Was the victory of the Decembrists possible?

After the successful completion of the Patriotic War of 1812 for Russia and the foreign campaigns of 1813-1814, which ended in the capture of Paris, many Russian officers were amazed by the life of Western Europe. The discrepancy between the standard of living and the political structure of France and the Russian Empire was sharply evident to the victors of Napoleon. “We won, but why is it so much worse for us than for them?” This question haunted them for a long time.

In Russia, as before, there was an autocracy with unlimited power of the monarch, serfdom, which placed millions of Russian peasants in a slave position, twenty-five years of soldier's service, which differed little from serfdom. In a word, everything that France got rid of back in the years of the revolution flourished in Russia. All this gave rise to a quite natural question in such conditions: what to do?

Already in 1816, only 2 years after returning home, the first secret organization appeared among the officers - the Union of Salvation. After another 2 years, it was renamed the Union of Welfare. Despite the fact that the organization was a secret, for the first few years of its existence, its members were engaged only in gathering at each other's apartments and discussing what reforms should be carried out in Russia.

There were no plans for an armed seizure of power yet: everyone hoped that the tsar would abolish serfdom, carry out reforms, grant the country a Constitution, and voluntarily limit his power. However, years passed, and the tactics of waiting did not justify itself: no reforms began. Then the members of the organization began to have more radical plans, providing for the seizure of power and the implementation of reforms on their own.

Pavel Pestel

lack of unity

It is necessary to pay special attention to the fact that there was no unity among the conspirators. There were different views, various projects for the reorganization of the country, various leaders. The conspirators could not even create a single organization; already in the early 1820s, the Northern Society appeared in St. Petersburg and the Southern Society on the territory of present-day Ukraine, where the troops were quartered.

Program documents on the future reorganization of Russia, drawn up by the leaders of the Northern and Southern societies, fundamentally contradicted each other. So, one of the leaders of the Northern society, Nikita Muravyov, in his "Constitution" proposed to establish a constitutional monarchy and a federal structure in the country. The leader of the Southern Society, Pavel Pestel, was more radical. In Russkaya Pravda, written by him, Pestel plans the establishment of a republic, the extermination or expulsion of the royal family, a unitary structure and the establishment of a dictatorship in the country. Naturally, Pestel saw himself as a dictator.

Based on this, we will now try to trace the further course of events in the event that any of these societies, Northern or Southern, comes to power.

Nikita Muraviev

Odds of winning

Of course, the Northern Society had more chances to seize power, since it was located in the capital. On the day of the uprising - December 14, 1825 - Prince Sergei Trubetskoy was appointed leader of the conspirators. The day before, he drew up a detailed plan to seize power, including the storming of the Winter Palace and the arrest of the royal family.

However, the Decembrist Yakubovich, who, according to this plan, was to command the capture of the Winter Palace, refused to do so at the last moment. There was no hope for many other leaders of the uprising. So Trubetskoy's plan began to crumble even before the start of active operations.

As a result, realizing that the uprising was doomed to failure, Trubetskoy did not appear on the square at all on December 14 and, in fact, withdrew himself. Having lost their leader, the rebel regiments - about 3 people - gathered on Senate Square, but did nothing for most of the day until they were dispersed by government troops.

For the above reasons, the Northern Society failed the coup. He had the opportunity to seize power only if a more courageous and decisive person than Sergei Trubetskoy had been appointed the leader of the uprising. The mistake in choosing the leader of the uprising is the first and main reason for the failure of the Decembrists.

Suppose that somehow the most decisive and most radical of the Decembrists, Pavel Pestel, would have been at the head of the rebels in St. Petersburg. The probability of this is small, since, as we know, he was arrested the day before the uprising.

How would events have developed then? There is no doubt that in this case the Winter Palace and other government buildings would still have been taken by the rebels. However, what's next? The rebels had only 3 soldiers and 000 officers, while Nicholas I had at least 28 soldiers. The forces, as we see, are too unequal, and in any open clash, victory would have gone to government troops.

Thus, even under the condition of decisive action, the probability of a victory for the Decembrists is minimal.

Decembrist uprising on December 14, 1825. Vasily Timm

However, there was still a chance. But only on condition that it would be possible to kill or capture Nicholas I, thus depriving the government troops of a single command. Only in this case, part of the government forces could go over to the side of the rebels, realizing that they had no one else to defend.

Events in this case, most likely, would develop as follows. Pestel appoints himself a temporary dictator and begins to implement his "Russian Truth". Since all members of the Southern Society are far from St. Petersburg, Pestel has practically no supporters in the capital. Members of the Northern society unanimously oppose the newly-minted dictator and easily remove him from power.

The struggle for the empty place of the ruler begins. Nikita Muravyov, the champion of the constitutional monarchy, has the greatest chances to emerge victorious from the fight that has begun. Muravyov and his supporters decide to put Mikhail Pavlovich, the younger brother of Nicholas I, on the empty throne, forcing him to accept the draft of Muravyov's "Constitution" before that. Michael signs everything that is offered to him, and thus becomes a constitutional monarch. However, after only a couple of months, he sees that there is still no unity among the Decembrists and, having enlisted the support of several army regiments and guards, he tears to shreds the Constitution imposed on him. He sends part of the conspirators to the gallows, part to Siberia, and part to the Caucasus.

Bottom line: a few months after the uprising, autocracy was restored, Emperor Michael rules happily ever after.

As for the Southern Society, since it was located far from the capital, it had practically no chances to take power. In addition, the leaders of this society could not even organize universal support among the troops.

As you can see, even if the uprising of December 14, 1825 in St. Petersburg was successful, the leaders of the Decembrists would hardly have been able to retain power for a long time. And the main reasons for this are the lack of unity among them and a common, pronounced leader who would enjoy the support of the majority of the rebels, as well as the lack of a clear hierarchy and discipline in the Northern society.

As we know, almost 100 years later, the Bolsheviks were able to seize and retain power mainly because they had all of the above: a single leader, and unity in the party, and a strict hierarchy, and party discipline.

Comments

[Just_Kvasha]

"This is the first knife for the villainous nobles,
And another knife - on judges on rogues,
And having made a prayer, - the third knife on the king!

[Eule]

The main mistakes of the Decembrists were that they were far from the people. In their program there was neither the extermination of priests with the removal of the church from the neck of the people, nor universal education, nor the distribution of vacant lands. If their program included "development of virgin lands" in the style of Catherine the Great, with tax exemptions for those who went to virgin lands, then with the support of the people they would have completely resisted. Sorry it didn't work. Moreover, the example of America, which, without federal taxes and priesthood, developed at a wild pace, was before them. But even here - the Decembrists did not have enough education to understand what was happening.

[Elk]

Did the people want to remove the priests from their necks?
Did they sit on them?
It's good that it didn't work out.

[north 2]

it was then that the communists "untwisted" the Decembrists, naming city streets, squares and stations after their names. But in fact, they were ordinary, as the Agents of Foreign Influence would say today, who diligently completed the epilogue of this influence. Immediately to the square, and to the "Maidan" and give them power. And Pestel's draft constitution is a direct path to the collapse of Russia. There, Russians are already divided into indigenous and resettled, divided into national farms and villages, etc. If the Decembrists had been defeated, Russia would then have lost the Caucasus and Siberia, and by the beginning of the XNUMXth century, its entire territory would have collapsed into small principalities. The Decembrists should be remembered only as one of the projects for the collapse of Russia.

[gromit]

“to divide all these Caucasian peoples into two categories - peaceful and violent. Leave the former in their dwellings and give them Russian rule and organization, and resettle the latter by force into the interior of Russia, breaking them up in small numbers throughout all Russian volosts.
Pestel considered it desirable to Christianize non-Russian peoples, and to settle the lands of other nationalities of Russian colonists.

One land, one people. Estates cancel. Only Russians and Orthodox, and it doesn't matter what nationality they are.

The problems have not changed since then - the unlimited power of the "king" and, accordingly, his quirks and the quirks of his favorites.
The empire grew rapidly, but this was primarily due to the luring of local feudal lords into Russian citizenship by granting them preferences and preserving their traditions and power. Asian bais, Caucasian princes, Baltic barons, Polish gentry....

The fact that this patchwork quilt at any moment could scatter to their apartments or be sold at a reasonable price to enemies was clear long before the Bolsheviks.

Bismarck pushed through the Little German idea. And it turned out okay.

Their ideas were interesting and progressive, but what matters is not the ideas, but the readiness and determination to implement them.
Unfortunately, none of the Decembrists was even close to the strong-willed qualities of Napoleon or Bismarck,

[lisikat2]

"a direct path to the collapse of Russia" is to attract the "Polish society". He promised them Ukraine to the Dnieper, Belarus and Smolensk
Approximately, in the borders of 1608.
He planned to create: Corps of internal guards.
It seems that the number was supposed to be 3 times the size of the regular army

[gromit]

Divide all tribes into 3 categories:

1. Tribe Slavic, Indigenous People of Russian
This category includes all Slavic peoples without distinction.

2. The inhabitants of Central Asia must be transformed into the Aral Cossacks with the right to preserve the Muslim religion, but the eradication of polygamy.
Gypsies must either convert to Orthodoxy or be evicted from Russia.
The "violent" Caucasian tribes should be resettled "into the depths of Russia", having previously broken up into small parts. Leave the "peaceful" Caucasian tribes in the Caucasus.

3. Foreigners are divided into subjects and non-citizens of Russia according to their own choice. Non-citizens were forbidden to have real estate and be in public service. - remember about 2-3 citizenships of our fiery patriots

By the way: “Most of all, the goal should be to eliminate the influence of the close connection between the Jews, harmful to Christians, which they maintain against Christians and which completely separates them from all other citizens” - Obviously, the Rottenbergs, Vekselbergs, Friedmans, Avens, Abramovichs were talented businessmen even then)

Quite a thoughtful national socialist and anti-Semitic agenda.
Peasants also relied on buns.

I am sure, with due determination, power would have been seized by the Decembrists.
Is it good? Not sure.
Such visionaries will first drown the country in blood, and then maybe something worthwhile will come out. But it is not exactly.

The Jacobins and the Bolsheviks did something, the Nazis and the Khmer Rouge did not.

[border]

"divide all these Caucasian peoples into two categories - peaceful and violent. The first ones should be left in their homes and given Russian rule and structure, and the second ones should be resettled by force into the interior of Russia." This is what A. Ermolov did with the Kabardians in 1821: in order to eliminate the possibility of raids on the Caucasian line and villages for the purpose of robbery and captivity, expeditions of troops and then negotiations were undertaken to move to the plain in order to control auls and deprive them of the opportunity to rob and then hide with prey in the mountains. Did Russia fall apart before the Decembrists?

[Uma palata]

Pestel is an analogue of Yeltsin of the 19th century ..? Thirst for power even at the cost of the collapse of the State.
But here’s what I haven’t read about yet: was there any participation of England in an attempt to destroy both power and the Russian Empire itself?

[gromit]

Pestel is in no way similar to Yeltsin.
Yeltsin is just a traditional Russian coup d'etat, when part of the elite seizes power, relying on the security forces and with the support of the crowd.

And who could the Decembrists rely on? The aristocracy was united by fear of the French Revolution. The peasants are dark and illiterate, they only have enough mind to rebel and rob the estates. The soldiers are the same peasants, whatever the officer tells them, they do. Skilled urban workers and philistines were not yet in sufficient numbers.

Pestel understood that for the most part the people were not ready to take responsibility for the decisions made, it was not for nothing that in his program for the transformation of Russia into a republic, in addition to the property qualification, an educational qualification was included.
Poor, illiterate?
Go work and study. You will vote later.

The Decembrists understood that the system that existed at that time hindered the development of the country and sooner or later would lead it to disaster.
What were they to do?
There are no opposition parties, no opposition newspapers. Everyone seems to understand everything, but nothing can be done. freaked out)
If you really want to compare them with someone, then you can with the Young Turks. But the Young Turks succeeded.

The riots after the Crimean War, the 1905 revolution after the Japanese one, and the First World War finally finished off the Empire.

Here, the perseverance with which the emperors stepped on the same rake is rather surprising. They were well educated, but they could not overcome the "Masters of the Russian Land" in themselves.

[Vladimir80]

Everything has its beginning and its end, after the Decembrists, the empire was able to exist quite safely for another 90 years, four generations, the existing "brakes" were revealed during the next war and a short period of reforms and transformations began. Apparently in Russia there is no other way. The revolution of 1917 and the collapse of the USSR in 91 only confirm that we cannot go through a long period without wars and cataclysms ...

[Torins Narkuas]

The Decembrists should be remembered only as one of the projects for the collapse of Russia.

To be honest, this whole movement is more like an ordinary coup attempt under beautiful slogans. The officers and leaders of the uprising were all landowners who owned hundreds and thousands of serfs, the serfs were the key to their well-being. This is why the uprising failed - there was no wide support among the ruling class for this idea.
In general, this issue could only be resolved from the very top and Catherine tried to solve it at the very beginning of her reign, but she was told in the forehead that she sits on the throne solely thanks to the support of the nobles and if she wants to live, then go crazy against the nobles, otherwise she will repeat husband's fate. All subsequent emperors had the same dialogue with their entourage, which is why the abolition of serfdom stalled for so long, and if attempts were made, they were somehow half-hearted.

[AAK]

So after all, most of these same "December heroes" are Freemasons, for whom the main thing is the will of the elder order brothers, and most of these nobles are ardent feudal lords, they don't care about the people, at best - the electorate and cannon fodder. Just like Herzen - a foreign agent, and other petrels of revolutions for Western or, as an exception, for Japanese and American, money, up to the October coup of 1917 ...

[Torins Narkuas]

Just like Herzen - a foreign agent, and other petrels of revolutions for Western or, as an exception, for Japanese and American, money, up to the October coup of 1917 ...

revolutions are usually done this way, it is not the tsar who finances them against himself. Do you know many successful revolutions that did not have support from other states?

[bessonov932]

Is that what they called "theirs" directly?

[billy bones]

The discrepancy between the standard of living and the political structure of France and the Russian Empire was sharply evident to the victors of Napoleon. “We won, but why is it so much worse for us than for them?” This question haunted them for a long time.

Author, I advise you to read Fonvizin's travel notes about France in 1778. I do not think that the writer was more stupid than the Decembrists. He was greatly disappointed with people, orders, morals.
Quote:
"... If one of my young fellow citizens, who has a sound mind, becomes indignant, seeing abuses and disorder in Russia, and begins to alienate himself from her in his heart, then in order to convert him to due love for the fatherland, there is no surer way how to quickly send him Here, of course, he will learn very soon by experience that all the stories about local perfection are sheer lies, that people are people everywhere, that a truly intelligent and worthy person is rare everywhere ... "

[Amateur]

A free retelling of the Soviet agitprop, who tried to whitewash the terrorist organization under the conditional name "Decembrists" allegedly because they "fought against tsarism."
They didn't fight anything. Those who were taken to the Senate Square protested against the succession to the throne by Nicholas I, because. his older brother Konstantin was supposed to take the throne "according to seniority", but who abdicated in favor of Nicholas, and for some reason this was kept secret.
The "Southern Society" headed by Sergei Muravyov-Apostol generally demanded that Poland be given independence (not too much and not too little!!!).
"In Russia, autocracy still existed with the unlimited power of the monarch, ..." Was Emperor Napoleon a democrat and was elected in general and secret elections or what?
Before writing about the Decembrists, one must study history, and not the Soviet history textbook for high school or the wonderful FEATURE film "Star of Captivating Happiness."

[costa_2]

The author watched the film "Union of Salvation". Thank you for the brief retelling with fantasies.

[albert]

A review of the Bad Comedian is better and more interesting than the film itself. There is even more historical material.

[ivan2022]

"Graze peaceful peoples,
You will not be awakened by the call.
Why herds of gifts of freedom?
They need to be cut or sheared" / 1823 / - I knew, Pushkin guessed, how the matter would end.

Again, great. Again, the arguments of idle serfs on the topic: "with whom we live better with the blue-footed ones." With the white Barin al with the red Bvrin?

In France, a class of bourgeois grew up who arranged economic relations FOR THEMSELVES. And in the end, having drowned the resistance of the aristocrats in blood, they managed to achieve their goal. No one killed anyone "just like that."
Moreover, the struggle continued for a long time, through a series of revolutions and restorations.

The Bolsheviks, whose books the Russian people had not bothered to read for 70 years, believed that something similar would happen in Russia. Since it was in England, and in France, and in Germany and in the USA.
Revolutions, civil wars .... Blood and suppression of uprisings. ,

But what is the error of the Bolsheviks? - such grandiose idiocy, in order to lose in one year what has been created for centuries and fuck everything in one fell swoop, they did not expect.

For "this mind can not understand." If they knew, they would spit on everything ...

Yes, and instead of us, our great-grandfathers would have suffered. And we just wouldn't exist. As the yogis say: "Happy is he who is not born." Yes, we missed our happiness, and all the Bolsheviks are damned ... .

It's time for the Russian people to retrain in yoga. A teaching that is very much in keeping with the popular spirit. Yes, and then you can do without grub.

Vysotsky was right!!!
Our poets are always right..

[depressant]

Ivan, you don't take into account that it's not just...

In France, a class of bourgeois grew up who arranged economic relations FOR THEMSELVES

This class of bourgeois was, among other things, also petty-bourgeois. Representatives of this class, as well as their hired workers, who could no longer work otherwise than for hire, could be found in all cities and villages. The total number of such people was in the millions. At the same time, this petty-bourgeois stratum had been formed for a very long time - starting from the 12th century, and therefore became a stable economic tradition, which, growing deep and wide of the country, finally passed into such a quantity that demanded a new quality in the form of the right to govern the state.
The huge peasant masses of Russia were excluded from participation in such processes.
But it is known that if the revolution does not have an army of supporters, it is doomed. The Decembrists did not have such an army. The soldiers brought to the square on the principle of submission are not an army of millions of supporters.
The Decembrists were politically illiterate, they did not know how History actually works, its economic, social and political laws were unfamiliar to them. The Decembrists were familiar only with the experience of coup d'état. As a result, they were doomed, regardless of what they really wanted there.
Would you like to limit the monarchy constitutionally? So work hard! Create first in the country the broadest strata of the petty bourgeoisie and millions of hired workers.

[mihaylov]

Quote: depressant

Create first in the country the broadest strata of the petty bourgeoisie and millions of hired workers.

I'm sorry, but how are you going to create in the country a layer of the petty bourgeoisie and millions of hired workers under serfdom?

[Dart2027]

Whenever someone starts talking about how wonderful they were, then I have a question:
"How many of their serfs did they set free?"
The same applies to Herzen "awakened by them" (1 min 10 sec):

[ivan2022]

And where and when in the history of mankind were there those who "tried for the people"?
Heh ... Heh .. The sweet dream of serfs who are being crushed will not be crushed in any way ... So that a certain "good gentleman" will "try" for them .. After October 1993, there are definitely no such idealists and never will be .. Just crush, press press......

[astra wild2]

"how many serfs" there is an unofficial version that Benkendorf gathered at his place: Volkonsky, Pestel, Muravyov asked what they did for their serfs ?.
Benckendorff, even before 1825, freed his people with land and, it seems, transferred them to dues? To be honest, I don't remember the details.

[Senior seaman]

Quote: Astra wild2

there is an unofficial version that Benkendorf collected from himself: Volkonsky, Pestel, Muravyov asked what they did for their serfs ?.

This is not a version, but an excerpt from a work of art)))
Such an althistori light, and from the author who is not too confused by the materiel.
I somehow sorted out the blunders of that passage.
In short, the estates did not belong to Khristofor Alexandrovich, but to his father. So he couldn't free anyone. In addition, those estates were located in another province))) And most importantly, the local peasants were indeed freed, but not by the Benkendorfs, but by the tsar. As far as I understand, Alexander the Blessed conducted a full-scale experiment, but the results did not inspire him.
Besides. Benckendorff did not participate in the investigation, and therefore at that moment he could not express anything to the Decembrists.
In general, EMNIP Lunin made an attempt to release. But he offered such conditions that the peasants twisted their fingers to their temples and sent their master.
Curious moment. In the reign of Alexander, many submitted projects for the liberation of the peasants, including Arakcheev. And according to his project, 6 acres of arable land were supposed to be freed.
The Decembrists also had such projects. According to some, it was supposed to be released completely without land, according to others with an allotment of 2 acres. But at the same time, Arakcheev had a reputation as a villain (well-deserved, by the way), and the Decembrists, if you please, are people's defenders!

[parusnik]

Another article from the series: “So this is it: Caesar was killed, but they still didn’t succeed there! Two more were found: Caesar’s relative, Octavian, and Caesar’s workmate, Antony” (c).

[VLR]

The main reason for the failure is the degradation of the Russian nobility, the loss of passionarity, which has been growing rapidly since then and eventually came to a bloody anecdote, when several refined aristocrats could not kill one Siberian peasant with their joint efforts - the English curator had to personally shoot Rasputin (this is an established fact) . In order to carry out a successful coup d'état, it was necessary not to drag 3 soldiers to the square, but to go to the Winter Palace with one company. And then declare in a manifesto that the Sovereign Emperor died of some kind of hemorrhoidal colic, go to the new government to swear allegiance. And it wasn’t the Gogol Manilovs who were supposed to overthrow Nikolai, but tough men like Alyoshka Orlov or Burkhart Munnich, but the nobles ran out of those, but the raznochintsy were already born in fair numbers. And, yes, if the Decembrists miraculously managed to seize power, they would have ruined the empire very quickly and with great bloodshed.

[Edward Vashchenko]

The descendants of the peasants flogged on Fridays by the nobles, who received their will and freedom from the "damned Bolsheviks", who sent the peasant's son and the first man of the planet Earth into space, in the style of a capricious noble lady say:

Fi maman what are these Decembrists, Narodnaya Volya, Herzens - nasty terrorists, jacobins, freemassons, they are fighting so that they would not flog the stupid peasant bastard.

PS Flogging of peasants was abolished only in 1905 by the revolution.

[Carat]

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

PS Flogging of peasants was abolished only in 1905 by the revolution.

In 1861, along with the abolition of serfdom.

By the way, now the expression "Monday is a hard day" is associated with work, and earlier the whole household was flogged with rods on Mondays, hence the expression.

[VLR]

There are several options for the dates for the abolition of corporal punishment, since such decisions were made with various exceptions.
and reservations. After the abolition of serfdom, it was forbidden to beat until a court decision was made (that is, before it was possible to beat a potentially innocent person). Officially, only on August 24, 1904, all types of corporal punishment were abolished in Russia. But again there was an exception - punishment with rods was used in correctional detainees' departments and military prisons. There, the rod was abolished in 1917.

[Edward Vashchenko]

PS Flogging of peasants was abolished only in 1905 by the revolution.
In 1861, along with the abolition of serfdom.

Officially only in 1904.
Cossacks flogged the peasants during the revolution of 1905, regardless of the laws.
But the "red rooster" of the Revolution or the peasant uprising of 1905-1907. Weaned the feudal monarchy to flog the PEOPLE - the main population of the country.

[ivan2022]

Quote: Carat

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

PS Flogging of peasants was abolished only in 1905 by the revolution.

In 1861, along with the abolition of serfdom.

Not .. but .... Corporal punishment was abolished only in 1904. But in practice they were flogged until February 1917. while there were "nobles" ... and in Civil, too. Flogged. Learn materiel. Or at least watch the movie "Chapaev". The people who lived in those days remembered everything perfectly

You can also read M. Gorky's article "On the Russian Peasantry" dated 1922. I strongly advise you, it cleans your brains from all modern nonsense.

[Sergej1972]

Corporal punishment was allowed by the verdict of the volost court, consisting of peasants. This court had an estate character, consisted of peasants and judged them. That is, after 1861 other peasants were sentenced to flogging peasants. For many misdemeanors, a fork of punishments was supposed. Populist publicists noted that many peasants preferred to be flogged and pay a fine for weeks. Since 1904, flogging was abolished by decision of the volost courts.

[gsev]

Quote: Carat

In 1861, along with the abolition of serfdom.

My grandmother's brother was beaten to death by a landowner's clerk for stealing 2 potatoes for his sister. The laborer worked for food and for trying to take a couple of potatoes from his lunch, his sister was beaten to death. Grandmother was born in 1906. That is, the landowner could flog farm laborers back in 1910-1914. It was a common occurrence throughout. The landowners kept guards from representatives of the mountain peoples. Only the mass organized protests of the peasants in the summer of 1917 forced the guards to betray the landowners and leave for their homeland, and the landlords to stop flogging and killing farm laborers.

[Dart2027]

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

PS Flogging peasants canceled

They just flogged for theft, drunken brawls, fights, etc.

[Edward Vashchenko]

They just flogged for theft, drunken brawls, fights, etc.

This is the law, "General Regulations on Peasants ...":
101. The volost court examines and sentences peasants belonging to the volost to punishment for minor offenses, when they are committed within the volost itself against persons belonging to the same state, and without the participation of persons of other states, as well as when the said offenses are not in connection with criminal offenses, which are subject to consideration by general courts.
102. The volost court has the power, for such offenses, to sentence the guilty: to public works - up to six days, or to a monetary penalty - up to three rubles, or to arrest - up to seven days, or finally, persons who have not been exempted from corporal punishment - to punishment with rods up to twenty strokes. The imposition of a penalty for each misdemeanor is left to the discretion of the court itself.
And here is law enforcement in the capital of the empire: the mayor of St. Petersburg Trepov ordered to flog a political prisoner, populist A.S. Bogolyubov for not taking off his hat to him.
And what was there in the village?

[Dart2027]

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

the mayor of St. Petersburg Trepov ordered to flog a political prisoner, populist A.S. Bogolyubova

Keyword prisoner.

[Edward Vashchenko]

the mayor of St. Petersburg Trepov ordered to flog a political prisoner, populist A.S. Bogolyubov.
Keyword prisoner.

This changes things drastically Smash and smack again

[Dart2027]

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

This changes things drastically

Certainly. Indeed, in Soviet prisons, prisoners were cherished in every possible way, and in press huts they were fed with gingerbread.

[gsev]

Quote: Dart2027

Keyword prisoner.

The light of Russian democracy P.A. Stolypin gave orders to flog entire villages when suppressing peasant unrest. Stolypin did not disdain the butcher's craft, personally beating the objectionable. Yes, what to say. Nikita Mikhalkov, after 1991, after the action of the National Bolsheviks, satisfied his sadistic inclinations by hitting the National Bolshevik, twisted by his guards.

[mihaylov]

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

Fi maman what are these Decembrists, Narodnaya Volya, Herzens - nasty terrorists, jacobins, freemassons, they are fighting so that they would not flog the stupid peasant bastard.

Greetings Edward!
now, in the revisionist frenzy, it is fashionable to throw stones at the Decembrists, they say, bloody conspirators, a military junta and other nonsense.
And I personally like the Decembrists, they were "ideological" and, in my opinion, quite sincerely wanted positive transformations in Russia, and not for themselves personally (although there were also such people in their rather motley ranks).
Of course, we cannot answer whether they would have succeeded or not. Personally, it seems to me that those reforms that Russia had been waiting for another 36 to 92 years could have happened if they were lucky on December 14, 1825 (and there was such a possibility, everything hung in the balance).

[Edward Vashchenko]

Sergei welcome!
I, like you, of course, at one time, went through historiography on the Decembrists.
Yes, and at the exams, you remember, it was necessary to know in detail all the differences between societies, programs, their actions, and other specific details of the uprising, almost to the minute.
It is clear that, objectively, nothing new has appeared in relation to the uprising - therefore, the Soviet school textbook is absolutely right.
It was an uprising, relatively speaking, of "romantics" who planned to carry out the necessary changes in Russia while it was still at the "peak of everything." The fact that the DECABRISTS WERE HISTORICALLY RIGHT will not let Leo Tolstoy lie from the 4th bastion of Sevastopol.
And the current “interpretations” of the Decembrists, they are understandable, everyone proceeds from their own political views, if the country regresses to the level of the times of Alexander III, then it is clear that the Decembrists and populists will be rebels and troublemakers, and Pobedonostsev is the beacon of world philosophy ... and the educator of the heir.

[Reader_lover]

Agree. Now some kind of fashion has gone to see the hand of the State Department or England everywhere. Yes, the Decembrists were idealists, they did not understand much, but they wanted the right things. Is Serfdom is normal? Didn't Russia need reforms?

[parusnik]

Sergey, I left my comment above. I’ll only add: “I was already happy, and now I’ll be twice as happy. Because I have two cows” (c). (Samsonov and Sarmatov)

[Pane Kohanku]

And I personally like the Decembrists, they were "ideological" and, in my opinion, quite sincerely wanted positive transformations in Russia, and not for themselves personally (although there were also such people in their rather motley ranks).

My friends, hello everyone!
Sergei and Eduard - throw pebbles at me, but let me give you an amateur opinion, even though I don’t have a historical education like you do.
In some ways, they are cute with "ideological". Fine. Did the Northern Society have a specific program of immediately published decrees? Or would they first establish a military dictatorship?
As practice shows, any "freedom fighters", having come to power after the hotly criticized "bloody tyrants", first establish such a regime that the overthrown "tyrants" seem to be the children of a nursery group, starting with Isabella and Mortimer, ending with modern "Maidans".
"Ideological dreamers" would be the first to put under the knife (literally!) Nikolai, the wife, the young future Alexander II and the brother of the new emperor - Mikhail Palych. Yes, they would let everyone in - the imperial family.
Poland would immediately burst into flames. Konstantin Palych, sitting there tightly on his ass (who never wanted to rule Russia!) If only he was fucking with the news, completely demoralized. Miloradovich could have supported him very strongly with his will, but Miloradovich had already killed in the back by the exalted psychopath Kakhovsky...
Okay, the dynasty is destroyed. The new regime is accompanied by massacres. Some manifestos are being read out to the peasants, they are also loudly freaking out from the progress - ohnor accustomed to living under the master, what freedom? Yes, the shock to the patriarchal, traditional and poorly educated peasantry would be enormous!
In general, a lot of questions, what would it all lead to. If not for the guards sappers, who arrived at the Zimny ​​in time.
by the way:
On January 30, 1818, Grand Duke Nikolai Pavlovich was appointed inspector general for engineering, i.e. becomes the direct chief of all engineering units of the Russian Army and Guards. His attention to the battalion intensifies. He demanded that the officers take care of teaching the battalion soldiers to read and write, and made the requirement to know the letter a mandatory condition for the promotion of the battalion soldiers to non-commissioned officers. In the same year, textbooks were compiled for teaching the lower ranks of engineering.
http://saper.isnet.ru/history/l-g-batalion.html

In general, there are many questions for the "dreamers". They planned the uprising itself so through the ass with a somersault that the battalion of the Guards Naval crew came to Senatskaya ... from exercises ... from educational wooden analogues of flint in guns ...
But the fact that there would be a lot of victims if they won - no doubt!

And I sum up - of course, all reforms must come from above, and go on time. When they do not go for a long time, it leads to revolutions. This is a reminder to all politicians.

[parusnik]

Pane Kohanku, "why the hell did you get into these galleys?" (c) Are you drawn to alternativeism?

[Pane Kohanku]

Pane Kohanku, "why the hell did you get into these galleys?" (c) Are you drawn to alternativeism?

Not at all, Alexey Anatolyevich! You know, I am against alternatives and Samsonism.
I just imagined the consequences if the "dreamers" succeeded ...
The behavior of the leaders of the conspiracy also does not cause sympathy. "Terminator" Yakubovich, who in the Caucasus, it seems, personally caught up and personally killed every highlander who offended him, ran freely between the two camps, in each saying what was expected of him. The "dictator" did not appear. The conspirator Annenkov (the hero of Igor Kostolevsky in the famous film) was generally among the government troops.
The rebellious soldiers themselves were frankly deceived. A young idiot non-commissioned officer of the Life Guards of the Grenadier Regiment Lutsk comrades, apparently, being in elevated feelings, severely beat the mounted gendarme, who was standing in a cordon (does it remind you of anything?).
Yes - during the uprising on Senatskaya ... none of the conspiring officers was killed or even wounded! Well, sort of like this...
Alcohol trip with robberies of the Chernihiv regiment deserves a separate good article. Fooled and drunk... It was similar in one episode of the popular satirical animated series "South Park", when the inhabitants of the town got drunk at the festival of reenactors, decided to replay the results of the US Civil War, and even reached Washington. Analogies - there is!
But their commander was much smarter and more proactive than Muravyov-Apostol - General Eric Cartman Lee!

In general, I really do not like the means chosen by the Decembrists. And it is still not clear what would come of it. Something like this!

[mihaylov]

Fine. Did the Northern Society have a specific program of immediately published decrees? Or would they first establish a military dictatorship?

Good afternoon Nikolay!
In my opinion, the program of the Northern Society was quite real: if you look at the Constitution of Nikita Muravyov, then we will not see anything super-radical there:
- the monarchy is preserved, but in a constitutional form, the emperor remains the head of the executive branch
Separate executive, legislative and judicial powers. Elections to parliament are carried out on the basis of a fairly high property qualification (no peasants were supposed to be in it)
- the peasants receive personal freedom, but the land as a whole remains with the landowners, in principle - the forerunner of the reform of 1861.
- all citizens received equality before the law, freedom of speech and press was declared.
In my opinion, everything here is moderate and feasible, by and large, all these transformations in one form or another took place, only for a long time and much later than they were needed.
Pestel's program was much more radical, but the fact that the Southern Society came to power is unlikely.

"Ideological dreamers" would be the first to put under the knife (literally!) Nikolai, the wife, the young future Alexander II and the brother of the new emperor - Mikhail Palych. Yes, they would let everyone in - the imperial family.

Absolutely not a fact. EMNIP, just Mikhail Pavlovich, was basically supposed to play the role of a constitutional monarch. As for Nikolai Pavlovich, the likelihood of his physical elimination is also not necessary: ​​his elimination was supposed by the radical part of the Decembrists at the time of the seizure of power, but this did not happen. If their plan had succeeded, then Nikolai would have abdicated, and what chances would he have of returning to power? It seems to me minimal: he was not popular either in society or in the army, and even under absolutely legal conditions (it was he who was appointed heir), he was able to come to power with great difficulty. What if Constantine had changed his mind and decided to reign? We now know that he firmly refused, then it was not obvious.
As for Constantine in Poland, if the uprising was successful and the plan with a constitutional monarchy was implemented, it seems to me that he would not have "revolted" and most likely would not have been touched. But if the "bloody porridge" really started spinning, then that would be another question.

Some manifestos are being read out to the peasants;

But what exactly happened in 1861? By this time, the peasants had already lost the habit of living under the master, or did they not need to be released at all?

But the fact that there would be a lot of victims if they won - no doubt!

All this thesis is a priori cited as an axiom, but this is from the category of alternative history. Maybe it really would be like that, but maybe not? Here it turns out that the Decembrists are accused of what they did not do.

And I sum up - of course, all reforms must come from above, and go on time. When they don't go long it leads to revolutions

It is impossible not to agree with this thesis!

[Pane Kohanku]

Dear Sergey, point by point!

As for Nikolai Pavlovich, the likelihood of his physical elimination is also not necessary: ​​his elimination was supposed by the radical part of the Decembrists at the time of the seizure of power, but this did not happen.

EMNIP, the point for the physical elimination of the king did exist. Moreover, this would certainly have happened if we had added a few smart and unprincipled radicals at the head to the grenadiers of the Guards, who went to the Winter Palace. There were no radicals. Therefore, having found the Sapper Battalion guarding the palace, the grenadiers politely waved their hand, stepped back (as F.M. Dostoevsky would say), and went to Senatskaya .. past Nikolai Palych on horseback! The king shouted: "Brothers, where!", he answered: "We are for Konstantin!"
Nikolai gestured towards the Senate: "Then you - there!" And both sides parted peacefully, extremely pleased with each other. (I gave the quotes out of order, but something like that, too lazy to look for sources)

EMNIP, just Mikhail Pavlovich, was basically supposed to play the role of a constitutional monarch.

Would a monarch have turned out from Mikhail Pavlovich? Hardly. It was a pedantic officer. I could command a corps. They say that he introduced all the innovations in artillery - rightly (!), But at the same time, he tormented the infantry with stepping and appearance. Drunken officers in Petersburg in the evening were more afraid of running into him than the tsar himself. The result - the Crimean War, in which we were at least equal in artillery systems, but lost a lot in guns. A normal mass rifle was introduced only in 1856.
Although there were exceptions. LG The Finnish rifle battalion was completely armed with rifled rifles, and its soldiers repulsed several small landings in the Baltic.

What if Constantine had changed his mind and decided to reign? We now know that he firmly refused, then it was not obvious.

He could reign only if his old friend Miloradovich stood behind him. In principle, from my point of view, this explains the strange behavior of Mikhail Andreevich before the uprising. He was a clear opponent of Nicholas, and said: "he who has 60 bayonets in his pocket can speak boldly." With his intrigue, he only delayed the situation.
Konstantin pathologically did not want to be emperor, which he admitted on the night of the murder of Pavel Petrovich. Was Miloradovich not to know about this? No, he knew perfectly well, but Konstantin still pedaled with all his might! And why? Yes, because one would rules, and the other would ruled! They took over the ambitions of the hero general!
But these are just my thoughts, Sergey!

As for Constantine in Poland, if the uprising was successful and the plan with a constitutional monarchy was implemented, it seems to me that he would not have "revolted" and most likely would not have been touched.

Poland would burst into flames immediately. In five years, Konstantin will forcefully take his legs out of there.

peasants receive personal freedom, but the land as a whole remains with the landowners, in principle - the forerunner of the reform of 1861.

Some peasants were loudly stunned in 1861 ... From freedom ...

It is impossible not to agree with this thesis!

Truly so! Will live!

[mihaylov]

Good afternoon Nikolay!

And both sides parted peacefully, extremely pleased with each other. (I gave the quotes out of order, but something like that, too lazy to look for sources)

As far as I remember, somehow it was like that.

Would a monarch have turned out from Mikhail Pavlovich?

The whole world did not converge on Mikhail Pavlovich. I don’t remember now, but they considered several candidates from the royal family, including women. The royal family was large, they would have agreed with someone.

strange behavior of Mikhail Andreevich before the uprising. He was a clear opponent of Nicholas

The version of "some conspiracy of the generals" led by Miloradovich against Nikolai seems to be quite sound.
Actually, the attempted uprising was built on the basis of unpopularity in the army and in the society of Nikolai Pavlovich. On the basis of this, it was planned to re-agitate the troops, and this almost succeeded.
If Constantine had accepted the throne, there would have been no speech: it was supposed to go underground and conduct propaganda work.
In general, I believe that the program of the Decembrists was correct, they correctly assessed the problems of Russia and, on the whole, offered the correct ways to solve them. And my opinion is that the time was right (the 20s of the 19th century): Russia was still at its peak and perhaps these reforms were carried out in the 20-30s of the 19th century, it would not have missed the industrial revolution and in general everything that is possible.
As I wrote earlier, if you look at the program of the Decembrists, then as a result, most of the reforms they proposed were implemented to one degree or another, but much later than they should have.
PS Naturally, we are talking only about their software project. What would have happened in reality, had they come to power, one can only assume: from the "bloodbath" and civil war on the one hand to successful and peaceful reforms on the other. There are a lot of possible scenarios.
But as we know, they were unable to properly organize the uprising and, as a result, with their unsuccessful performance, they achieved the exact opposite of what they were fighting against: the conservation of the feudal system in Russia for another decades. And how it ended in the end - we know - 1917.

[Pane Kohanku]

The version of "some conspiracy of the generals" led by Miloradovich against Nikolai seems to be quite sound.

Sergey, welcome! I won’t say for the generals, but for Miloradovich personally... He knew Konstantin for at least 27 years, they both participated in the Italian campaign of Suvorov. Apparently, they knew each other very well. Mikhail Andreevich could not help but know that Konstantin Palych pathologically did not want to rule Russia! The Tsarevich was born out loud with this thesis immediately after the parricide of one of the interlocutors.
In general ... Miloradovich knew all about the one who was completely pedaled-pushed to occupy the throne. Perhaps an old friendship, sympathy, so what? Nevertheless, would rule the country, would be the first figure, more significant than "Tsar Konstantin" - that's exactly what Miloradovich!
Today is the anniversary of the assassination of Alexander II. On the day of the uprising on the Senate, guards sappers saved the Winter Palace, the wife of Nikolai and the young Alexander from reprisal ...
Many years later, the emperor, who abolished serfdom, will be dressed in the uniform of the LG Sapper Battalion at the time of his death ...
Paradox? Don't know. Many thanks to Dmitry - "Richard" for the information, I checked, yes, that was the uniform he was wearing.

[place]

Quote: Pan Kohanku

In general, there are many questions for the "dreamers".

The sailors have no questions for thieves, bandits. traitors. And to the "dreamers" - the mass. Probably all the troubles in our country from the "dreamers" and from the conservatory ... And also from the philharmonic.

[Senior seaman]

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

Flogging of peasants was abolished only in 1905 by the revolution.

And what all "Decembrists" were going to cancel it?
Or did they not use them in their shelves?

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

the tomes of the peasants flogged on Fridays by the nobles, who received their will and freedom from the "damned Bolsheviks", who sent the peasant's son and the first man of the planet Earth into space, in the style of a capricious noble lady say:

In historiography, a marker has developed about the Decembrists, as a generation of nobles who were not flogged.

[Fangaro]

As we know, almost 100 years later, the Bolsheviks were able to seize and retain power mainly because they had all of the above: a single leader, and unity in the party, and a strict hierarchy, and party discipline.

Is this a hint at some other time period in another country, in which it is not necessary to seize power, but simply hold it?

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote from Fangaro

As we know, almost 100 years later, the Bolsheviks were able to seize and retain power mainly because they had all of the above: a single leader, and unity in the party, and a strict hierarchy, and party discipline.

by no means, the Bolsheviks were able to come to power because the main thing had already been done before them, they had destroyed the foundation of the Empire. Don’t do this, the then liberalism is not a fact that the Bolsheviks succeeded, even in the presence of the factors you listed

[Sertorius]

The mistake in choosing the leader of the uprising is the first and main reason for the failure of the Decembrists.

And then, a sinner, I thought that the failure was due to the fact that "they were immensely far from the people," as the classic said.
But seriously, if the author had immersed himself even a little in the era, he would have written that the Decembrists were immediately doomed, because they did not reflect anyone's interests except their own. Without broad social support, revolutions do not take place. The comparative ease with which previous coups were carried out - from Elizabeth to Alexander were a change of elites. The Decembrists were not an elite. If there were an elite among them in the person of officials with real power and the military of the empire, then they would have had a chance.

[ivan2022]

Quote: Sertorius

the Decembrists were immediately doomed, because they did not reflect anyone's interests except their own. The Decembrists were not an elite. If there were an elite among them in the person of officials with real power and the military of the empire, then they would have had a chance.

At all times and everywhere, those who took power never thought about anything other than their own interests. And those who acted "for the people" were always beaten by the people.
Since the time of Christ.

Power in October 1917 was taken by armed soldiers and workers. For themselves, not for the people. And who is the "elite" .. they didn't care at all.

[astra wild2]

* or exile "- was excluded in advance. Only a complete murder
Pestel Planned: The Complete Destruction of the Romanovs.
And then the "leftist" people are accused of murder and, after demonstrative torture, executed.
While I was at school, I had a photograph of the executed Decembrists.
Now, there has been a reassessment of values: Muravyova, Trubetskaya, Annenkova
S Volkonsky
Sofia Perovskaya, Khalturin. As the author of the starship. He had a spaceship project

[Aviator_]

, Khalturin. As the author of the starship. He had a spaceship project

Dear Astra! Kibalchich had a project for a jet aircraft, Khalturin was engaged in more mundane affairs. True, the project did not save Kibalchich from the gallows.

[Pane Kohanku]

True, the project did not save Kibalchich from the gallows.

Sergei, it would be strange if he saved! Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich Kibalchich would have put him on his own project - "let him fly"!

[Aviator_]

Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich Kibalchich would have put him on his own project - "let him fly"!

Well, this is nothing more than a historical anecdote, about an inventor and a barrel of gunpowder, allegedly Grozny fought heresy in such a way. In reality, Ivan Vasilyevich, I believe, welcomed the new weapons. But Kibalchich, at least in this way, remained in history, there were many regicides, and there were significantly fewer inventors of aircraft. Moreover, this happened at a time when the theory of the wing did not yet exist, so the reactive principle (RDTT) looked preferable.

[Reptiloid]

Greetings Sergey ! I remembered all the time your last article and the interesting facts cited in it. Then I had some time to find something new to read. Now somehow the time has become less

[Aviator_]

Now somehow the time has become less than yes request

Hello Dmitry. Get used to it, there is never a lot of it, only a little. Have you collected any of the memories of relatives? At least ask your mother.

[Sergej1972]

It’s interesting, though, was Air Marshal Golovanov a descendant of Kibalchich, or is it still a beautiful myth?

[lisikat2]

"they have no one else to protect" the author, you completely forgot that Nicholas 1 was the heir and he entrusted him to the soldiers: Guards Engineer Battalion. Sorry, but I don't know the size of that battalion.
I asked my husband, and he says, probably over a thousand

[Richard]

Probably we are talking about the Life Guards engineer battalion, stationed in St. Petersburg and part of the 1st Guards Corps.
During WWI, the battalion was deployed in the Life Guards Sapper Regiment and the Guards Cavalry Demolition Squadron

[Pane Kohanku]

It is he, Dmitry. Guards sappers, well done!

[Richard]

Nicholas. did you change your soap? I sent you a whole bunch of archival documents about Pavel

[Richard]

Sorry, but I don't know the size of that battalion.

the battalion originally consisted of 4 sapper companies (since 3.01.1879/5/XNUMX - XNUMX sapper company was added)
rice. banner of the Life Guards sapper battalion

rice. uniform of the Life Guards sapper battalion

[Richard]

Curious fact On March 1, 1881, Emperor Alexander II dies from a sapper - an explosive charge, while dressed in the uniform of the Life Guards of the Sapper Battalion.
In the picture: fragments of the uniform of Alexander II, in which he was at the time of the assassination attempt.

[Pane Kohanku]

An interesting fact On March 1, 1881, Emperor Alexander II died from a sapper - an explosive charge, while dressed in the uniform of the Life Guards of the Sapper Battalion.

That's for sure... Mysticism... Or fate.

And Nikolai Palych on Senatskaya was in the uniform of the LG of the Izmailovsky regiment. In memory of the loyalty of this unit, he subsequently ordered them to build a new regimental cathedral - Trinity Izmailovsky, with a starry dome.

The column on the left is decorated with barrels of captured Turkish cannons of the 1877-78 war. In 2006, the wooden dome of the cathedral burned down, but it was restored.

[balabol]

Nikolay, now standing column is a remake.
The modern monument is a copy of the historical column and is made of bronze. Restoration work began in 2001 and ended in 2005. The architect for the reconstruction of the column is G. A. Sheremetiev.
In the new constructive solution, there is a decorative relief on the column shaft, imitating cannon barrels[b][/b]. Parts of the column were cast iron free of charge at the Novo-Lipetsk Metallurgical Plant, painting and finishing - at the St. Petersburg enterprise Admiralty Shipyards. The bronze sculpture of Glory was cast at the Monumentskulptura factory according to the model of the sculptor Z. K. Tsereteli and at his expense.

The original monument was unveiled on October 12, 1886 by Emperor Alexander III. The column consisted of 128 captured Turkish steel (52) and bronze (76) guns of various eras. The largest guns were placed in the lower tier of the column, there are 36 in total, on each of the four subsequent ones - 8 bronze and 8 steel guns, alternating through one and placed in separate niches. In January 1930, the original was dismantled and sent to be melted down. This was done to restore diplomatic relations with Turkey.

[Pane Kohanku]

The modern monument is a copy of the historical column and is made of bronze. Restoration work began in 2001 and ended in 2005. The architect for the reconstruction of the column is G. A. Sheremetiev.

Vladimir, thanks! Honestly, I didn’t know about it ... And about the remelting ...

[Pane Kohanku]

There was a terrible mess that day on both sides. I recommend: G. S. Gabaev. "Guards in the December days of 1825". Tsarsky, then Soviet officer-historian.
http://decabristy-online.ru/research/issl2-prav-monografii/gabaev/

[Senior seaman]

Could the Decembrists win?
Judging by the degree of organization - no.
The professional military could not plan and carry out a fairly simple operation. In any case, after a little over a hundred years, former lawyers, journalists, seminarian and wartime ensign coped with this much better.
Purely hypothetically, would they carry out the necessary reforms for the country?
Would you do it, the question is how?
Judging by the way they spoke on the Senate Square .... the country did not expect anything good from this.

[Amateur]

Pestel plans the establishment of a republic, the extermination or expulsion of the royal family, a unitary structure and the establishment of a dictatorship in the country. Naturally, Pestel saw himself as a dictator.

Pestel had a good example: the Corsican general Bounoparte eventually became the French Emperor Napoleon. So why shouldn't the German Colonel Pestel organize a new German dynasty on the throne of the Russian Empire?

[dfk-80]

Everyone missed the main thing - there is no revolution without socio-economic reasons, but conspiracies are easy.
Nobody is embarrassed by the arrest of Pestel a day before the uprising? Refusal of key persons from participation? I'm just sure that someone contributed to the failure of the uprising.

[Alf]

the Bolsheviks were able to seize and retain power mainly because they had all of the above: a single leader, and unity in the party, and a strict hierarchy, and party discipline.

And most importantly, they knew exactly what they wanted. And most importantly, they gave the masses an idea.

[Pane Kohanku]

And most importantly, they knew exactly what they wanted. And most importantly, they gave the masses an idea.

Exactly. And with an iron hand in 1918 they began to impose discipline in their ranks.

[Alf]

Quote: Pane Kohanku

And with an iron hand in 1918 they began to impose discipline in their ranks.

And they didn’t become liberal, guilty, against the wall!

[Pane Kohanku]

And they didn’t become liberal, guilty, against the wall!

In general, yes ...

[shikin]

As we know, almost 100 years later, the Bolsheviks were able to seize and retain power mainly because they had all of the above: a single leader, and unity in the party, and a strict hierarchy, and party discipline.

-
1. There was a single leader only in theoretical terms - Lenin, in practical terms - no, decisions were made collectively, and Lenin did not always agree.
2. Unity in the Party - Less than six months before October, many "mezhrayontsy" joined the party. After that, intra-party disputes and quarrels only intensified.
3. Strict hierarchy? For the first 2-3 years, whoever didn’t sit anywhere (I mean government chairs)
4. Discipline - let me remind you that before the speech in October, part of the party members opposed, moreover, publicly, which put the plans in jeopardy.
The Bolsheviks were able to seize power because by that time there was a terrible mess in the country, and there were no real forces to counter this. And they were able to keep it because they began to put into practice their program, as well as the program of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks (as opposed to just their chatter) in relation to the workers and peasants, and the bulk of the people supported this.

[Viktor Sergeev]

A bunch of degenerates who look like today's liberals do not see people's lives, but judge Western countries by tourist routes. How many soldiers suffered because of these freaks.

[Sergej1972]

A little about Poland. Firstly, the Russian Empire included only a part, although the largest, of ethnographic Poland. Secondly, by the time of the uprising, the Kingdom of Poland had been part of the empire for only a little over a decade. Thirdly, Pestel allowed independence exclusively within the borders of the Kingdom of Poland, that is, without Ukrainian, Belarusian, Lithuanian lands. And this independent Poland, according to his plan, was to be in an obligatory military alliance with Russia.

[Knell wardenheart]

The nobles, as a near-power class, found themselves in a situation of fierce dissonance in the question "what to do with the main guarantor of such power?" . In those days, the question of "honor and principles", so to speak, also pressed on their brains to a large extent. It was later that various philosophies of social construction would wash away this once powerful layer - and in 1825 it was still strong enough that all these Yakubovichs had the full (as it seemed to them) moral right to wriggle out like a snake, sir, both from a religious and from a "moral point of view ".
As for the plan - the plan was frankly a hat, precisely from the point of view of variations of the "if not so, then so" maneuver. As a result, "if not so" immediately forced people to improvise, frankly poorly imprisoned for this in a situation of fierce numerical and organizational superiority of official power.
The nobles in general did not get along well with each other. In that period of time, sophisticated hierarchical constructions were widespread among them, and this interfered with constructive joint activity. It was then that masses of educated raznochintsy appeared, not so confused by hierarchical constructions and the "logic of class thinking."

[Pane Kohanku]

so that all these Yakubovichs have a complete (as it seemed to them) moral right to turn out like a snake, sir, both from a religious and from a "moral point of view."

But at subsequent interrogations, they handed each other over with giblets, and were sincerely surprised: "What are we for?"
Mikhail Muravyov got off very happily during the investigation. Fate, it seemed, kept this man, so that later he would become a great statesman.
For the suppression of the Polish uprising of 1863-64, our snotty, prone to state masochism (that is, as they say now, "selected Akhedzhakovism") the intelligentsia called him "Ants the hanger", and the king ordered to be called - "Ants-Vilensky". It must be said that at that time he did a lot to bring the Belarusian peasantry out from under the heel of the clairvoyant lords. And the Belarusians should be grateful to him in some way for their special identity.

It was then that masses of educated raznochintsy appeared, not so confused by hierarchical constructions and the "logic of class thinking."

The alliance between Zhelyabov and Perovskaya is a prime example. A peasant (and according to the passport Zhelyabov was listed as such) and the daughter of the former governor of St. Petersburg, comes from a side branch of the Razumovskys ...

[the same doctor]

the Decembrists are the Khodorkovskys and Kasparovs of that time. There are many words, but ... At least one of them freed his peasants?

[Alf]

Quote: also a doctor

At least one of them freed his peasants?

And what to eat? Then you have to work...

[place]

Quote: also a doctor

the Decembrists are the Khodorkovskys and Kasparovs of that time. There are many words, but ... At least one of them freed his peasants?

Yes, here, I look, some saints and the righteous have gathered. Who will take off their last shirt for the sake of their neighbor. And from yourself, and not from your neighbor.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

“We won, but why is it so much worse for us than for them?” This question haunted them for a long time.

as these "snot" were already tired, they were interested in power and nothing more

[place]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

“We won, but why is it so much worse for us than for them?” This question haunted them for a long time.

as these "snot" were already tired, they were interested in power and nothing more

Yes, but those who already had power were not at all interested in it. There is a type, so let it lie. Everyone, together with the Tsar, only baked about the good of Russia. Just pure paradise.

[Seal]

Bottom line: a few months after the uprising, autocracy was restored, Emperor Michael rules happily ever after.

Firstly, nothing prevented him from killing his younger brother along with Nikolai.
And secondly, Michael never had a son. Some daughters. With him, the dynasty would have ended upon his death.
And then we could well form a different political system.

[Shkodnik65]

In my opinion, the original message of the author of the article is incorrect. Even before the Napoleonic wars, the Russian higher nobility did not climb out from abroad (and many Russian count-princes did not even know the Russian language, this is a fact). The elite knew perfectly well the state of affairs in Europe, and to write about the fact that only in the process of waging a war something was revealed to them there, at least not seriously. The reason is definitely something else, and, in my opinion, it was not without foreign interference. But, as they say, that's a completely different story. And history has no subjunctive mood. What happened, happened.

[OVZRKKU-1981]

The Decembrists saw in Europe a new, "free world" !!! What nonsense!? France is an empire, Austria is an empire, in other countries, kings and princes also sit on thrones. And these "liberators" have no programs, no specific plans, and those that do have - "instead of the army, the people's militia and the right of nations to self-determination" (that is: to destroy the basis of the country's viability and break a single powerful state into small latvia, estonia, Moldova and others ....). Half of them did not speak Russian, but "fought" for the freedom of Russia! The fool understands that our eternal "friends" from arrogance blew into their ears .....

[Illanatol]

Quote: also a doctor

the Decembrists are the Khodorkovskys and Kasparovs of that time. Lots of words but...

No, the analogy doesn't work. In Siberian exile, Khodorkovsky or Kasparov would have been of little use. And the Decembrists made a significant contribution to the history of Siberia, its cultural development.
People were quite worthy, even if they suffered from delusions and illusions. There is very little in common with the current pro-Western corrupt bastard.

[pavel.typingmail.com]

For some reason, a foreign trace in the case of the Decembrists was never considered, and yet one of the main rebels did not even know the Russian language. As they would say in the days of Joseph Vissarionovich - a French spy.

[ecolog]

Man proposes, but God ... You can not consider the plans of the Decembrists as an indestructible dogma. Gentlemen, officers can only do one thing - change one monarch for another and rise personally on this. Anna Ioannovna also explained about "Conditions".
They saw the edge of another life and did not understand why they already have it and we don’t have it yet. I'm wondering who they would rely on to carry out their bold plans?
The soldiers were taken to the square essentially by deception.
There are still not enough capitalists in Rus'. The landowners are more comfortable with the tsar. Naturally, their nobility did not think about the people as a source of power.
Well, ok, they would create a parliament. And who would sit there? Landowners, owners of peasants in the bulk. What would such elected representatives vote for, I think it is not necessary to explain. The boyars’ bosses weren’t chopped down anyway, they weren’t forced to serve. What more could a landowner want?
Dictator Pestel) would have slapped him quietly and forgotten.

[Alexey Alekseev_5]

Before writing this nonsense, afftor, it would not hurt to get acquainted with the notorious Russian truth from Pestel ...