Pavel Pestal and the Decembrists in Russia: Attempt at Revolution and Change

 

On the morning of December 14, 1825, an attempt at revolution broke out at St. Isaac’s Square in St. Petersburg, Russia. The revolution’s leaders, many young and representative of some of Russia’s most important aristocratic families, intended to force a Manifesto on members of the Senate and thus proclaim a new government that included the abolition of serfdom. These were the Decembrists, idealistic revolutionaries who chief contribution would be in providing martyrs to the future generations of Russian radicals and revolutionaries.

 

Decembrist Goals

 

Formed as a secret society in 1816, the loose organization that would tie Northern and Southern conspirators together went through several phases of ideological maturity from advocating a constitutional monarchy to regicide. Not all members agreed with each other on proper actions to take nor could they all agree on exactly what form of government should ultimately replace the autocratic rule of Tsar Alexander I. Pavel Pestel, considered the greatest intellect among the group, would confess in 1826 that he had come to the conclusion, after years of reading and observing, that “the republican form of government was superior,” and referred to the United States as a model.

 

Decembrist leaders were, for the most part, highly educated and harbored hopes of a reformed Russia after Alexander I returned from the 1815 Congress of Vienna. Instead, the tsar became more reactionary, even closing Masonic Lodges which had gained in popularity. Decembrists viewed national salvation in terms of republican ideals, using historical guidelines as models. Pestel idealistically invoked Republican Rome, contrasting it “with its lamentable fate under the rule of emperors” and spoke of the “glorious time of Greece when it was a republic.”

 

Casting the Die

 

The death of Alexander I in late 1825 gave the Decembrists the opportunity they had been waiting for. Although everyone assumed Alexander’s brother, Constantine, would succeed him, this was not to be. Constantine had abdicated earlier through a secret letter to his older brother. Alexander then named Nicholas, his 29-year old younger brother to succeed him. So secret was the affair that even Nicholas was unaware of the new arrangement. The Decembrists used this turmoil in succession to launch their revolution in St. Petersburg. The affair would be short-lived. The feeble military units occupying St. Isaac’s Square were leaderless, Prince Trubetskoi, ostensibly the commander of the operation, had absconded. Eventually, Nicholas I, now the Tsar after Constantine’s letter had been made public, ordered grape shot fired into the motley crowd, dispersing them in a melee of fear.

 

In the South, Serge Muraviev, leader of the southern faction, refused to admit defeat and fermented a mutiny with the intent on marching to Kiev. An imperial army had little difficulty ending the affray and arresting the leaders. Although most of the Decembrists were banished to Siberia, five, including Pestel and Muraviev, were executed.

 

Martyrs of a Cause

 

In her book on Mikhail Bakunin, [1] Aileen Kelly refers to the memoirs of Alexander Herzen, the “father of Russian Socialism.” In the memoir, Herzen relates that he was fourteen when Pestel and the other leaders were executed. The impression on him was to act out Schiller’s Don Carlos with his cousin. Far from ending a movement, the repressive policies of Nicholas I, the “Iron Tsar,” forced revolutionary sentiment underground. The Decembrists bred a progeny of future radicals that identified with these early Russian Jacobins.

 

[1] Aileen Kelly, Mikhail Bakunin: A Study in the Psychology and Politics of Utopianism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987) p.9ff.

 

Other Sources:

 

Imperial Russia: A Source Book, 1700-1917, Basil Dmytryshyn, editor (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1967)

 

Adam B. Ulam, Russia’s Failed Revolutions: From the Decembrists to the Dissidents (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1981)

 

 Comparing Peter the Great and Louis XIV of France

The mid to late 17^th century in Europe is defined by the lives of two men whose efforts greatly influenced the balance of power in the next century while creating competitive societies among the large and small European powers. Peter the Great of Russia and Louis XIV of France – the “sun king,” began their respective reigns with vision. Both would leave a legacy of strong leadership that resulted in the formation of powerful nations. Each ruler, alike in many ways, helped define the age.

 

The Early Years in France and Russia

 

Louis inherited a potentially prosperous kingdom with the largest population of any European nation. Yet for most of his twenty million subjects, everyday life in France reflected a day to day existence based on poverty, an inefficient and punishing tax system, and the continuance of a feudal system whereby a small group of powerful nobles controlled all aspects of society. Louis’ early years were marked by the Fronde, an uprising of nobles that forced him to flee Paris as a child.

 

Peter’s Russia was also a backward feudal society with a history of political and social unrest. Like Louis of France, Peter’s early childhood was marred by an unsuccessful attempt to seize power by his ambitious half-sister, Sophia. Both Peter and Louis took personal control of the state after coming of age, Louis’ reign identified as “Absolutism” while in Russia the rigid “Autocracy” was strengthened under Peter.

 

Building a Modern State

 

Although labeled “Antichrist” by the Orthodox Church, Tsar Peter’s determined efforts sought to modernize the feudal state along the lines of western European societies such as England and the Netherlands. His reforms, often called “revolutions,” affected everything from dress to architecture. His greatest act was the creation of the Russian navy. The traditional beard, so much a part of religious tradition, was outlawed and women were freed from their cumbersome clothes in favor of western-style fashion.

 

Much of this “fashion” came out of Louis’ France and the glittering court he presided over at Versailles. Like Peter of Russia, Louis transformed a semi-feudal society into a competitive mercantile nation. This involved an overhaul of the taxation system via the talents of treasury minister Colbert as well as the establishment of a modern, efficient army created by the Marquis de Lavois. Louis’ reforms helped to grow an urban middle class, the bourgeoisie.

 

Control of the Nobility and Symbols of Power

 

Louis’ most visible legacy was the great palace of Versailles, a model for all future rulers that wanted to demonstrate power and control. At the same time, Versailles was used to lure the restless nobility. At Versailles, the aristocracy was kept busy with endless parties and concerts, hunting and gambling, and dozens of diversions. In the midst of it all was the sun king, the epitome of absolute rule.

 

In Russia, Peter’s 1703 construction of St. Petersburg on the Neva River achieved similar purposes. It was his “window to the west.” Originally built as a fortress in the quest to deprive Sweden Baltic dominance, the city came to represent the ideals of Peter’s vision. Peter’s control of the nobility was linked to the “Table of Ranks,” which mandated state service for all nobles.

 

Death of Peter and Louis

 

Both Peter and Louis died leaving an uncertain future. In Russia, Peter’s second wife, Catherine, ruled with the help of advisors. Following her death, Russia experienced a brief second “time of troubles.” In France, a regency oversaw the interests of the infant king who would one day proclaim, “After me, the Deluge.”

 

Peter the Great and Louis XIV were larger-than-life figures at a pivotal time in western European history. Their lives saw many parallels and both men died bequeathing their people a stronger state.

 

Sources:

 

James Cracraft, The Revolution of Peter the Great (Harvard University Press, 2003)

Pierre Goubert, Louis XIV and Twenty Million Frenchmen (Vintage Books, 1972)

 

A Reprint from the Past...

Viktor Orban's Hungary has a Spotty Human Rights History and Should Start Acting Like an EU Nation

 

As the Second World War drew to a close, an enigmatic Swede fought against time to save the last large Jewish community from the Nazi death camps. Eclipsing Oskar Schindler, whose similar efforts were immortalized by Steven Spielberg, Raoul Wallenberg rescued more than 100,000 Hungarian Jews. Wallenberg disappeared when Budapest fell to the Soviet Army in January 1945. Despite inquiries at the highest diplomatic levels, his disappearance has never been adequately explained.

 

The Call to Sacrifice

 

Raoul Wallenberg was born into a prominent Swedish family. Well educated, Wallenberg graduated from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, returning to Sweden to be groomed for a banking career by his diplomat grandfather. Even before the outbreak of war in 1939, Wallenberg was told of the growing persecution of Jews in Hitler’s Germany. These impressions led to his determination to play a part in stopping the madness. He resolved to confront evil face to face and save as many Jews as possible. In July, 1944, he traveled to Budapest.

 

Sweden was a neutral nation during the war. Working at the Swedish legation, Wallenberg began issuing schutzpasses, official documents, to desperate Jews. The passes effectively put their bearers under Swedish protection. Wallenberg personally visited Admiral Horthy, the Nazi puppet ruler, pressing him to stop deportations. Finally, he enlisted the support of the other neutral legations in Budapest. Wallenberg purchased empty buildings in Budapest to use as safe houses and established an intricate intelligence network within the Jewish community.

 

Confronting the Face of Evil

 

As the Soviet Army drew closer to Budapest, the Nazis increased their efforts to exterminate the Jews, using their local surrogate force, the Arrow Cross, to do much of the killing. Agnes Mandl, whose description of events is listed with the National Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, credits Wallenberg with saving many lives. Her account details the Arrow Cross leading bound Jews to the Danube River, shooting one and then dumping the group into the cold December waters to drown. She, along with Wallenberg and others, rescued fifty people by jumping into the waters to save the drowning people.

 

Wallenberg eventually confronted Adolph Eichmann, who had returned to Budapest to complete the Final Solution in Hungary. Wallenberg was unsuccessful in his attempt to reason with the man responsible for the Third Reich’s railroad network devoted to transporting hundreds of thousands to Auschwitz, Sobibor, and other extermination camps. Eichmann was tried for war crimes in Israel in 1961-62 and executed for what historian Hannah Arendt called, “the banality of evil” in her 1962 book, Eichmann in Jerusalem.

 

Final Days in Budapest

 

Two days before the Soviets liberated Nazi death camps, Wallenberg threatened to have SS General August Schmidthuber tried for war crimes once the war ended if the planned massacre of the remaining Jews in Budapest was not stopped. The pogrom was cancelled at the last minute, although Schmidthuber was eventually executed for atrocities committed in Yugoslavia.

 

Raoul Wallenberg, in an attempt to make contact with the Russian commander, was taken by the Soviets and never seen again. Budapest was “liberated” by the Red Army. The Budapest Jews would not be exterminated. But the great hero whose passion was to confront and stop evil, disappeared. No adequate explanation has ever been offered by the Soviet government despite reports of sighting Wallenberg in the Russian Gulag. It remains as one of modern history’s mysteries.

 

Sources

 

http://www.ushmm.org (National Holocaust Museum)

Linnea, Sharon. Raoul Wallenberg: The Man Who Stopped Death (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1993).

Terror House Museum, Budapest (visited by author, December 2006)