated the bodies of the dead in the snow, the buildings and the monument, surrounded by the same square of rebels, as if already forever separated from it...
A total of seven volleys of buckshot were fired. The shooting continued for a whole hour. The rebel troops finally could not stand it. Many rushed onto the ice of the Neva*.
*(O. Forsh. Firstborns of freedom. Collection works, vol. V. M.-L., 1963, pp. 295, 300, 309, 315 - 316.)
Discuss, what was the significance of the Decembrist uprising and why it was defeated..
A.L. Slonimsky in the story “Chernigovtsy” describes the emergence of the “Southern Society” and the activities of the main members of this society, as well as the uprising of the Chernigov regiment, led by S.I. Muravyov-Apostol. The excerpt below shows one of the episodes of the uprising and its defeat.
Uprising of the Chernigov Regiment
The sixth day of the uprising has arrived. On Sunday, January 3 at four o'clock in the morning, in complete darkness, the Chernigov regiment set out from the village of Pologi (near Bila Tserkva. - Ed.). The companies were lined up in columns in half-platoons, when suddenly it became known that the company commanders, Staff Captain Mayevsky and Lieutenant Petin, had escaped.
Their disappearance only caused ridicule from the soldiers.
At the end of the eleventh hour, the regiment entered Kovalevka, from where five days ago, on Tuesday, the first two rebel companies left.
The soldiers of these companies were a little embarrassed when they saw familiar places.
We're spinning on the spot! - they said, smiling embarrassedly. ... It was noon. The regiment, stretched out in a narrow column in sections, walked at a fast pace along the road to Trilesy. Sergei (S. Muravyov-Apostol - Ed.) rode ahead.
Suddenly, somewhere ahead, something hooted and echoed across the sunny and snowy expanses.
The column involuntarily slowed down.
Sergei turned to the soldiers. On his pale face there was an expression of desperate faith in a miracle that was now about to take place. Rising in his stirrups, he shouted in an enthusiastic ringing voice:
Don't worry, friends! Then the fifth cavalry company gives us a signal. Forward!
They're coming. Another shot. This time you can hear that it is the core. Tearing the air, it rushes with a squeal and howl right above your head.
The soldiers stop in confusion. The back rows press on the front ones.
The soldiers have stern gray faces. Without waiting for orders, they themselves began to prepare for battle.
Having lined up in a combat column by platoons, they move on, at a distance of a mile - where the road, rising, goes into blue sky, - a dark, motionless line of horsemen is shown.
This dark line blocks the path to happiness, to freedom. Feel free to break through it all at once -o and there he will be greeted by hugs and brotherly kisses.
Forward! - Sergei commands, starting his horse at a light trot. The soldiers feel like obedient machines in his hands.
The front of the column runs after Sergei, leaving behind the convoy and rearguard.
Stop! - Sergei commands. To the right of the road, under the cover of a small hill, two cannons are visible. Two barrels of black spots peek out from behind a snow-white slope. Now a miracle must happen: these two muzzles will be turned there, towards Zhitomir!
Arrows, scatter! Bypass to the guns! Everything will be decided now: the course history will take depends on this minute. The uprising will grow like a snowball launched from a mountain, and will fall on the heads of the tyrants in a menacing snowfall.
Be brave! Our brothers are waiting for us there! A spark splashed over the hillock and smoke flared up. Shot. Buckshot whistled through the air with a whining squeal.
Everything was instantly confused. The leading platoon dropped their guns and ran. On the road, with their faces buried in the snow, curled up or overturned, lay the wounded and dead. A squadron of hussars, scattered throughout the field, pursued the fugitives*.
*(Alexander Slonimsky. Chernigovtsy. Detgiz, 1961, pp. 260 - 265.)
A. Gessen's book "In the depths of the Siberian ores..." contains colorful material about the Decembrist uprising, the reprisal of Tsar Nicholas I and the remarkable feat of the Decembrist wives, who voluntarily followed to Siberia and shared their fate with their husbands.
Execution of the Decembrists
At dawn, the jailers rattled their keys and began to open the cell doors: the condemned were being led out to death. In the sudden silence, Ryleev’s exclamation was heard:
Sorry, sorry, brothers!
Obolensky, who was sitting in the next cell, rushed to the window and saw all five below, surrounded by grenadiers with fixed bayonets. They were wearing long white shirts, their arms and legs were shackled in heavy shackles. On each chest there was a plaque with the inscription: “Kingslayer”...
All five said goodbye to each other. They were calm and maintained extraordinary fortitude.
“Put your hand on my heart,” said Ryleev to the priest Myslovsky who accompanied him, “and see if it beats stronger.”
The Decembrist’s heart beat evenly... Pestel, looking at the gallows, said:
Don't we deserve a better death? It seems that we have never turned our heads away from bullets or cannonballs. They could have shot us!..
The condemned were taken to the platform, led to the gallows, and the nooses were thrown on and tightened. When the benches were knocked out from under the feet of the hanged men, Pestel and Bestuzhev-Ryumin were left hanging, and Ryleev, Muravyov-Apostol and Kakhovsky fell.
Poor Russia! And they don’t know how to hang it properly! - exclaimed the bloodied Muravyov-Apostle.
In the old days, there was a belief that people from the people, sympathizing with those sentenced to hanging, deliberately made loops from rotten ropes, since those who fell from their loops during execution were usually pardoned. But this was not the case with Nicholas I and his zealous executors.
Adjutant General Chernyshev, “a vile inquisitor in appearance and manners,” who pranced on horseback around the hanged men and examined them through a lorgnette, ordered them to be raised and hanged again.
These three convicts died a second time.
Covered in blood, having broken his head in the fall and having lost a lot of blood, Ryleev still had the strength to get up and shouted to the St. Petersburg Governor-General Kutuzov:
You, General, have probably come to watch us die. Please your sovereign, tell him that his wish is being fulfilled: you see, we are dying in agony.
Hang them again quickly!” Kutuzov shouted in response to this to the executioner.
The vile guardsman of the tyrant! - the indomitable Ryleev threw it in Kutuzov’s face. - Give the executioner your aiguillettes so that we don’t die a third time!..
At dawn, the bodies of those executed were placed in coffins and secretly taken to Goloday Island, where they were buried. Their grave was not found. An obelisk was built on the island in 1939.
The details of the execution became widely known on the same day, they were talked about in all circles of St. Petersburg*.
*(A. Gessen. In the depths of Siberian ores... M., "Children's Literature", 1965, pp. 101, 102.)
Wives of the Decembrists in Siberia
The Decembrists received a lot of help during hard labor and exile by their wives who went to Siberia to pick up their husbands. There were eleven of them, these heroic women.
In distant Siberia, these heroic women began to build their new life and became “mediators between the living and the dead of political death.”
Together with the Decembrists, they selflessly bore their heavy lot. Deprived of all rights, being together with convicts and exiled settlers at the lowest level of human existence, the wives of the Decembrists throughout for long years throughout their Siberian life they never stopped fighting together with their husbands for the ideas that brought them to hard labor, for the right to human dignity in conditions of hard labor and exile.
The wives of the Decembrists always behaved freely and independently and, with their great moral authority, did a lot together with their husbands and their comrades to raise the cultural level of the local population.
The Siberian authorities, big and small, were afraid of them.
“Between the ladies, the two most irreconcilable and always ready to tear the government apart are Princess Volkonskaya and General Konovnitsyna (Nyryshkina. - A.G.), - a police agent reported to the authorities. - Their frequent circles serve as a focus for all dissatisfied, and there is no more evil abuse that which they spew upon the government and its servants."
Not all Decembrists endured thirty years of Siberian hard labor and exile. And not all wives were destined to see their homeland and their children and loved ones left at home again. But those who returned retained clarity of heart and soul and always warmly and gratefully remembered their tightly knit, friendly family of Decembrists.
“The main thing,” wrote I. I. Pushchin from hard labor, “is not to lose the poetry of life, it has supported me so far; woe to those of us who will lose this consolation in our exceptional situation.”*
*(A. Gessen. Said essay. Page 7, 8, 9.)
Question. What moral qualities of the Decembrists’ wives were evidenced by their arrival and life in Siberia?
The poem by A. I. Odoevsky “Response to the message to A. S. Pushkin” is used as an emotional ending to the topic. It is read out by one of the prepared students.
Reply to the message of A. S. Pushkin
The fiery sounds of the prophetic strings reached our ears, Our hands rushed to the swords, But only found shackles. But be at peace, bard: with chains, We are proud of our fate, And behind the prison gates In our souls we laugh at the kings. Our sorrowful work will not be wasted: A flame will ignite from a spark, And our enlightened people will gather under the holy banner. We will forge swords from chains And again we will light the fire of freedom: It will come upon the kings - And the peoples will sigh joyfully *.
*(Collection "Poetry of the Decembrists", M.-L., "Soviet Writer", 1950, p. 353.)
Literature on the topic
A. Gessen, In the depths of Siberian ores... M., Detgiz, 1963.
M. Maric, Northern Lights. M., Goslitizdat, 1952.
L. N. Medvedskaya. Pavel Ivanovich Pestel, M., "Enlightenment", 1967.
S. N. Golubov. From a spark - a flame. Novel. M., Detgiz, 1950.
Yu. Kalugin. Decembrist's wife. Kyiv, 1963.
N. A. Nekrasov. Russian women. Any edition. Vl. Orlov. Poets Pushkin's time. L., Detgiz, 1954.
A. L. Slonimsky. Chernigovtsy. M., Detgiz, 1961.
Yu. N. Tynyanov. Kyukhlya. Lenizdat, 1955.
N. Zadonsky. Mountains and stars. M., Voenizdat, 1965.
O. Forsh. Firstborns of freedom. Collection of works, vol. V.
M. K. Paustovsky. Northern story. Any edition. L., 1963.
For noble stage of the liberation movement in Russia The economic ideas of the Decembrists were characteristic. V.I. Lenin repeatedly addressed the issue of the noble revolutionism of the Decembrists. He noted that during the era of serfdom in liberation movement the nobility prevailed: “Serf Russia is downtrodden and motionless. A tiny minority of nobles, powerless without the support of the people, are protesting. But the best people from the nobles helped awaken the people.”*
The emergence of Decembrism as the first stage of the liberation movement in Russia was due to a number of objective reasons. Among them, the most important place is occupied by the disintegration of serfdom under the influence of the growth of productive forces, the expansion of commodity-money relations, and the aggravation of class contradictions between landowners and serfs. The Pugachev uprising revealed the full depth of these contradictions. The Patriotic War of 1812 played a well-known role in intensifying the ideological struggle within the ruling class, when advanced officers and soldiers, having crossed Europe, became acquainted with the life of the peoples of Western countries, with the elementary norms of bourgeois democracy, with the ideas of the French Revolution of the late 18th century. As I. D. Yakushkin wrote, “a stay for a whole year in Germany and then several months in Paris could not help but change the views of at least some thinking Russian youth”*. The conservative policy of Emperor Alexander I, who left everything in the country unchanged even after the end, had a great influence on the growing discontent of the advanced Russian officers. Patriotic War 1812
The writings of Russian enlighteners of the late 18th century played an important role in the formation of the ideology of Decembrism. (N.I. Novikova, I.A. Tretyakov, S.E. Desnitsky, Ya.P. Kozelsky, etc.). but especially the revolutionary ideas of A. N. Radishchev. The economic views of the Decembrists were generated by the complex economic and political contradictions of feudal Russia, critically understood by representatives of the revolutionary nobility. The revolutionary-minded Decembrists saw their main task in the destruction of serfdom, providing personal freedom to the peasants, eliminating the absolutist monarchy, and establishing a democratic order in Russia. This was a revolutionary program for breaking the feudal system, the implementation of which would contribute to the development of Russia along the bourgeois path.
Anti-feudal movement in Russia should have led the bourgeoisie, but at the beginning of the 19th century. she was still weak. Therefore, the role of leader of the liberation movement fell to the lot of the revolutionary nobility. Various currents emerged within the Decembrist movement. The most consistent noble revolutionaries grouped around P. I. Pestel (Southern Society), and moderates organized the Northern Society led by N. M. Muravyov.
The most striking literary source allowing one to judge the program of the Decembrists is “Russian Truth”, written by P. I. Pestel in the period after the end of the war with Napoleon. P.I. Pestel (1793-1826) was a highly educated man who was seriously involved in political science. He knew well the works of the classics of bourgeois political economy, the works of petty-bourgeois and vulgar economists of the West. Pestel was the ideological leader of the Decembrist movement, a theorist and propagandist of the radical path to establishing a new system, and a convinced supporter of the republic. "Russian Truth" uncompromisingly proclaimed the destruction of autocracy, serfdom, the establishment of a republican system and ensuring the "welfare of the people." In the very concept of “prosperity”, too broad and equally vague, Pestel tried to put two main ideas - welfare and security. To ensure them, Pestel considered it necessary to implement a system of economic and political measures.
Political laws must be based on “natural law”; political economy must also be guided by it. Pestel understood the doctrine of “natural law” very broadly. He believed that “natural law” should be the initial norm in establishing both the political rights of citizens of society and their rights to property and the means of production. Hence, the author saw the main goal of “Russian Truth” as setting out “the right order both for the people and for the temporary Supreme Government”, to indicate ways and methods of achieving the goal of social well-being, by which was meant “the well-being of the totality of the people.” At the same time, “public welfare should be considered more important than private welfare”*.
The Decembrists raised the question of the destruction of the monarchy. In the “Orthodox Catechism”, compiled even before the uprising by Pestel’s associate S.I. Muravyov-Apostol with the participation of M.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, and widely distributed among soldiers, the question of what “befits... the Russian army” to do in order to free itself from tyranny of the tsars, an unequivocal answer was given: “To take up arms all together against tyranny and restore faith and freedom in Russia.”*
However, there was no unity among the Decembrists on the issue of a republican system. Head of the Northern Society N. M. Muravyov (1796-1843) in 1820-1821. drafted a Constitution (three versions), in which he resolutely opposed autocracy and serfdom, believing that “the power of autocracy is equally disastrous for rulers and for societies.” Chapter III of the draft Constitution declared that “serfdom and slavery are abolished”*. However, unlike Pestel, Muravyov was inclined to maintain a constitutional monarchy, albeit limited by the People's Council, consisting of the Supreme Duma and the House of People's Representatives.
The Decembrists were unanimous in their methods of overthrowing the autocracy. They all shared the idea of a military coup without the participation of the masses. This is explained by the narrow-mindedness of the nobility and lack of understanding of the role of the people in the destruction of feudalism. The Decembrists intended to create a social system in which, along with the free peasantry, capitalist enterprises in industry and trade, there would also be landowners who owned land as the source of their livelihood.
The Decembrists, while fighting for the “welfare of the people,” at the same time excluded them from participation in this struggle, rightfully fearing that the peasantry would not limit itself to the noble program in resolving the issue of land. This explains why V.I. Lenin, while highly appreciating the Decembrists’ program for eliminating the autocratic system in Russia, noted at the same time that they were too “far from the people” and therefore their practical capabilities for carrying out a military coup were insignificant. This ultimately predetermined their defeat. Pointing out the class limitations of the economic program of the Decembrists, it must nevertheless be emphasized that in the historical conditions of serfdom in Russia, the demand for the liberation of the peasants and the attempt to practically implement this through a military coup were an outstanding revolutionary event.
According to the preliminary plan for the uprising, developed by S.P. Trubetskoy, in the event of the victory of the rebels, the Senate was supposed to publish a “Manifesto” to the people. It announced the destruction of the former rule (autocracy), serfdom, the “equalization of the rights of all classes”, the right of any citizen “to acquire all kinds of property, such as land, houses in villages and cities.” This was complemented by the abolition of “poll taxes and arrears thereon”*.
These are, in general, the fundamental principles of the Decembrists, guided by which they began the fight against the autocracy. At the same time, they saw the supporting positions of their program demands not only in the doctrine of “natural law”, but also in the history of Rus'. As the Decembrist M.A. Fonvizin wrote, " Ancient Rus' did not know either political slavery or civil slavery: both were grafted onto her gradually and forcibly..."*.
One of the central issues that worried the Decembrists was agrarian. It was discussed for a long time in their circles. How to free the peasants - with or without land? The author of "Russian Truth" took the most radical position, arguing that the real liberation of the peasants from economic and political dependence on the landowners is possible only when the peasants (along with personal freedom) are also endowed with land. Pestel resolutely denied the right of the nobles to keep peasants in personal dependence. “...The right to possess other people as one’s own property,” he wrote, “to sell, mortgage, give... is a shameful thing, contrary to humanity and natural laws.”* Based on this general position, Pestel argued that the liberation of peasants with land is the only and most important condition for ensuring public welfare.
The ideological leader of the Decembrists, P. I. Pestel, did not imagine revolutionary changes in Russia without changes in agrarian relations. He considered agriculture as the main branch of the national economy, and he mainly considered labor in agricultural production to be the source of national wealth. If one of the tasks of the new social system was the elimination of poverty and misery of the masses, then the closest way to achieve this was seen in providing the opportunity for all citizens of the new Russia to work on land that was either publicly owned and provided for the use of peasants, or in their private property. Pestel gave preference to public ownership of land over private ownership, since the use of land from the public fund should be free, everyone will be able to get it at their disposal, regardless of their property status. Pestel thought of granting such a right to all residents of villages and cities in order to place all Russian citizens on an equal footing in relation to the land. It was original solution difficult question.
What lands were to be used to create the public fund? These are mainly lands of landowners and the treasury. Such lands are quite enough to provide for all those in need. The very idea of encroaching on the land of the landowners was justified in the new constitution (the “State Testament”), which stated that “the entire Russian people” would form “one estate - the civil”, since all the current estates were being destroyed. This is Pestel’s formulation of the question of land and its use, of a new form of land ownership. He saw the practical embodiment of this idea in the division of all the land in each volost “into two parts: volost and private. The first belongs to the whole society, the second to private people. The first is public property, the second is private property.”*
Pestel also developed the conditions on the basis of which part of the landowners' lands were selected for the benefit of society. It was planned to take away half of it free of charge from landowners with 10 thousand dessiatines or more. If the landowner had from 5 to 9 thousand dessiatines, then half of the selected land should be reimbursed from state holdings or compensated with money from the treasury*. This would allow the landowner to run his economy with the help of hired force and gradually transfer it to capitalist principles. Thus, according to Pestel’s project, the property of landowners’ farms was preserved, although it was significantly reduced in large estates. This undoubtedly reflected the limited views of Pestel. But the true revolutionary nature of his agrarian program lay in the fact that he proposed to allocate land to all peasants and thereby abolish the economic dependence of the peasants on the landowners.
Pestel's agricultural project was not supported by all members secret society Decembrists. Its radical content went beyond the liberating transformations allowed by moderate members of society. For example, the prominent Decembrist and economist N.I. Turgenev (1789-1871), who fought for the liberation of peasants from personal serfdom, at the same time allowed their liberation without land or with land (two tithes per male soul), but for a ransom. Turgenev made a lot of efforts to convince the landowners that the liberation of the peasants from personal dependence would not be the reason for the disruption of their economy. It is possible to “squeeze” no less income out of the hired labor of peasants than under serfdom. N. I. Turgenev, who wrote a number of works: “An Experience in the Theory of Taxes” (1818), “Something about Corvee” (1818), “Something about Serfdom in Russia” (1819), “The Question of Liberation and the Question of Managing Peasants” (1819 ) and others, painted a vivid picture of the plight of peasants, especially corvées and serfs. However, he still saw a way out of this situation in decisions “from above”, and not in the revolutionary abolition of serfdom. The author of the note “Something about serfdom in Russia” assured that “the government alone can begin to improve the lot of the peasants”*.
But it is known that landowners not only during the period disintegration of serfdom (late 18th - early 19th centuries), but even during the period of the crisis of serfdom (mid-19th century) they were resolute opponents of the emancipation of the peasants, and only objective reasons forced the government in 1861 to take the path of reform. Turgenev mistakenly considered landlord ownership of land as a condition for the economic progress of Russia, and advocated the transfer of noble latifundia to the capitalist path of development. Peasant farms were assigned a subordinate role as a source of cheap labor for the landowners' estates. Unlike Pestel, Turgenev saw the future of Russia in the capitalist development of agriculture, led by large capitalist farms of landowners. Turgenev's views on serfdom and the land question were a reflection of the narrow-mindedness of the nobility.
N. M. Muravyov also expressed his negative attitude towards Pestel’s agrarian project, who did not hide this even before the uprising, and after his defeat, he openly declared during the investigation: “... Pestel’s entire plan was contrary to my reason and way of thinking.”* In his draft Constitution, Muravyov left all the land for the landowners, preserving economic basis domination of the nobility. In the first version on this issue, he put it this way: “The right of property, which includes certain things, is sacred and inviolable.”
During the period of the dominance of serfdom in Russia, only the nobility and the free commercial and industrial class were granted property rights. Therefore, when N.M. Muravyov declared the inviolability and sacredness of property, this applied only to the ruling class - the nobles. The draft Constitution stated that “the lands of the landowners remain theirs.” After reading the first version of the draft Constitution by individual members of the secret society of the Decembrists, N. M. Muravyov supplemented this thesis with the note that “the houses of the villagers with their vegetable gardens are recognized as their property with all agricultural tools and livestock belonging to them.” I. I. Pushchin wrote a note in the margin: “If there is a vegetable garden, then the earth”*.
Supporters of the landless liberation of peasants were also S.P. Trubetskoy, M.S. Lunin, I.D. Yakushkin, M.F. Orlov and others. The views of the moderate Decembrists came into clear contradiction with the main goal of the movement. The liberation of peasants from the personal dependence of landowners without land or with a meager piece of it did not solve the issue of eliminating the dependence of peasants on land owners. The replacement of non-economic coercion with economic bondage did not exclude an antagonistic class contradiction between peasants and landowners.
"Russian Truth" does not contain a developed program for the development of industry, trade and finance. But the attitude of the Decembrists to these issues can be judged from the works of Turgenev, Bestuzhev and Orlov. Pestel, attaching decisive importance to agriculture, did not deny the important role of the development of industry and trade. Pestel, for example, believed that the state’s economic policy should actively promote the development of industry, trade, and the establishment of a correct tax system, and for the sake of protecting backward domestic industry, he supported protectionist policies. Some Decembrists of the southern regions of Russia (I. I. Gorbachevsky (1800-1869) and others) gave priority to industry over agriculture, arguing that the problem of eliminating poverty and poverty could be more successfully solved by active development industry. “...The people can be free only by becoming moral, enlightened and industrial,” wrote Gorbachevsky.
Pestel pointed out that the development of industry should be facilitated by trade, both external and internal, but its growth was hampered by the existence of merchant guilds, which provided privileges to large merchants. Decembrists of all directions believed that these privileges should be abolished, since they slowed down the growth of trade.
According to Pestel, tax policy should also be changed. After the declaration of equality of all citizens of Russia and the abolition of class privileges, taxes must be paid by all members Russian state, including nobles. Pestel even proposed abolishing poll taxes, all in-kind and personal duties, and establishing direct, differentiated property and income taxes that would not be ruinous for the poor. He was opposed to indirect taxes, especially on basic necessities. In order to help small-scale production in villages and cities, the author of "Russian Pravda" proposed expanding the activities of the banking system, creating banks in every volost and issuing interest-free loans for long periods to peasants and townspeople to promote the development of their farms or industries. All of these proposals by Pestel essentially led to the creation of a new financial system, the purpose of which would be to assist the population in economic development, and not to solve the fiscal problems of the state. The Decembrists did not have a unified view on these issues either.
Representatives of the moderate wing created important works, as evidenced by the works of N. I. Turgenev (“Experience tax theory", 1818), N. A. Bestuzhev ("On freedom of trade and industry in general", 1831) and M. F. Orlova ("On state credit", 1833). The content of these works goes beyond the scope of the problems indicated in the title. They raise general issues of serfdom, the economic policy of the state in the field of trade, taxation, finance and credit. In "An Experience in the Theory of Taxes" Turgenev analyzes the history of taxes in various countries, sources of payment of taxes, forms of their collection, the importance of tax policy for the population, industrial development , trade, public finance, etc. But the author saw his main task in the analysis of Russian history, in the criticism of serfdom in defense of the idea of freedom. As Turgenev later recalled in his work "La Russie et les Russes" ("Russia and the Russians", 1847 ), “in this work (i.e., in “An Experience in the Theory of Taxes.” - Author) I allowed myself a number of excursions into higher areas of politics. The poll tax gave me the opportunity to talk about slavery... These side points were much more important in my eyes higher value than the main content of my work"*.
Considering Russia as an economically backward country, Turgenev, in contrast to Pestel, considered free trade to be a policy promoting industrial growth. Here, of course, not only the influence of the teachings of A. Smith, which was fashionable at that time, was felt, but also concern for the interests of the landowners. Of all the social strata of Russian society, the nobility was most closely associated with foreign trade as a supplier to the foreign market of bread, hemp, lard, leather and a buyer of fine cloth, silk, wine, spices, luxury goods, etc. Turgenev spoke approvingly of the new tariff of 1810 ., which destroyed customs barriers for foreign goods. However, his historical references to the example of England, which established a policy of free trade, are unsuccessful. It was impossible to mechanically transfer the principles of free trade to Russian reality, where industry was poorly developed. Turgenev ignored the fact that England itself and almost all the countries of Western Europe built their industry under the protection of a policy of protectionism.
The prominent Decembrist P. G. Kakhovsky (1797-1826) also did not understand the significance of the policy of protectionism for the development of industry in Russia. In his letters to Tsar Nicholas I, he stated that “the prohibitive system, which cannot be useful anywhere, has greatly contributed to the decline of trade and the general ruin of the state,” *. N. M. Muravyov, N. A. Bestuzhev and others showed a negative attitude towards protectionism.
In his work “On Freedom of Trade and Industry in General” (1831), N. A. Bestuzhev (1791-1855) expressed an erroneous judgment about the negative consequences of prohibitive tariffs. He perceived the well-known formula “laissez faire, laissez passer” (“freedom of action, freedom of trade”) uncritically, without taking into account the historical conditions of each state. Bestuzhev viewed protectionism as a belated reflection of the outdated policy of mercantilism. In his opinion, countries rich in fertile lands and vast territories should produce mainly agricultural products and supply them to foreign markets. Small countries are forced to develop industry and enter the markets with industrial goods. In this case, there should be free exchange between states. The free actions of private entrepreneurs should not be limited by government restrictions, including tariff policy. Bestuzhev did not oppose the development of industry, but was more inclined to develop the processing industry, which was in the hands of the nobility*.
N. I. Turgenev argued that the tax system, although indirectly, reflects the character of a republican or despotic state, and emphasized that the correct organization of taxation can only be built on a thorough knowledge of political economy and “any government that does not understand the rules of this science ... it is necessary to die" from financial breakdown*. Giving an idealistic explanation of the origin of taxes based on the theory of “social contract” J.-J. Rousseau and considering their collection correct in principle, Turgenev opposed the privileges of the nobles and clergy, because taxes must be paid by all layers of society in accordance with income. Although he took examples of unfair taxation from the history of France, he quite transparently criticized the Russian order, demanded the abolition of poll taxes and their replacement with a tax on “labor and land.” The author especially opposed personal duties, considering it expedient to replace them with monetary dues. In despotic countries, taxes are heavy and burdensome, but they should not be ruinous for the people. Therefore, “the government should take as much as is needed to satisfy the true needs of the state, and not as much as the people are able to give”**. It was proposed to levy taxes only on net income, without affecting fixed capital, and to establish a tax on landowners once every 100 years. This logically followed from his idea of the role of landowner farms in the development of capitalist agrarian relations. It should be emphasized the progressiveness of Turgenev’s views on tax policy aimed against serfdom and tsarist tyranny.
Turgenev's statements about paper money, banks and credit are of some interest. He considered the use of paper money as a means of circulation as a rational phenomenon, since they replaced the movement of metallic money. Turgenev emphasized that the amount of paper money functioning in the sphere of circulation must correspond to the size of trade turnover. If this condition is violated, then the extra paper money leads to the depreciation of “pure money,” i.e., full-fledged money, which is like an additional tax on workers. Turgenev criticized the government, which used the policy of covering the budget deficit by issuing money, believing that it was more economically rational to resort to state credit. He emphasized that “all governments must direct their attention to maintaining and preserving public credit... The age of paper money has passed for theory - and has passed irrevocably. The age of credit is coming for all of Europe”*.
Deeper systematic analysis of public credit given by the Decembrist General M. F. Orlov (1788-1842). His book “On State Credit” (1833) was one of the first in world literature to set out the bourgeois theory of state credit. Orlov was a supporter of large-scale capitalist industry and large-scale private ownership of the means of production. Until the end of his days, he adhered to the idea of the inviolability of private property. Unlike other Decembrists, Orlov linked progress in Russia's economic development with the organization of large-scale production in both industry and agriculture. But such development was hampered by the lack of large capital. To solve these problems, Orlov proposed expanding state credit (by the way, well-known opponents of this idea were A. Smith, D. Ricardo, Russian finance ministers Guryev, Kankrin, etc.). The Decembrist overestimated the role of state credit, fetishized it, seeing in it a source of so-called primitive accumulation, and proposed combining this with a moderate taxation system. He noted that "if good system taxes are the first basis for credit, then the use of credit is the motivating reason for the organization of the tax system"*.
Orlov's proposal to make government loans a source of government credit was original. In this case, it was meant not to repay the loans, but to pay their amount in the form of interest over a long time. This idea formed the basis of the theory of state credit. A developed system of state credit will require the creation of an extensive network of banks, which corresponded to the trend in the development of capitalism. Having written this book, M. F. Orlov declared himself as a serious theorist in the field of state credit not only in Russian, but also in world economic literature. References to his work are available in German literature.
Thus, the Decembrists not only acted as revolutionary fighters against serfdom and autocracy, but also left a serious mark on the history of economic thought. In their works, agrarian problems, issues of state economic policy, especially foreign economic and tax policies, problems of public debt, credit, etc. received deep coverage. Their views, being essentially bourgeois, had a huge influence on the development of socio-economic thought in Russia.
V.I. Lenin gave a dialectical definition of the historical place of the Decembrist period of the liberation movement in Russia: “The circle of these revolutionaries is narrow. They are terribly far from the people. But their cause was not lost. The Decembrists woke up Herzen. Herzen launched revolutionary agitation”*.
