S. Buntman- Good evening everyone, 21 o’clock and soon 7 minutes, we are live with you. And our guest today will be Alexander Valkovich, a historian, and you know very well how much we talked about both the Russian army and the French army. We have a Napoleonic number, this April one, Napoleon, 100 days. But I would still like to find out who these people who fought were. Not marshals - although the marshals, Napoleonic and ours, have an interesting origin and their path. But, in fact, the Russian and French army, what it was, and who it consisted of.

Alexander Mikhailovich, I would like to open a parenthesis, because after our wonderful order readings, I told us here, when Kibovsky and Podmazo were speaking, the whole color of the military-historical reenactment was sitting, it was wonderful when they asked questions from the weapons department of the Historical Museum even .

A. Valkovich- Employees?..

S. Buntman- Yes, yes, and they tried to figure out whether it was possible to identify this or that object. It was fascinating.

We will have something completely different on April 26, “Amateur Readings”, our next issue will be, the central theme will be Trotsky as a demon of revolution or merciless angels of revolution. And now Mikhail Weller, who devoted a lot to studying both the civil war and the psychology of the civil war, Mikhail Weller will be with us at 19 o’clock in the same place in the Historical Museum, in the building where the Lenin Museum was, and will be there at 19 o’clock. So tickets are already available both on the Internet on the museum’s website and at the box office. Buy as you prefer. Don't miss the moment. There will probably be few tickets left by the end. Alexander Mikhailovich, forgive me, our affairs are amateurish.

So, how many times have we met Napoleon?

A. Valkovich- We met with Napoleon, if we take the campaign of 1805, 1806, 1807, 1812.

S. Buntman- This is actually with Napoleon.

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- And before that...

A. Valkovich- ... Italian and Swiss campaign, yes.

S. Buntman- So, both the Russian and French armies were different in these times.

A. Valkovich- Yes. And if we are talking about revolutionary armies...

First of all, good evening, dear listeners.

S. Buntman- Yes, yes, today I didn’t even let you say hello.

A. Valkovich- The revolutionary army, if we say, inherited the army of the old order, if earlier they collected all the rubbish, as they said, in society and made soldiers out of them with the strictest discipline...

S. Buntman- Is it really like in English?

A. Valkovich- The same thing in France. They also recruited...

S. Buntman- In English, in general, there’s a rabble...

A. Valkovich- Wellington counted for a long time, despite his successes.

S. Buntman- Well, yes, gin is the basis of their patriotism.

A. Valkovich- I can say that it was precisely thanks to the danger that threatened the revolutionary changes, when they finally allocated land to the peasants, that is, I mean those freedoms that were declared - freedom, equality, fraternity - the volunteers who joined, albeit poorly disciplined, but nevertheless, this, let’s say, rise of the national spirit, in fact, a revolutionary army, it was the flower of the French people.

S. Buntman- But there were recruitments, and there were forced recruitments.

A. Valkovich- Waves of enthusiasm after defeats, after, on the contrary, the French won, not only defended, but also expanded their possessions, and established the so-called natural borders of France along the Rhine and the Alps. But at that time it was really the best, and if we remember the expression of Marshal MacDonald, when they were at dinner with the restored French king, I mean the Bourbons, Louis XVIII, his brother the Duke said that how he felt about the revolution, he said , that the revolution - I served in the army, and the army is clean of the atrocities that, naturally, the revolutionaries committed, and thanks to the revolution I became a general and a marshal and am having lunch with you. Well, he beat him up - he had no other option.

But I can say that this feeling of belonging to a single one inspired by the best ideas and patriotism, and freedom, equality, brotherhood, and dedication, which was inherent in the revolutionary army, everything changed when, in fact, these changes gradually took place. And he summed up these changes when they not only defended their independence, but also when they expanded their possessions. And here is the order of the general of the Italian army Napoleon, who said that he would lead them to fertile lands, and each of them would gain honor, glory and wealth. So a change took place, out of dedication they began to strive for a career, that is, the development of ambition, for wealth. That is, this single organism became a caste, a closed caste, which served and idolized its first general, and then its emperor. And this is his worship and loyalty to him, despite the defeats, and unlike the marshals, who were amazingly enriched for their service to Napoleon, tired of these battles and inconveniences, that is, the officer corps remained faithful to the end. Therefore, changes have occurred.

If we are talking about middle age or talking about social life, such a generalized portrait, then in the era of the Napoleonic wars, already when the empire was in full swing, and when they were marching on Russia, two-thirds of the officers were veteran soldiers. Thanks to the democratic principle, when everyone who was gifted and talented could come out during the revolution. That is, most of them, senior officers, went through the revolution.

S. Buntman- Yes.

A. Valkovich- I'm not talking about generals and marshals. And if we are talking about their origin, then after Napoleon declared an amnesty for migrants, it was diluted quite a bit, that is, if before it was about ten...

S. Buntman- Is this our year 1801 or what?

A. Valkovich- 1801, in fact, it started when they rushed, not only began to serve at court, but also in the army. True, he creates certain military units where the offspring of noble families served, this is what later there will be officers of the ordinance, that is, we are talking about the fact that somewhere by 1812 there were about 30 people from the noble class and maybe even more, but at the same time more than 20% come from peasants, workers, that is, from the lower classes. This suggests that...

S. Buntman- That is, not at all, not even petty nobles, not even patriotic nobles, who were at first during the revolution.

A. Valkovich- Yes Yes. And if we are talking about their age, we must say with surprise, thanks to the latest research of Dmitry Tselorungo, who has been working on formal lists in the Military Historical Archive for more than 20 years, he found out that by 1812 Russian officers were 7 years old younger than their counterparts. That is, it turns out that our junior officers from ensign to lieutenant are about 23 years old, compared to them - 30-year-olds, they have less combat experience, however, but they are also full of the best manifestations, although their experience is still small. Those are more shelled.

S. Buntman- It’s very interesting, because we somehow imagine very young people, but this is true for the Russian army, very young people who grow up quickly.

A. Valkovich- Undoubtedly. But if he actually enters the service at the age of 16, and we can say that if we are talking about the fact that our officers are primarily nobles, of which about 87% are hereditary nobles.

S. Buntman- Officers?

A. Valkovich- Yes. But let us recall that the officer rank was given by hereditary nobility, the first officer rank. Then it changes. In fact, they all started from the lower ranks - some in the guards, some in the page corps. That is, they started from a lower level by 1812. But military educational institutions did not give such a high percentage. If we are talking about education, then military educational institutions both in Napoleon’s army and in our country at that time, according to the research of French researchers, by the end of the empire no more than 15% studied in military educational institutions.

S. Buntman- Mostly they came out through the service, through real combat operations.

A. Valkovich- Yes. We had a large replenishment in 1807, they formed a corps of nobles, which, in fact, in accelerated courses, trained young nobles for 16 years for a year or two and graduated. In 1812, a thousand of them were released. And if from the corps of the first and second corps there are no more than two hundred, then a significant part of the replenishment came precisely...

S. Buntman- Our building was very old, dating back to the 18th century. Which, according to various things, is land (unintelligible)…

A. Valkovich- Second artillery. They trained first of all, they were universal, and many who studied artillery went into the cavalry. It's the same with Napoleon. He created, to his credit, a special military school, which was first located in Fontainebleau, then in 1808 it was transferred to Saint-Cyr, what is now in the vicinity of Versailles. They were also universal. But the trouble is that the cavalrymen who were sent were trained for infantry, and they ended up in the cavalry; in fact, they already acquired skills in combat. Such was the famous General de Braque, who left his remarkable memoirs in the form of instructions before the campaign in Belgium in 1832.

If we are talking about the level of education, as I already said, mainly our officers who went through the corps or home education thanks to their wealth, many names entered the army, having received home education thanks to the care of their parents, then we can read and write and they also know arithmetic, the majority were like that, about 60%. But in the guard there is actually a large number of officers who knew several languages. These constitute about 20% of the total number of those who served in the army. Most of them, naturally, are in the guards, and this pure French and secular communication in Paris, when we were already entering after many years of bloody war, the French ladies noted sophistication, secularism, and in comparison with their French officers - they still give off barracks. And it is no coincidence that Marie-Henri Bayle, whom we know as the writer Stendhal, said that receptions at Napoleon’s court were reminiscent of an evening at a bivouac.

S. Buntman- Yes, but he emphasized this a little more then.

A. Valkovich“Perhaps, although he opened his doors to the nobility and tried to surpass the splendor of the court, the ceremony surpassed the previous royal one. Why did he also encourage the children of noble families around him to serve?

S. Buntman- And here’s a private question, it’s very interesting about the children of noble families, about aristocrats, about emigrants who began to return, how much did the influx of emigrants decrease after the execution of the Duke of Enghien? The fact that we always have the center of the first volume of War and Peace is the famous execution of the Duke of Enghien. Which struck all of Europe.

A. Valkovich- In fact, the influx of emigrants, (unintelligible) service occurs in 1807-1808.

S. Buntman- That is, 2-3 years after that, yes.

A. Valkovich- Yes. And when they see victories, thunder, and that order and calm are returning, and simply returning to their homeland, this is the fate of many, especially since because of the emigration of one brother or another, his brothers who remained in France died. This was the fate of Chateaubriand when his brother and his wife were guillotined. That is, this principle still resembled a lot, and these wounds of the revolution stung.

S. Buntman- But not all emigrants, it must be said, like Russian emigrants, by the way, were such royalists, legitimists, Bourbonists...

A. Valkovich- Undoubtedly. And here, if we say that most of them, when the revolution began, almost all the officers of the cavalry regiments left, many remained in the infantry, but they turned out to be excellent generals, but, however, when the Convention declared terror, that is, they lost the battle, more often in total he was sent to the guillotine. But nevertheless, here is this brilliant galaxy of untainted (I mean by politics) personalities - Kleber, Marceau, Gauche, and many believe that if he had survived, the fate of Napoleon is still unknown. Because in his interpretation he was inferior to him, but in reality many studies say that he was superior to him in many ways, and he was pure.

S. Buntman- Yes. There, of course, they also cut it down very badly; in conditions of incredible danger, they cut down the officer corps very seriously then, the revolutionaries.

A. Valkovich- And here, again, fate decreed that one day Kleber dies, and Desaix dies, who, however, is already... well, we won’t even talk about Bernadotte, who would have been ready to lead the coup himself.

S. Buntman- Yes, he also looked at Napoleon very strongly.

A. Valkovich- Yes, this Gascon looked.

S. Buntman- Yes. But he became the Swedish king.

A. Valkovich- Yes, he set the task, he accomplished it.

S. Buntman- Yes. He became a sovereign. But if we compare – okay, let’s summarize a little – we can say that Russian officers were younger than French officers on average, younger, they were generally, let’s say, somewhat more educated on average, I don’t mean in military terms.

A. Valkovich- Yes, they were inferior in military experience, but the senior officers, I can say, more than half of the senior officers by 1812 had combat experience, and significant one. Of these, about ten campaigns were completed the day before. Well, of course, I must also say - Mikhail Aleksandrovich Fonvizin, who served as an adjutant in 1812, writes about this...

S. Buntman- Which Decembrist later.

A. Valkovich- Yes. He spoke about the inherent nature of the French army: the enthusiastic, furious attack that is inherent in the French, this impulse, this is the fact that they broke through everything when they went on the attack. Others write about this too. That is, they somehow became... thin, small, but they were transformed, this self-confidence, inspired by past victories led by the most brilliant commander, their strength increased tenfold. They crushed everything.

But the Russian army, the strength of the Russian army lies in its unshakable fortitude and tenacity in defense. Therefore this was compensated. And the outcome of these many years of military action is known.

S. Buntman- Yes.

A. Valkovich- Enthusiastic and furious attack.

S. Buntman- Enthusiastic and furious attack. This comes from the revolutionary armies, and, of course, the key here is probably the first Italian campaign.

A. Valkovich- Not only, but Moreau, who was under Hohenlinden the day before, and Gauche...

S. Buntman- What is the core of this development?

A. Valkovich- I can say that the Peace of Leoben interrupted successful actions, both Moreau and Kleber approached Vienna, if peace had not been concluded in 1797 in Leoben, it is still unknown what would have happened. Therefore, the (unintelligible) army was also distinguished by the greater purity of its ranks, it was dedication, when both officers and lower ranks suffered great hardships, the generals sought to be clothed and fed...

S. Buntman- In general, this is an era, yes.

A. Valkovich- And it cannot be said that Napoleon - honor, glory, that is, awakened ambition and enrichment, others had this too, it’s just that it was actually legitimized under the Directory. And they went on a campaign in 1812, and even the allies, if we are talking about the Confederation of the Rhine, those troops, were all inspired, they were delighted that they were going on a campaign, not only the officers expected them, but glory and booty. Someone dreamed that they would receive fabulous horses and secure their future with military spoils. No one thought or imagined how it would end. But it was the best army at that time that he assembled. And what is the outcome?

S. Buntman- Well, yes, such things don’t last forever. No one can assume that this will not last forever.

A. Valkovich- But here is the substitution, first of all, a successful career, and naturally, ambition, which is in all its manifestations. Speaking about the French army, it was declared that the third part is chosen by the regiment themselves, this was declared. In reality they chose, but the emperor approved everything. There are many memories when, after battles, he interviewed both officers and lower ranks about who had distinguished himself, who was the best. And those who were literate received officer epaulets. This also meant a lot, naturally, here.

S. Buntman- That is, such advancement is quite rapid if you survive.

A. Valkovich- If you survive. Because in general, from captain to colonel, the average duration, length of service, period of service is 18-20 years, it corresponds to ours, in fact. There's a big difference in salary, let's put it this way.

S. Buntman- Well, they’re already asking about this, and we’ve come close. From production to monetary allowance.

A. Valkovich- I can say that if a Russian lieutenant received 150 rubles annually, then lieutenant, he received, if I’m not mistaken, a thousand francs a year. And if we compare, we multiply - then the franc was worth 1.7 in relation to the ruble, I can say that they were many times richer. But we do not forget that Napoleon created a fund of 350 million francs to provide the military with all its needs, so that for 5 years it would not depend, would not demand from anywhere, that is, thanks to indemnities imposed on the defeated countries.

S. Buntman- He created a fund, right?

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- Let’s take note here, realize what we heard, and in 5 minutes we will continue together with Alexander Valkovich.

S. Buntman- We continue, Alexander Valkovich is our guest, we are talking about the French and Russian armies. And now we’ve moved on to our pockets, comparing salaries and allowances.

A. Valkovich- It must be said that both French and Russian officers, in addition to their salaries, also received table money, rent money, and amounts were also allocated for equipment.

S. Buntman- Amounts were allocated both there and there?

A. Valkovich- Yes. The fact is that a complete set for a released officer cost 200 rubles, so 200 rubles were allocated from the treasury to equip him. And if we talk about purchasing power, then products are surprisingly cheap in Russia and more expensive in France. For comparison, a lamb in France costs about 10-12 francs. In Russia this is no more than one and a half rubles. Further. A liter of vodka costs 10 francs, while red wine costs 50 centimes. In our country, buckets were considered vodka, and it cost from 30 to 50 kopecks.

S. Buntman- So.

A. Valkovich- And, accordingly, if we are talking about equipment, a sword in France cost about 100 francs, in our country it costs no more than 30 rubles.

S. Buntman- What does this have to do with? Why is this so with weapons? Is the cost less?

A. Valkovich- May be. Or it all depends, naturally, on its quality.

S. Buntman- Well, of course, but we take average ordinary weapons.

A. Valkovich- Again, if we say, in addition to the fact that in the Russian Imperial Guard, that in Napoleon’s Guard they received even more, and there the captain of the Imperial Guard was a wealthy man, that is, the dream of many rentiers, he had much greater wealth. But we can say that according to the studies conducted by French researchers, most of the income of the officers, that is, the smaller part had some kind of additional income, and everyone lived on their salaries.

S. Buntman- This is also important. And as far as we had...

A. Valkovich- The same. No more than 10% had about a hundred souls, but this is actually the annual salary of a junior officer. That is, large landowners...

S. Buntman- They couldn’t feed on their possessions somehow?..

A. Valkovich- No, that’s why they valued the service here and there. But besides everything that there are, naturally, more favorable conditions, there is probably the greatest risk. Although, if we compare the era of the Napoleonic wars, we also have intense military operations in different theaters of war - the long war with Persia, the long war with Turkey, the Russian-Swedish war. Well, and the campaign against the French.

S. Buntman: 5- th, 6th, 7th - straight in a row.

A. Valkovich- And then - the 12th, 13th, 14th year. Therefore, I had combat experience. If we talk about the general condition, Napoleon believed that simply bravery was the norm for an officer, so you had to be undaunted, then this was different. But the same thing, the same Paskevich said that in military affairs the main thing is courage, courage and courage. That is, a personal example from both the one and the other side, that of an officer leading into an attack, stopping at a moment when there is some kind of panic, this is typical for all officers, both the Russian and the French side. And the huge losses they suffered in the Battle of Borodino on the French side, not to mention the fifty generals, we have about 13 killed and wounded, not so many were killed. And the losses among the officer corps were great, that is, no one hid behind them, but pulled them forward. That is, it is one.

S. Buntman- There is another thing. Now we will return to the officers, but I would like to see the lower ranks, to what extent are they - let’s say, the level of darkness, illiteracy, or so...

A. Valkovich- If we say, in fact, a minority know how to write and count, but if we compare, and the French are not so, the percentage, unfortunately, is smaller. A study dedicated to this sociological portrait of, say, the lower ranks of the French army.

S. Buntman- This is incredibly interesting.

A. Valkovich- This work is currently underway, and it will be made public soon. But in terms of mobility of character, by nature, of course, I think the French soldier was superior, I mean, in literacy, in general literacy, than the Russian soldier. But French memoirists explained this steadfastness in battle with a kind of fanaticism and downtroddenness of the masses. In fact, they just wanted to explain it, but did not understand nature. And the soldiers became part of a single organism. At this time, the fighting had gone away; many officers already understood that during an attack you would receive a bullet from your own soldiers.

S. Buntman- This is the first thing.

A. Valkovich- And the attitude there is different. This is the young generation, from which the Decembrists will later emerge, brought up on the ideas of enlightenment, that they are not slaves, that they are the same people. And even the policy that changed at this time, and the Minister of War, who, in order to reduce and prohibit corporal punishment, did not exhaust the soldiers. That is, at this time there is a certain respite, and then they return to stepping, to drill...

S. Buntman- Although Alexander did not shy away from shaggy and also loved parades, like his father and brothers.

A. Valkovich- He inherited this from his father and grandfather, this is what those Romanovs already had in fact with their upbringing, although Catherine fought with this, but nothing happened, Maria Fedorovna fought, she wanted Nikolai not to inherit with Mikhail, but they also ...

S. Buntman- No, no, somehow it stuck with them very seriously.

A. Valkovich- For him, this external side of military affairs is significant. Konstantin Pavlovich’s expression that war spoils the army means a lot.

S. Buntman- Yes. We will not forget, of course, Tolstoy’s description when in front of Austerlitz...

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- Read it again, don’t be lazy, it’s very...

A. Valkovich- And images that immediately awaken the imagination in cinema, I won’t talk about “War and Peace” or “The Hussar Ballad”, officers of that time, or Pushkin’s “Duel”. And if we talk about the French, of course, this is an amazing image created by a French actor in “War and Peace”, this captain who was almost killed when he went to Pierre’s apartment... this is just this spirit, this living, brave, brave and able to appreciate the enemy, he is very loyal.

S. Buntman- Rambal, right?

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- This is such a sketch. Then, Napoleon very much, and in general it was a manner of addressing soldiers very often and very much.

A. Valkovich- Yes. And short, energetic, but memorable. It is no coincidence that when he went to one or another review, he was given a list of distinguished soldiers, and they believed that he knew all the soldiers in his army. Of course, he didn't know everyone.

S. Buntman- Certainly. But there was a feeling. Look, then it turns out that this is the recruited army. On the other hand, resilience is another important trait that has also been cultivated over the years, and specifically in the army.

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- And it doesn’t matter here whether there were external manifestations, but rather internal ones, like the Potemkin reforms, this...

A. Valkovich- Certainly. But this is still traditional among the Russian people, given that most of them come from Great Russian provinces; this tenacity, this same tenacity, if we say, was shown by the British in the era of European armies of that time. At Waterloo he learned this English fortitude. That is, this, overcoming to stand and fight, and it is no coincidence that he is a famous commander, but not the best of military leaders, I mean, in some operations with maneuvers and other things, we maneuvered worse than the French, that’s why we were not able to make detours and other things, this is what happened during our offensive at Tarutino. But we are talking about the ability to stand and die. You also need fortitude - to stand and die, to hold your position. And when now they remember a lot about the thin red line, when at Balaklava, how they lined up, they forget how thin the line of the 1st Guards Division was at Kulm, when they had to cover a wide front of actually several kilometers, and they held out. But here, of course, it is also the fault of Vandam, who neglected, believing that he would have time to break through all this, and did not become a marshal.

S. Buntman- It’s a pity that you weren’t at the “Amateur Readings”, we talked there in some detail, somehow, in my opinion, everyone froze when they remembered...

A. Valkovich- Because there are a lot of interesting facts, what happened in practice, that is, the statute of the orders, and how it happened in practice, this is interesting.

S. Buntman- It is very interesting. About subsequent events. The Russian army reached Paris. After that there were already, for the French army there was still, the return of Napoleon, there were 100 days. I then have the feeling that the Russian army went through one development, one subsequent path, and as for the French Napoleonic army, I have the feeling that it completely disappeared into thin air. Only memories, some veterans - but the spirit of the Napoleonic French army, it somehow almost disappeared.

A. Valkovich- He disappeared due to the fact that, naturally, firstly, very many, that is, when they were dismissed without pay or on half pay. But before this happened, I want to remind you that Napoleon received a new army, which successfully began the campaign in Belgium, because many veterans of the campaign returned from Russian captivity in 1814 - seasoned, experienced, and who still believed. And they were left behind when the army was reduced during the restoration. Therefore, I can say that they are trying to restore this spirit, but it is not working.

S. Buntman- No, we see in the descriptions of some campaigns, about the 20s, 1820s, I don’t say, in general, little is clear there.

A. Valkovich- Undoubtedly.

S. Buntman: 30- these years...

A. Valkovich- In Algeria.

S. Buntman- Yes.

A. Valkovich- They tried something, they wanted to show something, when compared with the British, when there were disagreements between the generals in the Crimean campaign, well, there is no such thing. There is, of course, an impulse, there is perseverance and the fact that they persistently attack. But there is also the superiority of weapons.

S. Buntman- Yes. The French army goes this way. Then we understand that in half a century, a little more, something terrible will happen, this defeat, the national shame with the Franco-Prussian War.

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- The English army was always later criticized for the lack of initiative of its officers. This is especially true in the Crimean War, English specialists are always lacking initiative...

A. Valkovich- In fact, there were not the best military men on both sides, let’s say, on both sides, that in the English army, that is, they won thanks to advantage and perseverance, let’s say, and the war itself actually began by accident, they decided to punish this Russian bear.

S. Buntman- Yes, and we remember that everything is becoming wrong. Or maybe this is the last era in general, and despite all the bloodiness, it was a terrible war, and all the Napoleonic wars were very terrible. This is the last something like this, some kind of last click in this century. A special phenomenon.

A. Valkovich- This is the intoxication from those campaigns, from the glory when they were everywhere, and disdain. A very typical episode is when the first prisoners at the beginning of the campaign in Russia, they behave so defiantly, French officers, that it irritates even the Russians. That is, they felt themselves masters of the world. Well, now we would compare them to the Americans, perhaps. That is, this disdain for the enemy, and the fact that this is the highest nation in the world, in fact...

S. Buntman- The fact that they carry advanced ideas, they carry ideas of progress. They are the best at everything, they know everything better than anyone.

A. Valkovich- Yes. But here at this same time there is precisely a frenzy of chauvinism.

S. Buntman- Yes. And this, on the one hand, is a frenzy of chauvinism, and on the other hand, and until then, in different parts of France, not all people even spoke French.

A. Valkovich- Undoubtedly. But it must be said that in the French army there were not only French, there were also Italians...

S. Buntman- Well, yes, but those from the center of the empire, from the hexagon that we are used to seeing, not all of them spoke French and understood each other.

A. Valkovich- This is true.

S. Buntman- It seems to me that this is still a phenomenal phenomenon, this is the history of the Napoleonic wars in which Russia was involved. And in Russia there was such an impulse, and it corresponded to this spirit of the times, and this is what Tolstoy contrasted with some of his valor, and very subtly - admiration for Napoleon...

A. Valkovich- Undoubtedly.

S. Buntman- And these relationships, a lot of minds worked on this later, on awareness both in Russia and in France. It seems to me that this is a separate phenomenon. This is not just an episode of military and army history, but it seems to me that this is some kind of extraordinary story. For this totality.

A. Valkovich- Yes, this is still being discussed vividly, and it still touches the strings of the soul, this era.

S. Buntman- Yes, of course, people here ask what is better to read about this, other than “War and Peace.”

A. Valkovich- Do you mean in literature?

S. Buntman- What is better in general, this is the greatest impression for you somehow, for its accuracy, perhaps? This can be a historical work or books.

A. Valkovich- If we talk about the revolutionary army, recently the “historian” (GPIB, State Public Historical Library - “EM”) republished one of the best works, this is Alexei Karpovich Dzhivelegov “The Army of the Great French Revolution and its Leaders”, these are sketches, a biography in fact and generals, and the whole atmosphere, and how it all happened. This is one of the best. It's accessible and inexpensive.

S. Buntman- Where can you buy Alexey Karpovich Dzhivelegov?

A. Valkovich- So you need to go to the “historian” website, I think it might be there.

S. Buntman- He is generally a brilliant historian.

A. Valkovich- Both the living, interesting language and the very visible images it creates.

S. Buntman- Yes, to understand this - of course, the beginning of the revolution, we have Chateaubriand translated remarkably, although not completely.

A. Valkovich- Unfortunately, his participation in hostilities and the description of the events of the revolution were reduced. It is sad.

S. Buntman- Yes, but the character can be understood.

A. Valkovich- Undoubtedly. And now “Zakharov” has published a whole series related to Napoleon, memoirs. And recently the memoirs that young Balzac helped create came out, these are Laura d'Abrantes, they are also interesting, the characteristics are not always objective, but the spirit of the era means a lot. Napoleon had no hope of becoming marshals, he made them colonel generals, so how once Eugene, after the wounds that he had, a strong saber blow, which, nevertheless, he survived, that is, what later led to insanity, this is all together here besides the fact that he lost, say, the favor of his adored Emperor. He was his first adjutant. Nowadays there are quite a lot of interesting and accessible things.

S. Buntman- Well, yes. Certainly.

A. Valkovich- And, of course, memoirs. The Kuchkovo Pole publishing house recently published memoirs, I prepared them, these are Muravyov-Karssky, memoirs. This is an amazing thing. So, now we can find more and more.

S. Buntman- Yes, now there is a lot, of course, not without nonsense.

A. Valkovich- Undoubtedly.

S. Buntman- But you have to break through it.

A. Valkovich- Let them read more memoirs from both sides. And “The French in Russia”, which is a two-volume book, is again historically tied to the anniversary, it is a collection of testimonies of the participants in the campaign, they are very interesting.

S. Buntman- Great, have a wonderful reading. Well, don’t forget that it exists; you can rewatch “Waterloo” for the 5722nd time, of course.

A. Valkovich- Of course, yes.

S. Buntman- Decent people, you know how they go to work. But once a year at least.

A. Valkovich- And watch “The Duelists.”

S. Buntman- Yes, only those “Duelists”, wonderful ones.

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- A completely unrelated film just came out. We're talking about Ridley Scott from the 70s.

A. Valkovich- Yes.

S. Buntman- This is a great film. And don’t forget, a good film was released based on Balzac’s Chabert.

A. Valkovich- Yes. "Colonel Chabert." Amazingly amazing movie.

S. Buntman- Yes, with Depardieu.

A. Valkovich- Yes, and there is a scene after Eylau, when... a mass grave. It's a great movie, yes. And if we talk about the revolution, “The Chouans,” of course, should also be read by Balzac.

S. Buntman- Yes. This is his first historical novel. And just like that, he gave a very serious, not just a diagram, he gave the backbone for understanding.

A. Valkovich- Thanks to the fact that he was there, and the eyewitnesses, participants in those events, he was fed and then stated it.

S. Buntman- This is a wonderful novel, by the way, I recently re-read it, which I don’t regret at all.

A. Valkovich- This is high prose, and precisely the spirit. And, naturally, Hugo “The Ninety-Third Year”.

S. Buntman- Yes, a completely different book. Read our friend Stendhal too.

A. Valkovich- Certainly. About Napoleon is better than Stendhal, especially since he was a participant in all these events.

S. Buntman- Okay, thank you very much, Alexander Valkovich, of course, we will talk about different things here both in this program and in the “Like this” program, we will also have meetings. Don’t forget that on April 26 we have another “Amateur Readings”, about something completely different called “Trotsky – the merciless angel of the revolution.” You will hear Mikhail Weller, you will be able to ask him questions, argue with him on the 26th at 19:00. Buy tickets on the museum website and at the box office.

All the best to you, goodbye!

A. Valkovich- Goodbye.

Service always began with the lower ranks. Officer candidates entered as privates into one of the guards regiments - Preobrazhensky or Semenovsky. There, after serving for five or six years, or more (depending on ability), they received the rank of guard corporal or sergeant and were transferred to army regiments, enlisted in the army as warrant officers or second lieutenants. Both guards regiments were kept in double strength compared to the others (4 battalions instead of 2) and were a nursery for officers for the entire army, a kind of military schools that gave their students not only combat training, but also excellent combat training. For a hundred years, all those who created the great Russia of the eighteenth century passed through their ranks...

In the cavalry, the role of a military school was played by the life regiment, where youngsters signed up as dragoons. At first, during the era of the Northern War, it was the St. Petersburg Dragoon, and from the beginning of the 20s it was the Kronshlot Dragoon, named the Horse Guards in 1730.

The role of the Guard officers, these first-born chicks of Petrov’s nest, and their importance in the country were very great. They performed not only military (and sometimes naval service), but often received important assignments for other departments, for example, diplomatic ones, royal couriers, auditors, etc. Thus, the duties of the chief officers of the Guard included presence as fiscal officers at meetings of the Government Senate and ensuring that gentlemen senators do not engage in extraneous matters. In general, Peter's officer, the guards in particular, was a jack of all trades, like his great Sovereign, whose example was before everyone's eyes.

Peter the Great understood the importance of an officer in the country and tried in every possible way to give him a privileged position. In the table of ranks, with equality of ranks, the military had an advantage over civilians and courtiers. There were 14 ranks:

I rank – field marshal general, admiral general, chancellor;

II – general of the branch of arms (chief), admiral, actual privy councilor;

III – Lieutenant General, Vice Admiral, Privy Councilor;

IV – major general, rear admiral, actual state councilor;

V – brigadier, schoutbenacht, state councilor;

VI – colonel, captain 1st rank, collegiate adviser;

VII – lieutenant colonel, captain 2nd rank, court adviser;

VIII – major, lieutenant commander, collegiate assessor;

IX – captain, lieutenant, titular adviser;

X – staff captain, collegiate secretary;

XI - lieutenant, ship's secretary;

XII – second lieutenant, midshipman, provincial secretary;

XIII – ensign, provincial secretary;

XIV – collegiate registrar.

In the artillery, the rank of warrant officer corresponded to the rank of bayonet-junker, and between the lieutenant and the captain there was the rank of captain-lieutenant. The promotion of chief officers to staff officers and from staff officers to generals was determined by voting, and this order, which, of course, had its benefits, but also great inconveniences, was preserved until Peter’s death. Foreigners, entering Russian service, were seconded to generals and staff officers, under whom they carried out ordinary duties, taking a closer look at the service and mastering the language. At the end of this experience, they received production and enlisted in the service. The salaries of foreigners were on average double, as befits mercenaries. By the end of the reign of Peter I, there were about a third of the total number of general and staff officer ranks at the top (in 1726, in an army of 5 chiefs - 2 foreigners, of 19 lieutenant generals and major generals - 8, of 22 brigadiers - 5, of 115 colonels – 82).

For special merits they complained to the orders of St. Andrew the First-Called (the first and for a long time the only Russian order, founded in 1698), and at the end of the reign of St. Alexander Nevsky (founded in 1722).

The control of troops in peacetime was concentrated in the hands of the military college, established in 1719 and initially having 3 departments (expeditions) - army, garrison and artillery, which were in charge of field troops, garrison troops and materiel, respectively.

Higher tactical formations, brigades (2–3 regiments) and divisions (2–4 brigades) were formed only in wartime. In peacetime, the highest administrative unit was the regiment.

By the end of the reign of Peter I, the army consisted of infantry: 2 guards, 2 grenadiers and 42 infantry regiments (of which 9 were lower corps in Persia), a total of 70,000 bayonets with 200 guns of regimental artillery; cavalry: 33 dragoon regiments - 37,850 people, 100 pieces of horse artillery; artillery: 1 guards, 4 army cannon companies - 4190 people with 21 regimental and 160 siege guns; sapper: 2 companies - engineering and mineral. In total, the active troops have 112,000 combat troops with 480 guns. The cavalry thus made up a third of the field troops, and for every thousand fighters there were an average of 3 cannons (not counting siege ones). In addition, there were 68,000 garrison troops (50 infantry and 4 dragoon regiments), 10,000 land militia (4 infantry and 16 cavalry regiments) and 35,000 Cossacks.

A total of 225,000, and including the fleet personnel, there are 250,000 lifelong professionals.

The infantry regiments were in 2 battalions and consisted of 1 grenadier and 7 fuselier companies. We only had battalions in 1698. Before that, regiments were divided directly into companies. Both guards regiments had 4 battalions. Many army regiments during various periods of the Northern War also had 4 or 3 battalions. Each regiment had two 3-pound cannons, on the carriage of which two 6-pound mortars could be fitted, if necessary. The gunners wore regimental uniforms and were subordinate to the regimental infantry command. The escort guns of the Peter the Great era weighed 20 pounds and were transported by a pair of horses. The staff of the infantry regiment was 1200 combatants. Until 1708, regiments were named after colonels.

Each infantry and dragoon company had its own banner. The banner of the 1st company was considered regimental and was white, the color of the rest was at the colonel's choice (most often black). The service life of the banners was 5 years and they were considered ammunition items, although their loss was already considered shameful and units could be deprived of their banners in court. (Standards were first introduced during the formation of the cuirassiers in 1733.)

All cavalry were dragoons. The dragoon regiment consisted of 5 squadrons of 2 companies each, in all 10 companies there were 1200 combat troops (the first companies were considered, like in the infantry, grenadiers). Each regiment was also given two 3-pound cannons, and in addition one 20-pound howitzer, weighing less than 30 pounds.

The fighter's weapons were in the infantry: a fusee (gun) and a sword for everyone. The fusée weighed 14 pounds, the bayonet (baguinet) was inserted into the barrel, so it was impossible to shoot with the bayonet attached. The grenadiers had, in addition to only 2 grenade bags (one 6-pound grenade in each). Non-commissioned officers had tall halberds instead of fusees. The shortage of guns forced Peter to reintroduce pikes (half-pikes, so-called protazans) into infantry service in 1707. Pikemen (at one time over a quarter of the entire infantry) formed the rear 4 ranks and were assigned primarily to provide cover for the artillery. The dragoons had a fusee, pistols and a broadsword. Fusées were worn on the shoulder of the infantry; among the dragoons they were attached to the saddle (there were no belts).

The uniform consisted of a long single-breasted caftan of green color (from the time of Peter until the beginning of the 20th century, for two hundred years, green was the traditional color of the uniform of Russian troops), a camisole, short pants to the knees, green stockings and low shoes, on the march and guards wear boots, dragoons have jackboots. In winter, they wore an epancha - a type of cloak.

The satisfaction was excellent. The daily ration consisted of a pound of meat, two pounds of bread, two glasses of wine and a garnz (quart) of beer. One and a half garnets of cereal and two pounds of salt were issued monthly. The Tsar himself tested this ration on himself for a month, before approving it. The soldier was entitled to a salary of 24 rubles per year, of which, however, half was deducted for uniforms.

There were no barracks and the troops were billeted among the inhabitants. When allocating apartments to troops, the Military Charter required one bed for three people, on the basis that two would sleep on it, and the third would be occupied by guards. We can be convinced from this that the dispatch of guard duty in those days absorbed a third of the available troops.

The discipline of Peter's army was harsh: people were put under arrest in chains, corporal punishment was frequent, but not particularly cruel. Demotion (in severe cases with defamation and without seniority) was widely practiced. Officers, sometimes senior generals, like Repnin, signed up to be soldiers, while lower ranks signed up to become cab drivers (i.e., wagon drivers). Military units could also be subject to disgrace. This is what Peter wrote in one of his military articles: Regiments or companies that flee from the battlefield are judged in the general military court, and if it is found that the commanders are the reason for this, then defame them and, having broken the sword over them through the executioner, hang them. If the culprits are officers and privates, then the first should be executed as stated, and of the last, by lot, the tenth, or as ordered, should also be hanged; the rest should be punished with spitzrutens and, moreover, without banners, they should stand outside the convoy until they atone for the crime with brave deeds. Whoever proves his innocence will be spared. Peter I thus introduced the principle of Roman decimation (execution of the tenth) into the troops. If we remember that the Military Charter sets the small army of Julius Caesar as a model, then we can argue that when organizing the regiments of the Third Rome, the Tsar took an example from the legions of the First. It must be added to the credit of the Russian army that it was not necessary to resort to this kind of punishment. Nevertheless, this formidable maxim has served its purpose, guiding more than one timid heart onto the true path.

The short article of 1706 introduced the punishment of spitzrutens, which until then had been applied (as a foreign punishment) only to foreigners who served with us. Spitzrutens were assigned exclusively by court and the culprit was driven through the ranks (the largest number of spitsrutens - driving through the regiment's ranks, was assigned for repeated robbery). Punishment with batogs (rods) was imposed as a disciplinary measure.

With all this, corporal punishment in the Russian army of the 18th century was not as frequent and not as cruel as in foreign armies.

The few surviving tales of Peter the Great's regiments - combat reports, reports of all kinds, reports and correspondence - allow us to judge the life of the troops. Looking at these tales, we are first of all struck by the extent of desertion. For example, in the Butyrsky regiment, considered one of the best in the army, 361 people fled from 1712 to 1721, i.e., over a quarter of the regular staff in ten years. This phenomenon is explained by the novelty for the Russian people of the harsh and heavy conscription service, which was also lifelong. Called under the banners of the Danes, at first he could not get used to the idea that he would never again see his own family, his native village, his native fields. This is where most of the escapes come from. Often the fugitives took away ammunition and weapons - fuses, swords, sometimes even halberds. All this did not at all serve to ensure peace on the highways. It is characteristic that of the total number of escapes indicated in the Butyrsky regiment, 361 over ten years, only one took place before the enemy (for which the culprit was executed by death - shot). This circumstance serves as a unique indicator of the high quality of the troops.

Little by little, the forced professional became accustomed to his fate, his share of the cut-off slice. Every year, the abandoned loved ones became more and more distant, the regiment, which was hated at first, became more and more close... The soldier transferred all his affection to him, his second and last family, and to the camaraderie of soldiering. So little by little, gradually, from generation to generation, the immortal type of Russian soldier, Peter the Great and Elizabethan fuselier, Catherine’s miracle hero, Nicholas’s campaigner was created...

The territorial recruiting system introduced by Peter (in which fellow countrymen were assigned to the same regiment) then provided a tremendous service to the Russian army: recruitment was easier to bear - no matter what, the young regiments soon acquired the necessary cohesion.

The regiments accepted from their recruiting district, on average, 80,100 recruits annually in years when there were no significant losses, for example, in the last period of the Northern War, that is, they completely changed their composition in 10–12 years. The recruit lists did not indicate their age or physical data (height, chest volume, etc.). We know that they were accepted without examination. Only literacy was noted; from tales, for example, the Butyrsky Regiment (which had a capital recruitment district, Butyrskaya Sloboda in Moscow) it is clear that there were 2-3 literate people per hundred, in other regiments there were even fewer.

Taking into account the heavy losses in the battles and campaigns of the first half of the Northern War, we can say that during this entire twenty-five-year struggle, the Russian army completely changed its composition three times. Our losses are estimated at approximately 300,000; who can count exactly how many of them fell into Finnish swamps, into Polish clay, into German sand? How many were crowned with blood for piety in the fields of Livonia, Ingria, Poland, Germany, Little Russia... And how many died there from various ulcers and fevers, from all kinds of superhuman labors and inhuman deprivations?

Let us remember what a great fate befell at least the soldiers of the Ostrovsky and Tolbukhin regiments, the first settlers of Kotlin and the Peter and Paul fortress! In the distant Finnish wilds, with a gun in one hand and an ax in the other, they cleared a windfall on the site of the future Neva prospect under the wolf howl and shots of Swedish partisans. And the bones of these first pioneers, who laid down their heads in that distant, unsightly land, became the piles of St. Petersburg, the foundation of Russian great power... Let us remember the same Butyrtsevs, great-grandfathers in the direct line of Gavrila Sidorov, who carried ships from The White Sea to Lake Onega... And this entire Peter the Great army, suffering hardships, but cheerful in spirit, with an iron hand directed to new exploits, in the mud and cold, making thousand-mile marches - from Poltava to Riga, from Riga to Iasi, from Iasi to Copenhagen - Was it not the army of a great people, the army of a great King?

The Russian soldier of Peter the Great's times, who said goodbye to his family forever in the name of serving Russia, was an example of perseverance and patience, loyalty and self-denial, which other peoples do not know. And grateful Russia will keep his image in its heart forever.

Petrovsky regiments:

Life Guards Preobrazhensky (1683);

Life Guards Semenovsky (1683);

2nd Grenadier Rostov (1700 - infantry Gulitsa, from 1708 Rostov);

5th Grenadier Kyiv (1700 - infantry Vilima von Delden, from 1708 - Kyiv);

9th Grenadier Siberian (1700 - infantry Irika von Werden, from 1708 - Siberian);

12th Astrakhan Grenadier (1700 – Bruss Infantry, from 1790 Astrakhan). From 1708 to 1790 this regiment was called Vologda. Since 1708, the name Astrakhan was borne by the regiment of Alexander Gordon, formed in 1700, which in 1790 went to staff the Georgian Grenadiers, which received its status.

11th Pskov Infantry (1700 - Mevsa Infantry, from 1708 - Pskov);

15th Shlisselburg Infantry (1700 - Infantry von Treiden, from 1708 - Shlisselburg);

17th Infantry Archangel City (1700 - Infantry Krota, from 1708 Arkhangelsk);

19th Kostroma Infantry (1700 - infantry of Nicholas von Werden, from 1805 - Kostroma);

22nd Nizhny Novgorod Infantry (1700 - Pohlmann's Infantry, from 1708 Nizhny Novgorod);

25th Infantry Smolensky (1700 - Infantry Bilsa, from 1708 Smolensky);

29th Infantry Chernigov (1700 - infantry von Schweden, since 1708 Chernigov);

45th Azov Infantry (1700 - Bush Infantry, since 1708 - Azov);

61st Vladimir Infantry (1700 - Junger Infantry, from 1708 Vladimirsky);

64th Kazan Infantry (1700 - infantry von Delden, from 1708 Kazan);

65th Moscow Infantry (1700 - Ivanitsky Infantry, from 1708 Moscow);

85th Vyborg Infantry (1700 - Kuloma Infantry, from 1708 Vyborg) - Founded in 1700, the glorious Vyborg Regiment was disbanded in 1833 and went to form Finnish line battalions (we began to value the old regiments only in the second half of the 19th century) . In 1863, infantry regiments of the 22nd division were formed from Finnish line battalions, and the 85th was named Vyborg, although the battalions formed from the former Vyborg regiment went to form the 88th Petrovsky infantry regiment, which thus had more reason to be called Vyborg - The old Velikolutsk regiment was converted into a huntsman in 1810, and in 1833, with the abolition of the rangers, it was disbanded. In 1835, an infantry regiment was again formed, called Velikolupkiy. Emperor Alexander III in 1884 ordered, in order to preserve the names of the two oldest regiments in Russia - Velikolutsk and Vyborg, their seniority, as an exception to the general rule, was assigned to the 12th Velikolutsk infantry and 85th Vyborg infantry regiments. In the table below, we therefore include these shelves as an exception.

3rd Narvsky Infantry (1703 - Schoenbeck Infantry, from 1708 - Narvsky);

9th Infantry Staro-Ingermanlandsky (1703 - Menshikov’s infantry, from 1704 - Staro-Ingermanlandsky);

27th Vitebsk Infantry (1703 – Skripitsyn’s Infantry, from 1784 Vitebsk);

38th Infantry Tobolsk (1703 - infantry of Prince Repnin, from 1708 Tobolsk);

69th Ryazan Infantry (1703 - Lang Infantry, from 1708 - Ryazan);

1st Infantry Nevsky (1706 - Kulikov Infantry, from 1711 - Nevsky);

62nd Suzdal Infantry (1707 - Renzel Infantry, from 1727 Suzdal) see note. 13th Infantry Belozersky (1708 - Grenadier Repnin, from 1727 - Belozersky);

16th Ladoga Infantry (1708 - Bush Grenadier, from 1727 Ladoga);

21st Infantry Muromsky (1708 - Grenadier Engberg, from 1721 Muromsky);

63rd Infantry Uglitsky (1708 - Grenadier Bilsa, from 1727 Uglitsky);

Life Guards Kexholmsky (1710 - Grenadier Prince Baryatinsky, from 1727 - Kexholmsky - formed as the Second Grenadier);

8th Estland Infantry (1711 – Estland garrison);

12th Velikolutsky Infantry (1711 – Azov garrison, from 1835 Velikolutsky);

193rd Infantry Sviyazhsky (1711 - Kazan garrison, from 1891 Sviyazhsky);

81st Absheron Infantry (1722 - Astrabad Infantry, from 1732 Ashperon);

84th Shirvan Infantry (1724);

1st Life Dragoon Moscow (1700 – Dragoon Gulipa, from 1708 Moscow);

17th Nizhny Novgorod Dragoons (1701 – Morelia Dragoons, from 1708 Nizhny Novgorod);

12th Uhlan Belgorod (1701 – Dragoon Dev-gerin, from 1826 Belgorod);

13th Ulan Vladimir (1701 – Zhdanova’s dragoon, from 1708 Vladimir);

Life Guards Cuirassier of His Majesty (1702 - Dragoon of Prince Volkonsky, since 1796 - Cuirassier of His Majesty);

Life Guards Cuirassier of Her Majesty (1704 - Dragoon Portes, since 1796 - Cuirassier of Her Majesty);

10th Hussars of Ingria (1704);

13th Narvsky Hussars (1705 – Pestov’s Dragoons, from 1708 Narvsky);

5th Dragoons of Kargopol (1707);

1st Uhlan St. Petersburg (1707 - Geshov's Dragoon Life Regiment, from 1721 - St. Petersburg);

4th Dragoon Novotroitsko-Ekaterinoslavsky (1708 - Dragoon Kropotov, from 1708 - Novotroitsky, from 1783 - Novotroitsko-Ekaterinoslavsky);

3rd Ulan Smolensky (1708 - Roslavsky Dragoon, from 1765 Smolensky);

11th Dragoons of Riga (1709 - grenadier of Prince Kropotkin, from 1727 - Riga);

13th Dragoons of the Military Order (1709 - Grenadier von der Roop, since 1774 - Dragoons of the Military Order);

Life Guards Cavalry (1721 – Dragoon Kronshlotsky, from 1730 Cavalry);

Life Guards artillery brigade (1683 - bombardment company, since 1796 - Life Guards artillery brigade);

Guards Crew (1710).

Note. The Suzdal regiment was formed from the remnants of seven regiments of the Vostromirsky division, which were completely defeated at Fraustadt. The tables include only shelves that have never been disbanded. The first date is the founding of the regiment, the second is the granting of the present name to the regiment. Many regiments changed their names several times. We can note that in the 16th Infantry Division of the old Imperial Army, all four regiments were founded by Peter (and, moreover, even before the Battle of Poltava).

The 14th Gruzinsky Grenadier should be counted among the Petrovsky regiments: it was formed in 1700, called the Alexander Gordon Infantry, in 1708 the Astrakhan Infantry and in 1785 renamed the Caucasian.

Officers in Tsarist Russia have always been a special “caste”, different from both soldiers and civilians. Detachment from society was explained, in particular, by the fact that officers did not have the right to join political parties, but had to be guided throughout their lives only by the principles of duty and honor. Where officers of the late 19th - early 20th centuries spent their time, when they could get married and how they defended their honor, Ekaterina Astafieva will tell you.

Don't play around
In 1904, captain Valentin Kulchitsky compiled a unique set of rules “Advice to a young officer.” Based on his notes, the “Russian Officer’s Code of Honor” was created, which spells out the basic rules of life - both personal and public. For example, officers were advised to “behave simply, with dignity, without foppery,” but at the same time not to forget the difference between “dignified politeness” and “adulation.”

In 1904, the “Code of Honor of the Russian Officer” was created

One of the points of the code read: “Don’t play around - you can’t prove your valor, but you will compromise yourself.” True, Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy in “War and Peace” very colorfully depicted the revelry of the color of the nation and, for example, the Semyonovsky officer Dolokhov, drinking a bottle of rum on a dare, sitting on the third floor window with his legs down. In general, a real officer had to be able to do everything in moderation: if he did drink, then not get drunk, and if he played cards, then never get into debt.

Money down the drain
Nevertheless, they often got into debt: this is not surprising, because officer salaries were generally low. Paying off a gambling debt was considered a matter of honor (remember how, in the same Tolstoy novel, Nikolai Rostov wanted to commit suicide because of a debt that he was unable to repay). The officer had to purchase uniforms at his own expense, and the prices, to put it mildly, were steep: on average, a uniform cost about 45 rubles, a frock coat - 32, a cap - 7, boots - 10, a sword belt - 2.6 rubles. Mandatory expenses also included membership in the officers' meeting, an officer's library, and borrowed capital. It was especially expensive to serve in the guards infantry, because regiments were often located in the capital. The biggest spenders served in the Guards cavalry. They lived in grand style, regularly hosting luxurious dinners, which the officer could not refuse to attend. The cavalrymen considered it beneath their dignity to sit in the theater not in the first row of the stalls or in the box; they refused the government horses that everyone was entitled to and bought their own, the most expensive ones.

Life as prescribed
There were also official instructions on how not to lose your dignity. For example, an officer could not afford to visit hotels and restaurants of the lower ranks, taverns, tea houses and pubs, as well as 3rd class buffets at railway stations. The officer could not carry bags and packages himself, but was obliged to pay for the delivery of goods to his home. It was considered important not to skimp on tips, although not everyone’s salary allowed them to waste money.

The officer could not carry bags and packages himself

On the propriety of marriage
Officers were also limited in matters of marriage. In 1866, rules were approved according to which an officer had no right to marry before the age of 23. Until 28, the officer had to ask for permission to marry from his superiors, providing property security. The bride had to be chosen in accordance with the concepts of decency. The future wife had to be distinguished by “good morals and good manners,” and the girl’s social status was also taken into account. Officers were prohibited from marrying artists and divorcees who took the blame for the divorce. Getting married without permission could easily get you fired.

The officer had to ask his superiors for permission to marry

Thursdays and Tuesdays
The officers did not have to choose entertainment. Mandatory attendance at the officers' meeting was interspersed with home evenings in the officers' families. It was considered good form to host “Thursdays” or “Tuesdays,” to which colleagues and their relatives were invited. Those who served in the capital were luckier, because they could go out into the world at regularly organized balls and dinner parties. In rural areas, some landowners, wanting to prove that their society was no worse than in the cities, also liked to invite officers to evenings. The lack of theaters in the outback was compensated for by home concerts and amateur performances. The Code of Honor of the Russian Officer noted, however, that it is not customary for military personnel to dance at public masquerades.

To the barrier!

The officer's honor did not give him any privileges; rather, on the contrary, it made him even more vulnerable. Considerable courage was required by the willingness to risk one's life so as not to be dishonored. It was considered a sign of bad taste to show offence, but not do anything to sort things out with the offender. The price of words was increased by the threat of a mortal duel - a public insult inevitably entailed a duel. Duels in Russia were fought with all their might, but no imperial decrees could prohibit officers from demanding satisfaction from their offenders. An officer who endured an insult and did not challenge his enemy to a duel was considered forever disgraced. Interestingly, in 1894, special rules were issued that in some way legalized duels.

Since 1894, the court could officially rule on the necessity of a duel

According to the greatest commandment, all cases of officer quarrels were sent to the court of the society of officers, which could already decide the need for a duel. Real bratism was widespread in the first half of the 19th century. Ryleev, for example, was ready to challenge him to a duel with or without reason, and the sun of Russian poetry, Pushkin, before the infamous duel, went to the barrier at least 30 times, without, however, injuring anyone.

The era of Peter the Great is famous for the scale and strength of the latest reforms. They completely changed the lives of all segments of the population, from government officials to serfs. The most significant are the military reforms - this is the reorganization and radical change of the army of the Russian state in the period from the 14th to the 18th centuries.

Peter I is the last Tsar and first Emperor of Russia. Born in the village of Kolomenskoye on June 9, 1672. Came to power at the age of 10, albeit nominally. He spent the entire time of his reign after the overthrow of Princess Sophia on campaigns, which allowed him to bring the country to a new world level. Peter the creator of the Russian fleet and regiments, founder of the new capital - St. Petersburg, reformer. He is the first ruler of Russia to travel abroad on a Grand Embassy. He mastered many professions while traveling throughout Europe. Peter I is the winner of the Northern War, a hero and tormentor for his people. He died of illness at the age of 52, leaving no heir to his great empire.

The essence of the reforms

Peter I became interested in military affairs as a child. Amusing regiments were created especially for him, and then an amusing fleet and artillery. Games, after a decade, have become a reality. It was on this experience that the strongest army in Europe would later be founded. Army reforms were necessary for Russia during the reign of Peter the Great. They radically changed the structure, system and content of the army.

Basic principles:

• New recruitment method (recruit kits);
• Creation of a unified troop control system;
• Creation of a fleet;
• Organization of independent military production;
• Organization of the army according to the European model;
• Opening of special educational institutions.

Reasons for reforms and their purpose

The young king understood the importance of reforms, because there were enough reasons:

• The existing army consisted of militia and streltsy ranks, which did not inspire confidence in the king due to frequent riots.
• The army was incapacitated and unorganized, this was proven by the Azov campaigns;
• Proximity of war with Sweden.

The main goal: the creation of a trained and permanent army capable of leading Russia to victory in the Northern War.

This is interesting! The War with Sweden or the Northern War (1700-1721) is a conflict between Sweden and the Northern Alliance. The latter was organized by Peter I during the Great Embassy. The goal of the war is to gain access to the Baltic Sea and raise the international authority of the Russian state.

Stages of reform

The foundation for army reforms had already been laid by Alexei Mikhailovich, Peter’s father. The changes did not bring full results, and the army remained ineffective. There was no strict system of its organization. So the Streltsy army was recruited from the willing urban population. The Sagittarius, in addition to military affairs, were also engaged in crafts. There was no complete management system. Different orders controlled different parts of the army, without communicating with each other.

The military reform was multifaceted, extensive and covered more than one sphere of society. These transformations took a long time. The following directions can be roughly distinguished:

• Acquisition
• Control
• Structure
• Armament
• Education

Progress of reforms

	Organization of the Kozhukovsky campaign, during which the effectiveness of regiments of new and old types was tested. A special training fortress was built, in which the exercises were held. From 10 to 40 thousand people took part. Based on the results, Peter was convinced that he was right and began to carry out reforms;
1696 Decree “There shall be sea-going vessels”	Creation of the first military fleet in the Russian state;
	Dissolution of the old army of archers. After their uprising during the great embassy, ​​Peter I finally lost confidence in them. The king became convinced that change was necessary;
	Organization of recruitment. In total, more than 40 thousand people were recruited. Foreign commanders were invited to provide leadership;
	Publication of the Military Regulations on laws in times of conflict;
1718 - 1719	The establishment of the Military Collegium to unite all outdated orders in it;
	Creation and publication of the Maritime Charter;
	Table of Ranks - a unified system of ranks and ranks;
1701 - 1721	Development of an independent military industry;
1698 - 1721	Development of education in the fields of mathematics, geography, navigation, engineering, medicine, etc.;

In addition to all of the above, Peter also thought about rearmament of the army. This is how new guns and grenades were obtained. Foreign masters and teachers were invited. Reforms came one after another. There have been cases when changes did not achieve their goal because they were too drastic and thoughtless.

Pros and cons of military reforms

What Peter I had in mind was fully realized. Now no one in the world doubted the power of Russian weapons, because the most powerful army in Europe was defeated. However, the changes had both positive and negative results:

Pros of military reform:

• Victory in the Northern War brought not only access to the Baltic Sea, but also the status of an empire for the Russian state;
• Creation of a full-fledged and permanent army, which was capable not only of conducting combat operations, but also of winning with valor;
• Creation of our own military production, namely, independent provision of the army with weapons, uniforms, artillery, etc.;
• A strong fleet, which as such has never existed in the Russian state;
• Development of education, namely the opening of new schools and special institutions for the development of modern crafts.

Disadvantages of military reform:

• Service became mandatory for the nobility and was initially intended to be lifelong, and later 25 years;
• Complete enslavement of peasants in production;
• Heavy material costs that had a detrimental effect on the lives of ordinary people.

Historical significance of military reforms

Military reforms allowed Russia to remain the most powerful and powerful power in Europe for a long time. Thanks to these fundamental changes, Russia received the status of an empire, which completely changed the course of its history.

We were talking about permanent conscription in Russian villages of the 18th century. Now we invite you to familiarize yourself with what contemporaries thought about permanent conscription in cities and villages in the 19th century.

Military post in the assessments of contemporaries (XIX century)

Life, especially in provincial towns, became noticeably livelier with the arrival of troops, and attracting a large number of people to a small town could even stimulate it economically to some extent. From fiction it follows that the military made significant changes to the usual, established “civilian” life: “The town of B. became very cheerful when a cavalry regiment began to be stationed in it. And before that time he was afraid of how boring...” 456 One of the most striking evidence of the relationship between military and civil society in the province during the period of stationing military units is the poem by M.Yu. Lermontov “Tambov Treasurer”:

Suddenly the circle of nobles became animated;
The provincial maidens cannot be recognized;
The news has arrived: the Uhlan regiment
He will spend the winter in Tambov.
Lancers, ah! such grips...
The colonel is probably unmarried -
And the brigadier general
Of course it will give a brilliant ball.
The mothers' eyes sparkled;
But, obnoxious merchants,
Relentless Fathers
We came to thought: sabers, spurs
A disaster for painted floors...
The whole of Tambov was so worried. 457

The poet very accurately describes the experiences of Russian women when military personnel were stationed in cities:
“Oh, look here, cousin,
This!" - "Where? Major? - "Oh no!
How good he is, and the horse is a picture,
It's a pity, he seems to be a cornet...
How cleverly, boldly he got out of his way...
Would you believe it, I dreamed about him...
I couldn’t sleep afterwards...”
And then there's the girl's breasts
He quietly lifts his scarf -
And a dream that played out
The living gaze darkens slightly. 458

Gogol N.V. describes in sufficient detail the revival of city life in the provinces, when soldiers and officers took up quarters: “...The streets became colorful, became lively - in a word, they took on a completely different look. Low houses often saw a deft, stately officer passing by, going to talk to a comrade... the wooden fence between the houses was all dotted with soldiers' caps hanging in the sun; the gray overcoat was sure to stick out somewhere on the gate; in the alleys one came across soldiers with mustaches as stiff as shoe brushes. These mustaches were visible in all places... On the frontal place, a soldier with a mustache was surely washing the beard of some village wanker, who just grunted, his eyes bulging upward. The officers revived the society, which until that time consisted only of a judge, who lived in the same house with some deaconess, and a mayor. The society became even more crowded and entertaining when the brigadier general’s apartment was moved here. 459
Chekhov A.P. through the mouth of his characters, he also notes the influence of the military, primarily officers, on the sociocultural development of urban society in the middle of the 19th century: “...Maybe not in other places, but in our city the most decent, most noble and well-mannered people are the military.” 460

As provincial newspapers wrote, the military played an inspiring role in city life and especially delighted the marriageable daughters of nobles, merchants and wealthy townspeople. “Tambov Provincial Gazette” noted in 1856: “...Everything promises noisy fun. The shortage of cavaliers, which was significantly felt with the arrival of spring; the rivalry between shiny epaulettes and modest black tailcoats should give a new character to Tambov meetings.” 461
However, on the other hand, soldiers in their free time from duty wandered around the city in search of simple entertainment, which could include folk festivals, playing cards, and fist fights, drinking alcoholic beverages, wine, which could discredit the army in in the eyes of the population. 462 A similar situation was typical for recruits, who immediately after the oath were distributed to apartments and transferred under the direct supervision of mayors, whose duties, among other duties, included the following: “By depriving them of the way to handle drunkenness, especially at night, taverns and , if there are beer houses, they will lock them up, and for all this at night the recruits will not be allowed to leave their apartments.” 463 Here the formulation of job responsibilities speaks for itself, thereby showing the weakest aspects of the behavior of military personnel at the post.

A letter from the Tambov governor dated October 24, 1826 just says that in order to improve the condition of the cities, even from the point of view of a representative of the city administration, it seemed necessary to first solve the problem of housing in the city, since “over the last 10 years, very few of the nobles have moved to the city... and their resettlement to the cities is stopped by a military checkpoint that has been going on in the local province for more than 9 years, which is confirmed by the reviews of the nobles...” Thus, having acquired a good arrangement of premises in the village and being free from all duties, the governor says that “it is unlikely that in the current situation of constant service he will decide to sacrifice capital for the construction of a house again in the city, with which he will be subject to the correction of city duties, ... which sent either in kind and may embarrass his family or require the payment of a rather significant amount.” 464 This circumstance, as the governor points out, was unpleasant for any citizen, and even more so for representatives of the noble class.
There were other opinions on the system of troop billets in cities and villages, such as: “...Stationing in the middle provinces was pure freedom. The squadron commander lived in a large village as a real landowner and ruled it as if he were at home. In addition to the village in which the headquarters was located, several neighboring villages were assigned to the squadron location area, which brought great benefits to the guests. The soldiers had several houses, from which they received lunch in turn. This was not a burden for the residents, and the soldiers always had excellent food.”
In the house where the soldier lived, he was considered a member of the family. This opinion was also shared by M. Bogdanovich in the middle of the 19th century, who described the condition of the military, who in the courtyards enjoyed welding or the same food as their hosts’ families. Experience shows that such maintenance, together with the government ration, is quite sufficient, and in the southern grain-growing and some Moscow region provinces, villagers often refuse the soldiers' dacha provisions that go to the artel, and feed their guests with their own bread. 465 Because the soldiers helped their masters in the work, the latter gave the horses plenty of straw, and often oats... However, in reality, about the existence of payment for feeding people... many Russian peasants until the mid-1840s. didn't even suspect it. 466

A very interesting question when considering the problem of relations between military and civilians is whether the population tried to extract any benefit from this situation. It is necessary to mention that, after the government began to take steps to replace natural housing with cash collections from the population, the practice of purchasing premises from private individuals developed significantly. And such cases are quite frequent, so we can
conclude that these real estate transactions generated significant income. So, in 1865, the city of Kozlov suffered a big fire, and to relieve the residents of the city, on the occasion of the fire, they wanted to move the 44th infantry reserve battalion to the city of Borisoglebsk. But, paradoxically, some homeowners in the city of Kozlov turned to the head of the Moscow
military district with a request to leave the 44th infantry reserve battalion in their city and at the same time expressed a desire, when finishing up the burnt houses, to adapt them into barracks to accommodate the lower ranks of the battalion. On this matter, the following correspondence began between the Minister of War and the Ministry of Internal Affairs:
“The homeowners announced that the presence of this unit in Kozlov cannot embarrass the residents, since the city duties, which consist in the preferential allocation of apartments to officers, due to the small number of officers in the battalion, are not burdensome, and also do not concern the burned-out residents, who are exempt from this duty by law...." 467 Thus, the quartering of a battalion cannot cause an increase in prices, since the city is located in the middle of a grain-producing area. On the contrary, in the city of Borisoglebsk it is possible to find only four vacant houses. Usman and Lebedyan are convenient for battalion distribution, but they are designated for the deployment of field troops. And thus, it was decided to leave the troops in Kozlov. 468 However, this matter had its continuation, since in August of the same year, a memorandum was sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs from the honorary citizen Rogov, Kozlov merchants Poretsky and Polyanovsky: “We are ready to take up residence and give up our houses for the deployment of troops, accepting the housing allowance of the gentlemen officers for themselves, without any expenses for the city.” Nevertheless, the opinions of the townspeople regarding the state billet varied greatly, and the mayor, on behalf of the society, spoke negatively about the stationing of troops in the city, despite the statements of the merchants. 469 Also on September 20, 1865, the governor wrote to the Ministry of Internal Affairs that “the townspeople are generally against it, since apartments will rise in price and fire victims will not be able to find housing in the winter, and therefore housing the battalion in the city of Kozlov will be burdensome for residents. And other district cities of the Tambov province, not occupied by field troops, due to the poverty of the inhabitants and small buildings, cannot satisfy all the conditions for quartering troops in a barracks arrangement.” 470 The reason for the persistence of Poretsky and Polyanovsky was material benefits. The above-mentioned gentlemen directly stated about this: “What right does society have to our property, when we, offering the government the services of giving our houses for the quartering of troops, do not attract even small expenses other than profit, because the maintenance provided to the troops naturally remains in the hands of our merchants?” , and the amounts paid for lodging, as is the collection of zemstvo tax, do not apply to the city.” 471

As a result of this trial, the material interests of wealthy citizens were satisfied and the troops were abandoned by order of the Minister of War. 472 Soon the premises were hired, which was reported by the governor to the Ministry of Internal Affairs in November 1865. 473 However, the material interests of certain segments of the population did not always find support from the state, especially when it came to financial costs and various lawsuits from the average person.
In the magazine “Economic Index” for 1861, the following reflections on the topic of military billets were published: “...Ask the old mustachioed captain what miracles he will tell you. There was a blessed time, as the old men call it, when a company for a company commander was the same as a heavenly estate. Especially somewhere off the beaten path, in reserves
the soldiers stood in permanent quarters in the villages, the provisions went entirely into the pocket of the company commander, and people went to work.” 474 This author's opinion is especially interesting since he is a military man. And his view is especially valuable. However, despite the fact that the author himself talks about the extraordinary severity of standing, he is against barracks. And his motivation is quite interesting and convincing. The barracks, in his opinion, will deprive the soldier of his native environment of the villagers: “... This soldier retires, or goes on indefinite leave - he is a dead member of society.” 475 Therefore, the author speaks out in favor of taking into account the capabilities of residents when performing permanent duty and proposes “to pay the residents for everything in good faith; build playpens and other utility rooms not in an economic way, but from taxes.” 476
In general, the assessments of a number of contemporaries published in the 60s. XIX century on the pages of many magazines, are a valuable source for studying the issue of people’s attitudes towards military posts. The emphasis on the problem during this period may have been due to the fact that in 1861, papers with a draft law on permanent conscription appeared in the legislative mechanisms of the empire, which resulted in publications in periodicals. One way or another, in these articles various opinions were expressed regarding the practice of regular service and the attitude of the common man towards it. All contemporaries, without exception, spoke about the severity and unevenness of conscription. But still, each of the authors had their own approach and their own vision of the problem.

In particular, the author of the article in the “Military Collection” speaks out about the inconveniences of paying housing taxes in kind, and especially singles out the countryside in this regard. In addition, he writes that these inconveniences apply not only to ordinary people, but also to their guests, military personnel: “... the inconveniences of apartment
duties in kind have long been experienced both by the townsfolk themselves and by their guests - officers... In many county towns, where housing duties are served in kind, the owners of the houses to which an officer is assigned pay off, pay either the state for housing duties, or the officer himself, who pays extra and rents decent housing.” 477 However, the article says that in very few localities, residents decided to serve their housing duties with money, for which purpose they decided to annually contribute a certain amount of money to the public committee from taxes or from their souls, or from capital and rent apartments. An example of this is the Alekseevskaya Count Sheremetyevo patrimony in the Voronezh province... where 25 - 30 k. in silver from each tax. 478 To avoid all the above inconveniences, the author proposes the introduction of monetary fees instead of in-kind conscription. At the same time, the above example is given as evidence of a successful innovation.
Another author of the early 1860s, A. Chuzhbinsky, advocates converting in-kind conscription into cash and building barracks. His article focuses on the particularly deplorable situation of the poor, since, in the author’s opinion, the military post bears the brunt of it precisely on the poorest segments of the population. In cities there are also
apartment commissions, and the contribution in kind is replaced by a contribution of a certain amount paid by the landlord. A person with little means must serve his service in kind, which is why he lives in a house and does not receive income from it. As a result, it is the poorest class that is constantly burdened with housing. 479

The ironic statement of another author of the same period regarding apartment commissions sounds very clear: “...The chairman of the apartment commission in county towns is the mayor. Election deputies - they almost always come from officials and the nobility - people like the Dobchinskys and Bobchinskys, from merchants some broker is a servant of the police, from the burghers - a publican, from commoners - making his way in crumbs from the same police. Who would dare to vote against such a sovereign chairman as the mayor? True, in most towns where only disabled teams are housed, such a commission has very little work to do: assign 7–10 apartments for officers, including lodging guards, and 150–200 for soldiers. 480 The author of the article advocates the chairmanship of housing duties by the leader of the nobility or the mayor, hoping, apparently, in this way to restore order in the housing commissions. In general, it should be noted that the work of housing commissions very often caused dissatisfaction, both from the average person and from officials at various levels. This is evidenced by the report of the Tambov governor: “...In apartment commissions, the writing procedure is in good condition. But in Tambov, a malfunction was noticed in the equation of permanent conscription for residents, which arose more from the fact that elected deputies, and especially nobles, are all avoiding service, which does not bring either salary or other benefits, under various pretexts.” 481
Many researchers stood in the 19th century. agreed that conscription in kind, which at first glance should have been cheaper than others for the government, turned out to be in fact very expensive, because this conscription, while burdening the townsfolk, impeded their well-being; and with the decline in the welfare of the residents
government income decreased even more. 482 Thus, to summarize, we can say that all contemporaries, without exception, unanimously noted the severity and ruin of housing for the population and that the state suffered significant material losses. Another distinctive feature of standing is its unevenness. The opinions of researchers differed only on the issues of reforming the permanent residence. The range of proposals on this matter is quite wide and varied, starting with the need to leave troops in ordinary apartments, mainly in rural areas, and paying significant attention only to equal distribution, and ending with the urgent need to introduce a barracks system.

It is important to note that at the end of the 19th century, when there was no longer a formal military station in kind, troops continued to actively use the houses of urban and rural residents for quartering troops. In the memoirs of V. Littauer, it is noted that military personnel sometimes had disputes with the local population, who did not want to take guests.
Then the officers used one fairly effective technique. They asked for a written explanation that the residents objected to the deployment of the military, but the residents categorically refused to sign any official papers, preferring to accommodate the “uninvited” guests in their homes. 483
Considering all of the above, we can identify several “painful” points of contact between the army and the civilian population:
− sharing a dormitory for a long time caused significant domestic discomfort;
− there was legal vulnerability of the urban and rural population;
− the military’s performance of police and control functions made them practically unpunished on the ground;
− conscious activity of the state, in which it, understanding the population’s fear of permanent conscription, often tried to use permanent service as a lever of pressure;
− the unevenness of regular service both in terms of geographical scope (concentration around capitals, border regions, etc.), and in the amount of distribution locally, in the choice and purpose of houses, the inability to have a sufficient choice of premises that meet the requirements of military units, led to that the best of
households attracted the most attention.
Thus, it is impossible to name the only reason for dissatisfaction with the cohabitation of military and civilians, just as it is impossible to talk about discrimination between one part and the other. Given the necessity of such a situation, naturally, there were reasons for mutual discontent, which, however, did not stem from the rightness of the soldiers, on the one hand, and the townspeople,
villagers - on the other, but from an internal conflict with alien circumstances imposed from above, in which all the most pressing everyday issues had to be resolved together with strangers. Such a hostel could not but cause conflicts on a variety of problems in the everyday life of the military and civilian population.

455 Bolotov A.T. Decree. op. P. 332.
456 Gogol N.V. Stroller // Collection cit.: In 6 vols. M., 1959. T. 3. P. 160.
457 Lermontov M.Yu. Tambov Treasurer // Works in two volumes. M., 1988. T. 1. P. 530.
458 Lermontov M.Yu. Works in two volumes. M., 1988. T. 1. P. 531.
459 Gogol N.V. Stroller / Works in two volumes. M., 1965. T. 1. P. 582.
460 Chekhov A.P. Three sisters // Selected works in three volumes. M., 1964. T. 3. P. 526.
461 Tambov Provincial Gazette. 1856. No. 41. P. 2.
462 Life of the Russian army in the 18th and early 20th centuries / Compiled by S.V. Karpuschenko. M., 1999. P. 37.
463 Quoted. by: Belousov S.V. Provincial society and the Patriotic War of 1812 (based on materials from the Middle Volga region). Penza, 2007. P. 94.
464 GRIA. F. 1286. Op. 3. D. 79. L. 41–42.
465 Bogdanovich M. About the hygiene (preservation of health) of the Russian soldier // Military Journal. 1855. No. 4. P. 9.
466 See: Lapin V.V. Regular service in Russia // English Embankment, 4: Yearbook of the St. Petersburg Scientific Society of Historians and
archivists. pp. 149–150.
467 RGIA. F. 1287. Op. 26. D. 17. L. 50.
468 Ibid. L. 51.
469 Ibid. L. 55.
470 Ibid. L. 59.
471 Ibid. L. 59.
472 RGIA. F. 1287. Op. 26. D. 17. L. 62.
473 Ibid. L. 64.
474 A few words about military billets // Economic Index. 1861. No. 53. P. 478.
475 Ibid. P. 479.
476 Ibid. P. 480.
477 Proceedings of the commission to determine the allowance of army troops // Military collection. 1863. No. 1. P. 125 – 127.
478 Ibid. P. 128.