The beginning of the uprising of the Chernigov regiment against the autocracy. The uprising of the Chernihiv regiment and the lesson of history. Reasons for the defeat of the Decembrists

Uprising of the Chernihiv Regiment

Members of the Southern Society became aware of the unsuccessful uprising in St. Petersburg on January 6, 1826. At that time, arrests in the south continued, threatening this organization with complete defeat. The closest associates of Pestel, the leaders of the Vasilkovsky Council, Lieutenant Colonel of the Chernigov Regiment S.I. Muravyov-Apostol and his friend Lieutenant M.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, decided on an immediate uprising in accordance with the previously developed plan of simultaneous action in the capital and Ukraine.

With the active participation of members of the Vasilkovskaya council and a group of "united Slavs", on January 10, the 5th company of the Chernigov regiment rebelled. The next day, the entire Chernigov regiment, which was stationed in the city of Vasilkov, joined it. S. I. Muravyov-Apostol, who led the uprising, tried to establish contact with members of the secret society in other regiments of the second army through special messengers. From Vasilkov, the insurgent regiment moved in marching order to Zhitomir, towards the expected reinforcements. But in the following days, the route of the Chernigov regiment changed several times, since the army command, informed through spies about the activities of the secret society, changed the location of the regiments associated with it in advance. S.I. Muravyov-Apostol did not succeed in strengthening the forces of the insurgent regiment.

Mounted units of General Geismar with artillery were sent against the Chernigov regiment. The collision took place on January 15, 1826 near the village of Kovalevka, 8-10 km south of the city of Fastov. Geismar scattered the rebellious regiment with volleys of buckshot. Many participants in the uprising died. S. I. Muravyov-Apostol, wounded in the head, was seized with a weapon in his hands. The uprising of the Southern Society was crushed.

Members of the Southern and Northern Societies, along with constitutional and program projects, have developed a specific plan of action. They intended in the summer of 1826 to carry out a coup d'état during military exercises. They were supposed to be supported by the Polish Patriotic Society and the Society of United Slavs, which united with the Southern Society.

In November 1825, Alexander 1 died unexpectedly in Taganrog while traveling in Russia. He had no children. By seniority, his brother Constantine was to become the new king. But back in the early 1920s, he abdicated the throne in connection with his marriage to the Polish princess Lovich. Since his abdication remained unpublished, the Senate and the army swore allegiance to Constantine, but he refused the throne. An oath was appointed to another brother of Alexander - Nikolai. A peculiar situation has developed in the country - an interregnum. The leaders of the Northern Society decided to take advantage of this in order to carry out a coup d'état. In a difficult political situation, they demonstrated genuine revolutionary spirit, a readiness to sacrifice everything for the implementation of the plan for the state structure of Russia.

December 13, 1825 at the apartment of K.F. Ryleev, the last meeting of the members of the Northern Society took place. They decided to withdraw the troops of the Petersburg garrison to Senate Square and force them not to swear allegiance to Nicholas, but to accept the "Manifesto to the Russian people" (see Appendix 4), drawn up at the meeting. The Manifesto is the most important final program document of the Decembrists. It proclaimed the destruction of the autocracy, serfdom, estates, recruitment and military settlements, the introduction of broad democratic freedoms.

In the early morning of December 14, 1825, members of the Northern Society began campaigning among the troops. By 11 o'clock the brothers Alexander and Mikhail Bestuzhev and D.A. Shchepin-Rostovsky was taken to Senate Square by the Moscow Life Guards Regiment. At one o'clock in the afternoon, the sailors of the Guards Naval Crew led by Nikolai Bestuzhev and the Life Guards Grenadier Regiment joined the rebels. In total, about 3 thousand soldiers and sailors with 30 officers lined up in battle formation on Senate Square. However, by this time it turned out that early in the morning the Senate had already sworn allegiance to Nicholas, after which the senators dispersed. There was no one to show the Manifesto. Trubetskoy, having learned about this, did not join the rebels. The uprising was left for a time without leadership. These circumstances gave rise to vacillations in the ranks of the Decembrists and doomed them to senseless tactics of waiting.

Meanwhile, Nikolai was gathering units loyal to him on the square. Governor-General of St. Petersburg M.A. Miloradovich tried to persuade the rebels to disperse, but was mortally wounded by the Decembrist P.G. Kakhovsky. The rumor about the uprising spread throughout the city, and up to 30 thousand people gathered on Senate Square, ready to support the rebels. But the Decembrists did not take advantage of this. Two cavalry attacks by government troops were repulsed by the rebels. Fearing that with the onset of darkness it would be more difficult to put an end to the uprising, Nikolai gave the order to open artillery fire. Several volleys of buckshot caused severe devastation in the ranks of the rebels. The civilian population surrounding them also suffered. Soldiers and officers who tried to escape from the square were arrested. The uprising in Petersburg was crushed. Arrests of members of the society and their sympathizers began.

After 2 weeks on December 29, 1825 S.I. Muravyov-Apostol raised an uprising of the Chernigov regiment. By this time, P.I. Pestel and a number of other leaders of the Southern Society were arrested. The defeat of the uprising in St. Petersburg was also known. But members of the Southern Society hoped to raise the troops stationed in the south to rebel, and thereby show the government that the northerners were not alone and that the whole country supported them. But their hopes were not justified. Although the peasants supported the rebels who passed through their villages, the government managed to isolate the Chernigov regiment and a week later, on January 3, 1826, it was shot with grapeshot.

In late December 1825 - early February 1826, two more attempts were made to raise an uprising in the troops by members of the Society of Military Friends, associated with the Northern Society, and members of the Society of United Slavs. But these attempts, too, failed.

579 people were involved in the investigation and trial, of which 80% were military.

The process took place in strict secrecy and in a short time. The work of the Commission of Inquiry was directed by the emperor himself. Of all those under investigation, Pestel, Muraviev-Apostol, Bestuzhev-Ryumin, Kakhovsky and Ryleev were placed "out of the ranks" and sentenced to quartering. However, the fear of being branded as a "savage" in "enlightened" Europe led Nicholas to replace this medieval execution by hanging. On July 13, 1826, five Decembrists were executed in the Peter and Paul Fortress. Over a hundred Decembrists were exiled to hard labor and permanent settlement in Siberia. Many officers were demoted to soldiers and sent to the Caucasus, where there was a war with the highlanders. The entire Chernigov regiment was sent there.

Related content

Western Ukrainian lands within the Austrian Empire at the end of the 18th - the first half of the 19th centuries.

Content: 1. Creation of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Political reforms in the empire and changes in the administrative-territorial structure of Western Ukrainian lands. 2. Socio-economic situation of Western Ukrainian lands in the second half of the XIX century. 3. The problem of agrarian overpopulation and the beginning of mass labor emigration of Western Ukrainians. 4. Ukrainian national and socio-political movements in Western Ukrainian lands in the second half of the XIX century. 4.1. Consequences of constitutional reforms in the Austrian Empire. 4.2. Moskvofilstvo (Russophilism). 4.3. Narodovtsy. 4.4. "Enlightenment" 4.5. Radicals.

1. Creation of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Political reforms in the empire and changes in the administrative-territorial structure of Western Ukrainian lands On February 8, 1867, as a result of negotiations between the Austrian government and the leaders of Hungarian political parties, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was created. On December 21, 1867, Emperor Franz Joseph I approved the Austro-Hungarian agreement and constitution. The Austrian Empire was turned into dual (dualistic)state, called the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Hungary gained political and administrative autonomy, it had its own government and parliament - the Sejm.

Some changes took place in the position of the Western Ukrainian lands that were part of the empire. Although Galicia was led by an Austrian governor from among the Polish magnates, the region received limited autonomy. Back in 1861, the Galician Regional Seim began its work in Lvov. Polish landowners and entrepreneurs gained the advantage in it, but the right to vote (the right to elect and be elected to the Galician Seim) also had Ukrainians, especially the peasants. The imperial government refused to satisfy the long-standing Ukrainian demand - to divide Galicia into two administrative units - Ukrainian(Eastern Galicia) and Polish(Western Galicia). As before 1867, there was the "Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria".

Internal self-government was also granted Bukovina, however, Ukrainians' access to the Bukovina Seim was limited: it was dominated by Romanians and Germans.

Transcarpathia became part of Hungary and did not receive any self-government.

2. Socio-economic situation of Western Ukrainian lands in the second half of the XIX century. Despite the industrial revolution that began in the Austrian Empire in the 30s and 40s, in the last third of the 19th century. Austria-Hungary was one of the backward European countries with numerous feudal remnants.

The development of industry and market relations in various areas of Austria-Hungary took place unevenly. The Czech Republic and Austria achieved the greatest industrial development, while Galicia, Bukovina, Transcarpathia, as well as Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and some other regions lagged behind in their socio-economic development.

Eastern Galicia, Northern Bukovina, Transcarpathia preserved< strong>agrarian character economy The majority of the population was employed in agriculture. The development of the economy in the Western Ukrainian lands was increasingly determined by the interests of the large factory industry of the western and central provinces of the empire.

The industry of Western Ukrainian lands under the rule of Austria-Hungary in the last third of the XIX century. almost entirely in the hands foreign capitalists (German, Austrian, Canadian). During the 70s - 80s. 19th century there was also an intensive process of formation factory industry, mainly oil-producing, flour-grinding, alcohol-vodka, timber processing industries. Steam engines began to be widely used at these enterprises.

But in the economic structure of Austria-Hungary, the western Ukrainian lands were assigned the role sales market finished goods and a source of raw materials and labor for the industrialized provinces. Western industry could not bear competition cheap goods and started decline. The imperial government actually did not take measures for the development of industry in Western Ukraine. Western Ukrainian entrepreneurs were not provided with tax benefits, which were used in the western provinces. Access to Western Ukrainian goods to the markets of Austria-Hungary and neighboring countries was actually closed. At the same time, there were benefits for the export of raw materials and semi-finished products from the region.

Proclaimed in 1848 peasant reform, whose main position was cancellationserfdom, was carried out in the 50s. The government did everything to ensure that the losses of the landlords were minimal and that they received everything necessary to adapt to the new economic conditions.

After the reform, Western Ukraine remained the edge landowners'latifundium. Large landowners who owned 5 or more thousand hectares owned more than 40% of all land. Despite the large remnants of serfdom, agriculture in Western Ukraine in the second half of the XIX century. gradually developed in a market way: in civilian workers worked on landlord and rich peasant farms. By the end of the XIX century. in the Western Ukrainian lands there were over 400 thousand permanently employed and occasionally hired workers. Agricultural machinery was used more and more, and the specialization of regions deepened.

3. The problem of agrarian overpopulation and the beginning of mass labor emigration of Western Ukrainians. At the end of the XIX century. 75% of the total population was employed in agriculture and forestry in Western Ukraine. The active differentiation of the peasantry led to the fact that at the turn of the century in the Western Ukrainian lands there were almost 80% of the poor, 15% of the middle peasants, and only 5% of economically strong prosperous peasant farms. The peasant landownership of this era was characterized by an increase in the number of peasant farms as a result of fragmentation, which was accompanied by a progressive reduction in land holdings.

On this basis, the problem of agrarian overpopulation in Western Ukrainian lands became acute and mass labor emigration of Western Ukrainians began. The main reasons for mass labor emigration were:

The impoverishment of the majority of the peasants, the lack of land, the search for salvation from starvation;

- low earnings or their complete absence;

The fear of the not yet ruined peasants before future poverty;

The burden of national oppression and political lawlessness. Seeking a way out of the critical situation, the Western Ukrainian peasants began go abroad- to Canada, USA, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, etc. At the end of the XIX century. 250 thousand people emigrated from Eastern Galicia and Northern Bukovina, and 170 thousand from Transcarpathia. In the future, this process tended to increase.

At this time, there was also temporary (seasonal) wage emigration from Western Ukraine to Hungary, Romania, Austria, Germany, France, Russia. But in general, labor emigration of Western Ukrainians (in total, over 1 million people went abroad before the First World War) only partially solved the problem of agrarian overpopulation and softened the situation in the countryside.

4. Ukrainian national and socio-political movement in Western Ukrainian lands in the second half of the 19th century.

4.1. Consequences of constitutional reforms in the Austrian Empire. In the Western Ukrainian lands, the Ukrainian national and socio-political movements acquired a greater scope after the constitutional reforms in the Austrian Empire in the 60s. These reforms created a solid foundation for the revitalization of the national and socio-political life of all the peoples of the empire, and in particular the Ukrainians. The establishment of parliamentarism gradually changed social psychology. The masses of the population turned from silent subjects into citizens who trusted the authorities. The declaration, albeit formal, of the equality of all the peoples of the empire awakened national dignity - the first necessary basis for national revival.

In the 60s. 19th century As a result of the actual ban on the Ukrainian language in the Russian Empire, the influx of Ukrainian literature in Galicia intensified, which significantly intensified the processes of national self-determination here. But the Galician Ukrainians split into Muscovites and populists, who competed with each other.

4.2. Moskvofilstvo (Russophilism). Founders and leaders Muscovites were D. Zubritsky, B. Diditsky, N. Malinovsky, A. Dobryansky. It was generated by the difficult conditions of national life in Austria-Hungary. Initially, it had a relatively progressive character. It united, on the one hand, resistance to forced Polonization, the loss of illusions and hopes for the Austrian government, which supported the policy of suppressing Ukrainians in Galicia by the forces of the Polish nobility, and, on the other hand, disbelief in the possibility of a Ukrainian nation and the search for support in an ethnically related state.< /p>

The prerequisites for the emergence of Muscoviteism were: the loss by the Ukrainian people of their own statehood; centuries of foreign enslavement; fragmentation and isolation of individual lands; denationalization of the educated elite; low level of national consciousness of the masses.

At first, Moscowphilism had cultural direction, advocating that Russian became the literary language in Galicia. However, it gradually began to gain political overtones, propagating ideas about the ethnic identity of Russians, Ukrainians and Galician Rusyns, denying the existence of Ukrainians as a nation, asserting the need to unite all Slavs under the patronage of Russia.

4.3. Narodovtsy. It was in contrast to the Muscovite movement in the early 60s. 19th century and there arose Narodovtsy, who were guided by Ukrainian people and advocated the introduction of the Ukrainian language and literature into all spheres of life.

The populist movement arose on the basis of ideas national revival, formulated by the "Russian Trinity" and the Cyril and Methodius Brotherhood, and was formed under the influence of the work of T. Shevchenko, P. Kulish, N. Kostomarov. Based on the fact that Ukrainians are a separate nation living on the territory from the Caucasus to the Carpathians, the populists advocated the unity of all Ukrainian lands and the development of a single Ukrainian language based on folk dialects. Narodovtsy defended the rights of the Ukrainian people to state life.

The leaders of the populists were Vasily Barvinsky, Yu. Romanchuk, V. Navrotsky, A. Ogonovsky, A. Vakhnyanin. They carried out a wide scientific and educational work. In particular, on their initiative in 1864 the first Ukrainian theater was founded in Lviv, in 1861 - the cultural and educational organization "Russian conversation", in 1861 - "Prosvita". Of great importance for the development of the Ukrainian language and literature was the creation in 1873 in Lvov of the Literary Society named after. T. Shevchenko, which in 1892 was reorganized into the Scientific Society. T. Shevchenko.

The impetus for the beginning of active political activity of the Narodniks was the elections of 1879 to the Galician Seim, when the Ukrainians, led by the Muscovite Russian Council, were able to appoint three of their representatives.

In 1890, Yu. Romanchuk, S. Sembratovich, O. Barvinsky, through the mediation of V. Antonovich, concluded a compromise agreement with the Polish political circles and the Austrian government, which was called "New Era". The agreement provided for the concessions of the Austrian government to the Ukrainians, the recognition of the rights of the Galician Ukrainians as a separate people. It was planned to provide Ukrainians with a certain number of seats in the parliament in the Galician Seim, the opening of gymnasiums in response to loyalty Ukrainians to the Austrian authorities. But already in 1894, the parties, dissatisfied with the actions of each other, abandoned the “New Erean POLICY”.

In 1890, a significant part of the populists united in Russian-Ukrainian Radical Party, sharply condemning the policy of the "New Era" and continued the opposition struggle. In 1899, the main part of the Narodniks, part of the Radicals formed Ukrainian Nationaldemocraticparty.

4.4. "Education". "Enlightenment"- Ukrainian-cultural society, founded in Lvov on December 8, 1868 by a group of populists. It was the first cell of "Enlightenment" in the Ukrainian lands. The Prosvita Society in Galicia was born in opposition to anti-Ukrainian currents in cultural life: colonialist, supported by the tsarist government, on the one hand, and Muscovite, on the other.

The main task society was to promote the education of the Ukrainian people in the cultural, national-political and economic directions. In the early 90s. 19th century "Enlightenment" began to open its own reading rooms. The activities of the branches were coordinated by the main branch in Lviv. The Society published works by leading Ukrainian writers, school textbooks, popular brochures, newspapers and magazines, literary and scientific almanacs. Through printed publications, reading rooms, a wide network of circles, "Enlightenment" carried culture, knowledge and national consciousness to the masses and was an important factor in the consolidation of Galician Ukrainians.

4.5. Radicals. In the mid 70s. in Galicia, a young intelligentsia appears, which has become critically evaluate the activities of both Muscovites and Narodniks, and sought to give the Ukrainian movement a more revolutionary character. Under the influence of M. Dragomanov, young Ukrainian politicians I. Franko, M. Pavlik, O. Terletsky and others turned to socialism. So in the Ukrainian movement arose the so-called radical flow.

The radicals criticized the existing system, Muscovites and Narodniks, sought to defend the interests of the peasants and workers in specific cases. They stood up for the national and social liberation of the Ukrainian people, the reunification of Ukrainian lands into a single state.

The radicals stepped up the activities of all Ukrainian patriots of Galicia. They came to the realization of the need to unite their efforts within the framework of a single organization. Such an organization has become people's council, created by the populists in 1885. This organization set itself the task of continuing the work of the Main Russian Council of 1848. The People's Council became the prototype of a political party. In 1890, in Lvov, radicals created Russian-Ukrainian Radical Party - first Ukrainian political

It did not shake the determination of the members of the Southern Society to start the speech. Yes, and it was impossible to delay. On December 13, Pestel was arrested. And although at the first interrogations he denied everything, the southerners knew that the government, from the denunciations of Boshnyak and the captain of the Vyatka regiment Mayboroda, had data on the composition of the Southern Society and its activities. Following Pestel, other members of the Tulchinsk council were also captured. From day to day, the rest of the members of the Southern Society could be arrested, and above all the leaders of the Vasilkovskaya council.

Having learned about the arrest of Pestel, S. Muravyov-Apostol, together with his brother Matvey 24, went to Zhytomyr to inform the members of the society of his intention to start a speech, relying on the Chernigov regiment, and enlist their support. From Zhitomir, the brothers left for Lyubar, where the Akhtyrsky hussar regiment was located, commanded by a member of the society A. 3. Muravyov. On December 27, shortly after the arrival of the Muravyov brothers in Lyubar, M. Bestuzhev-Ryumin rode here, who said that the commander of the regiment Gebel received an order to arrest S. Muravyov, but, not finding him in Vasilkov, went along with a gendarme officer to search for him .

S. Muravyov suggested that A. Muravyov immediately assemble the Akhtyrsky regiment, go to Troyanov, drag along the Alexandria hussars stationed there, then move to Zhitomir and arrest the command of the 3rd corps there.

A. Muravyov refused to speak immediately, but promised to support the uprising of the Chernigov regiment. December 28 Ants and his companions arrived in the village. Trilesy, where the 5th company of the Chernigov regiment was stationed, the commander of which was a member of the Society of United Slavs A.D. Kuzmin.

By order of S. Muravyov, M. Bestuzhev went to Novograd-Volynsk to organize a performance there by units in which members of the secret society served. S. Muravyov sent a soldier to Vasilkov with a note and invited members of the society, company commanders, Kuzmin, M. A. Shchepillo, V. N. Solovyov to come to him. Having received a note, these, joined by I.I. Sukhinov immediately left for Trilesy. Upon learning that the Muravyov brothers had been arrested by Gebel and a gendarmerie officer who had arrived here, members of the society released them. The release of S. Muravyov on December 29 was actually the beginning of the uprising of the Chernigov regiment.

S. Muravyov saw the immediate task in raising the entire Chernigov regiment. On the same day, the 5th company went to vil. Kovalevka, where it united with the 2nd. On December 30, the rebels moved towards Vasilkov, where the rest of the companies of the Chernigov regiment were stationed, but before reaching it, they stopped in the town of Mytintsy. Here they were met by M. Bestuzhev, who did not manage to get into Novograd-Volynsk. An attempt by Major Trukhin, who remained behind the regiment commander, to organize resistance, was not successful. The soldiers of the Chernigov regiment enthusiastically greeted the rebels and went over to their side.

In Vasilkov, the food of the regiment passed into the hands of the rebels. “The night from December 30 to December 31,” writes Gorbachevsky, “was spent in preparation for the march.”

In Vasilkovo, a question arose about a plan for further action. At the military council convened to work it out, the Slavs - Sukhinov, Shchepillo, Kuzmin and Solovyov - spoke in favor of an immediate campaign against Kiev.

The occupation of this large center in the south of the country opened up great prospects for the further course of the uprising.

S. Muraviev, in principle, did not object to the possibility of Kiev. “From Vasilkov, I could act in three ways: 1st go to Kiev, 2nd go to Belaya Tserkov and 3rd move hastily to Zhitomir and try to connect with the Slavs. Of these three plans, I leaned more towards the last and the first, ”S. Muravyov testified during the investigation. Zhytomyr was in the center of the location of the units, which were influenced by members of the secret society. The headquarters of the 3rd Infantry Corps was also located here. The capture of it and the arrest of the command would have prevented the possibility of organizing forces to suppress the uprising. That is why S. Muravyov preferred the third option. However, the headquarters of the uprising refused an immediate campaign against Zhitomir due to insufficient available forces and the failure of M. Bestuzhev's attempts to establish contact with the Slavs and the Kremenchug and Aleksopol regiments located nearby.

At the council, a decision was made to move to Brusilov. This decision did not mean abandoning the plan to march on Kiev or Zhitomir.

On December 31, in the afternoon, the soldiers of the Chernigov regiment and the inhabitants of Vasilkov were read by the regimental priest "Orthodox Catechism", a program document that reveals the revolutionary goals of the uprising. It was compiled by S. Muravyov. In this document, the kings were declared "oppressors of the people" who stole their freedom. Clothed in a religious form, the "catechism" was directed against the autocracy, proclaiming the natural equality of all people.

After reading the catechism, S. Muravyov addressed the rebels with a short speech in which he explained the content and meaning of the revolutionary slogans of the uprising. He spoke about the need to proclaim freedom in Russia, about reducing the term of military service, about easing the situation of the peasants and called on the soldiers to defend freedom.

On the same day, the rebels went to Brusilov. Along the way, the rebels proclaimed the freedom of the peasants. The locals were very sympathetic towards the rebels. During the tour of the guards, the peasants joyfully greeted Muravyov and said to him: “God help you, our good colonel, our deliverer ...” They cordially received his soldiers, took care of them and supplied them with everything in abundance, seeing in them not guests, but the defenders.

Having learned about the movement of troops in the Brusilov region, the leaders of the uprising decided to move on Belaya Tserkov. Here they counted on the 17th Jaeger Regiment joining the Chernigovites. On January 2, 1826, the rebels marched in the direction of the White Church and, not having reached 15 miles before it, stopped in the village. Canopies. Having learned that the 17th Jaeger Regiment was withdrawn from Belaya Tserkov, the rebels on January 3 headed again to Kovalevka and Trilesy, from where they began their speech, intending to move to Zhitomir to join the units in which members of the Society of United Slavs served.

However, time was lost. The command of the 3rd Corps seized the initiative and, having concentrated large military forces, began to encircle the rebels. On January 3, on the way from Kovalevka to Trilesy, the Chernigov regiment was met by a detachment of General Geismar, who opened fire on the rebels with grapeshot. The Chernigovites went on the attack, but being shot at close range and suffering losses, they rushed back. S. Muravyov was seriously wounded in the head and could not control the battle. Schepillo was killed, Kuzmin wounded. The cavalry completed the defeat of the rebels.

The performance of the Chernigov regiment took place in unfavorable conditions for the Decembrists. The uprising in Petersburg was crushed. The arrest of Pestel, the refusal of a number of members of the Southern Society to take decisive action and support the Chernigov regiment made it easier for the government to fight the rebels. The uprising in the south, just as in St. Petersburg, did not rely on the people. During the uprising of the Chernigov regiment, the same tactical mistakes were made as on Senate Square on December 14, 1825.

I.A. Mironova“…Their business is not lost”

In the history of every state there are uprisings and coups. Russia is no exception. The event on Senate Square, which took place on December 14, 1825, is a bright, dramatic performance by the best representatives of the noble military intelligentsia, who consciously decided to go for a coup, a change in the state system. If almost every person in Russia knows about the events on the Senate Square, then little was known about the uprising of the Chernigov regiment, which was a continuation of the performance of the Decembrists.

Prerequisites

Revolutionary trends swept Russia at the beginning of the 19th century. This was facilitated by the disappointment in the reign of Emperor Alexander I, as well as the war of 1812, which stirred up the whole of Russia, rallied all the people, from nobles to ordinary peasants. The victorious campaigns in the countries of Western Europe, the acquaintance of the enlightened part of the nobility with the progressive movements of the West evoked a double feeling in society.

On the one hand - pride in the people and the Fatherland, and on the other - a sense of embarrassment for serfdom, for the oppression of compatriots, and awareness of the country's backwardness. The reactionary policy of Alexander I in relation to education in his country, participation in the suppression of revolutions in Europe led the most advanced part of the citizens to the idea of ​​an immediate need for change, since serfdom was considered an insult to national dignity.

Creation of the Northern and Southern Society

What preceded the speech on the Senate Square and the uprising of the Chernigov regiment? The very first political secret society was founded in St. Petersburg in 1816. Its participants were 28 people, including P. Pestel, N. Muravyov and two brothers Muravyov-Apostolov. Two years later, a larger organization, the Union of Welfare, was created in Moscow, which already included 200 people. Its branches were located in different cities of Russia. The union broke up due to internal contradictions.

In St. Petersburg, N. Muravyov created the Northern Society. In Ukraine, a Southern Society is being created, headed by Colonel P. Pestel. The goal of the societies is the elimination of serfdom and the constitutional restriction of the monarchy, up to the assassination of the emperor, the arrest of the royal family and the establishment of the rule of a dictator, who was supposed to appoint Prince Sergei Trubetskoy.

What predetermined the uprising

The main reason for the uprising was the controversial legal situation that arose around the rights to the throne. Emperor Alexander I was childless. Konstantin Pavlovich, who followed Alexander I in seniority, had previously written a renunciation of the throne, which gave the right to his younger brother Nikolai Pavlovich to take the throne. But he was extremely unpopular among the highest nobility, representing the military and bureaucratic elite. Under the influence of the Governor-General of St. Petersburg M. Miloradovich, he writes a rejection of the heritage in favor of his older brother.

On December 9, 1825 (new style), the people swore allegiance to Constantine, that is, in form, the Russian Empire received a new emperor, who did not accept the throne, but did not renounce it either. There was a situation called the interregnum. Later, Nikolai Pavlovich proclaims himself emperor. A new oath is appointed, which should take place on December 14, since Constantine again refused to accept the throne.

On the night of December 14, 1825, the Senate recognized the legitimacy of the transfer of the throne to the future Emperor Nicholas I. The re-swearing in was scheduled for the day. The conspirators decide to put their ideas into action. But for a number of reasons this did not come true. The uprising on the Senate Square was crushed. All Decembrists were arrested. In addition, more than 600 soldiers and 62 sailors of the rebel regiments were arrested.

Reasons for the uprising of the Chernigov regiment

Having received news from St. Petersburg about the Decembrist uprising, the commander of the Chernigov regiment ordered the arrest of S. Muravyov-Apostol, the lieutenant colonel of the regiment, because his connection with the conspirators was well known. It was he who promised to act together with the Northern Society, trying to win over other military units by concrete actions.

Four officers of the Chernigov regiment, members of the "Society of United Slavs", previously included in the Southern Society, released him and wounded Colonel Gebel, who ordered the arrest. The question of who would lead the uprising of the Chernigov regiment was not raised. Its leaders were S. Muravyov-Apostol and M. Bestuzhev-Ryumin. They also wrote a proclamation called the Catechism.

Rebellion of the regiment

In the village of Trilesy, where the 5th company of the regiment was located, on December 29, 1825, an uprising of the Chernigov regiment began. On a march, the company moved to the village of Kovalevka to join with another company. Having united, they marched to the city of Vasilkov, where the rest of the regiment was quartered. The city was captured by the rebels, in the hands of the rebels there were weapons and a regimental fund.

Further, the village of Motovilovka was occupied. It happened on December 31st. The purpose of the regiment was a breakthrough in the city of Zhytomyr, where a connection with military units should take place, according to the plan of the rebels, it was they who were supposed to support them, since members of the “Society of United Slavs” served here. But government troops stood in the way, so the rebel regiment had only one thing left to do - turn towards Belaya Tserkov.

Not all employees supported the uprising of the Chernigov regiment. The grenadier company under the command of Captain Kozlov went to the government troops. At the village of Ustimovka on December 3, 1826, the regiment was fired upon from guns and defeated, 6 officers and 895 soldiers were taken prisoner. S. Muravyov-Apostol, wounded in the head, was arrested. His brother is killed by buckshot.

Reasons for the defeat

The date of the uprising of the Chernigov regiment was tentatively set for the summer of 1826. However, the events in St. Petersburg and the arrest of S. Muravyov-Apostol led to the fact that the uprising began earlier than expected.

The uprising of the Chernigov regiment in 1825 was doomed to defeat. The main reason is the complete absence of prerequisites for an uprising. The peasantry, which the rebels were going to liberate, was not ready for changes and did not want them. The military, who dreamed of a constitution only at meetings, could not give up their families, positions and go to the end. The hope that immediately after the uprising, according to the principle of a chain reaction, disturbances would begin in other parts, was a utopia. There were no revolutionary prerequisites. Romantic naivety, political short-sightedness, led to unreasonable victims, repressions, broken destinies.

But nevertheless, pure, honest, noble romantic idealists, the color and conscience of the nation, who the Decembrists really were, changed the consciousness of enlightened people, lit the sparks of that flame, which almost 50 years later led to the abolition of serfdom, and after 90 years demolished the autocracy together with its bureaucratic apparatus.