Who implemented the idea of ​​military settlements. Military settlement

Department of Military Settlements of the War Ministry.

Prerequisites for creation

At the same time, military settlements were established in the internal provinces, with the purpose of providing care (monitoring) for lower ranks who were retired due to wounds, illnesses and old age. Thus, under Peter the Great, settlements of soldiers were organized in areas conquered from Sweden; Later, similar settlements were established in Kazan, Orenburg, Smolensk and other provinces.

The indigenous inhabitants of the area chosen for settlement were resettled to the Novorossiysk Territory, and about 70 thousand rubles were required to feed 4 thousand peasants during the resettlement. The peasants moved without any resistance, but on the way many of them died from cold, hunger, drunkenness and homesickness.

The battalion assigned for the settlement was made up of the best lower ranks of the regiment: predominantly married lower ranks were appointed among the villagers, and single men were allowed to marry peasant women on state estates, and the poorest were given cash allowances for weddings and establishment. The lower ranks of the battalion being settled were placed in houses abandoned by the peasants; they were given agricultural tools, draft animals and seeds for sowing fields from the treasury.

When establishing military settlements, “for the most convenient management of them and the suppression of any disputes between villagers and outsiders,” it was accepted as a rule not to allow private property within the boundaries of the settlements. At first, the treasury entered into an agreement with the landowners regarding the cession of their lands for military settlements. There are indications that landowners who did not agree to cede their lands were forced to do so by various means; Thus, Count Arakcheev ordered the estate of one landowner near Novgorod to be surrounded by a ditch, and the landowner, cut off from the river and the road, was forced to give in.

Abolition

After the accession of Emperor Alexander II to the throne, adjutant D. A. Stolypin was sent to the southern military settlements. Having visited all the settlements, Stolypin reported that the population of the districts was greatly impoverished: many owners did not have draft animals, gardening, which once provided significant income, had fallen into decay; buildings in the districts required constant repair; To provide food for the troops stationed in a military settlement, such an amount of land was needed that in many districts inconvenient areas were left for the villagers' own farming. Both the local and the main authorities of the military settlements then came to the conviction that the military settlements were unprofitable in material terms and did not achieve their goal.

• “Regulations on the full composition of the settled foot regiment and its duties”, approved on November 19, 1826;
• “Regulations on the military settlement of regular cavalry”, approved on May 5, 1827;
• Speransky M. M. About military settlements. - SPb.: type. Military headquarters settlements, 1825. - 32 p.
• Great Russian Encyclopedia: In 30 volumes/Chairman of scientific editor. Council Yu. S. Osipov, editor-in-chief S. L. Kravets. T.5 Grand Duke - Ascending node of the orbit. - M.:BRE, 2006. - 783 p.: ill.: map. - P.550. ISBN 5-85270-334-6 (Vol. 5)
• Bogdanovich M.“The history of the reign of the emperor. Alexander I" (vols. V and VI)
• "Revolt of military villagers in 1831"(ed. "Russian Antiquity", 1871)
• "Count Arakcheev and the military P."(ed. "Russian Antiquity", 1871) The revolt of military villagers in the cholera of 1831 // Historical Bulletin, 1893. - T. 53. - No. 8. - P. 390-402. ; Mayevsky (ib., 1873, vol. VIII), K. Detlov (ib, 1885, vol. XLV), von Bradke (“Russian Arch.”, 1875, books 1 and 3), Krymov (“Military Collection.” , 1862, t. XXIV), Romanovich (“Russian Arch.”, 1868), Yarosh (“Russian Star.”, 1886, t. XLIX) and Stolshin (“Russian Arch.”, 1874)
• “Military P. under Count Witte” (“Ancient and Modern Russia”, 1880, No. 7)
• Alexandrov, “Note on former military personnel P.” (“Russian Archive”, 1873, book II)
• Boguslavsky, “Arakcheevshchina” (1882)
• “Novgorod Collection” (1865, issue 5). Wed. book IV Part I of the Code of Military Regulations, ed. 1838
• Construction of military settlements (From the notes of retired Major A.P. Rudynovsky). 1820-1821 / Message N. Rudynovsky // Russian antiquity, 1873. - T 8. - No. 10. - P. 594-596

Libmonster ID: RU-8177

Military settlements have existed in Russia for a long time. Back in the 17th century, the eastern and southern borders of the Moscow state were guarded by settled troops who were engaged in agriculture along with military service. They repeatedly resorted to creating military settlements to protect the outskirts in the 18th century. Peter I, queens Anna and Elizabeth established settlements on separate borders of the empire. With the expansion of borders, such settlements lost their significance and the villagers merged with the local population.

The military settlements of the 19th century are not in any continuity with them. They arose in a completely different environment and were intended to solve completely different problems.

The reasons that caused the emergence of military settlements in the 19th century began to take shape during the reign of Paul I. Frightened by the Pugachev uprising and the French revolution of the 18th century messenger, Paul I sought to strengthen autocracy through the militarization of the country. By introducing merciless military discipline, Paul I sought to protect himself from revolutionary uprisings.

He introduced the Prussian cane system into the army, expelled from it everything living and initiative associated with the name of Suvorov, and tried to subordinate the life of the entire civilian population to the same military order.

The idea of ​​militarization of the civilian population, the idea of ​​petty regulation of private life, and most importantly, the grandiose drill system were later reflected in military settlements.

Back in 1778, in a letter to Panin, Paul I proposed placing shelves in “fixed apartments” together with families. “By placing the shelves together,” he wrote, “they will always be under the eyes of their superiors,” and when the shelves are scattered, “then various whims and excesses occur” (“Russian Antiquity” for 1882, p. 407).

During his short reign, Paul did not have time to take measures to introduce military settlements. This was partially accomplished during the reign of Alexander I. But Alexander I, who covered up the idea of ​​the absolute power of the monarch, emphasized by Paul I, with promises to create “representative institutions,” retained the harsh Pavlovian order only in the army.

There was one place in Russia where, on the scale of the estate, what Paul I aspired to on the scale of the empire was realized: this is Gruzino, the estate of Count Arakcheev with its purely military orders.

Two epithets could be applied to everything that existed in Arakcheev’s possessions: uniformity and lawlessness. The houses were built according to the same plan, stretched out in one line, at equal intervals and painted the same pink color. All the peasants were dressed the same. Their whole life was regulated to the smallest detail, right down to the obligation to report every egg laid by a chicken. Without Arakcheev’s knowledge, no one could do anything. Even the most intimate aspects of life were invaded by Arakcheev’s soldier’s boot. He compiled “Brief Rules for Peasant Mothers of the Georgian Fatherland” and “Rules on Weddings.” Arakcheev ordered marriage pairs. If the intended victims did not agree to marry, he imposed a short resolution to “agree”... and they were “agreed.” From the belvedere of the count's palace, Arakcheev could see all his twenty-two villages through a telescope. “There (in Georgian. - N.L.) we involuntarily had to remember our deceased father (about Pavel. - N.L.), and in the person of the owner of this estate we saw the devoted servant of the deceased" (Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich "Alexander I ". T. I. p. 272).

Arakcheev was, as it were, a living bridge between the reigns of Paul I and Alexander I. The connection between these two reigns was clearly revealed in 1810 in the organization of military settlements.

The idea of ​​military settlements received its first practical approval in 1810, when the inevitability of war with France began to clearly emerge. This required increasing the already significantly grown army and finding funds to maintain it. Russia's military expenditures were already so prohibitively large that they led the country to a difficult financial situation.

page 115
Minister Speransky was called upon to find a way out of this situation. He proposed introducing severe austerity, reviewing the budgets of all departments and establishing control over government costs. But cuts in military spending could only mean a reduction in the army, and Alexander I could not allow this. Consequently, it was necessary to look for ways to reduce the cost of maintaining an army. In the opinion of Alexander I, this was the way to organize military settlements.

Of course, it is no coincidence that it was at this time that Alexander I visited Georgia for the first time (July 7, 1810). He was delighted with the “abundance and organization” that he found there, and entrusted the leadership of the military settlements to Arakcheev.

The practical work of creating settlements was entrusted to General Lavrov. Alexander I specially sent him to Gruzin to look at the structure there. “In order not to waste any more time,” Alexander I wrote to Arakcheev, “I ordered Lavrov to go to you in Gruzino for a personal conversation with you... I liked your drawings very much, and it seems to me that it would be better to come up with a clever idea. Perhaps show Lavrov - everything your rural structure" (Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich "Alexander I". T. IV, p. 24).

In the summer of 1810, Lavrov began searching for a suitable area for settlement. In the Bobyletsky eldership, Klimovets povet, Mogilev province, a plot of land was found, provided by a special agreement for the use of state-owned peasants for three years. It was decided to terminate the agreement, resettle the peasants to the Novorossiysk region, and settle soldiers in their place.

November 9, 1810 addressed to the general. Lavrov was followed by a decree proposing to begin organizing settlements. The peasants were the last to learn about the misfortune that had befallen them. Throughout 1811, they were building, acquiring new houses and not suspecting the impending disaster. They were informed of their fate just two months before the resettlement, in February 1812. 4 thousand peasants were resettled to Crimea, and the conditions of the move were such that a significant part of them died on the road.

A reserve battalion of the Yelets Musketeer Regiment, composed of soldiers who knew agriculture, was moved into the empty peasant houses. They were given land, livestock, implements and seeds. The soldier had to become a farmer and feed himself.

The War of 1812 interrupted this experience. Already in July 1812, the settled battalion went to the front, and when the survivors returned back, they found their farm plundered.

The war of 1812 - 1813 - 1814 and the devastation associated with it raised the question of the position of the Russian army even more acutely. Europe, in which Alexander I achieved military hegemony, by this time had created a new type of army. Its two features were mass character and mobility. The prerequisites for the creation of such an army were “... the social and political emancipation of the bourgeoisie and the small peasantry. The bourgeoisie gives money, the peasants provide soldiers; the emancipation of both classes from feudal and guild fetters is a necessary condition for the emergence of the current colossal armies...” (F. Engels, Selected War Works, Vol. I, p. 23, 1937).

The army was built according to a completely different principle in feudal-serf Russia. Tsarist Russia acted in the international arena as a stronghold of reaction, and its influence on European affairs was based on military power, the basis of which was the old, serf-dominated army. The presence of a colossal army urgently raised the question of its financing. In the 1816 budget, military spending accounted for 54.5% of the total budget, and the total amount of spending doubled compared to 1810. The army absorbed all income and jeopardized the country's financial situation. This forced Alexander I to return again to his idea of ​​​​organizing military settlements. But the implementation of this idea now encountered new difficulties. During the war years, serious changes took place in the army. Contact with the bourgeois countries of Europe had a huge impact on the soldiers. They stopped considering themselves a blind tool in the hands of their superiors. “Soldiers who returned from abroad,” V. Karazin reported to Kochubey, “and especially those who served in the corps located in France, returned with completely new thoughts... People began to reason more. They judge that it is difficult to serve, that there are great penalties, that they receive little salary, that they are punished severely, etc. ("History of the Russian Army and Navy", p. 94).

Alexander I, however, was firmly convinced that a soldier could not reason, and if the soldier did speak, it was only due to corrupting influence from the outside. “Our people are rogues or fools,” the king spoke contemptuously of his subjects. Alexander I considered the only means of strengthening the army to be isolating it from all other layers of society, checking the officers, strengthening

page 116
training to the maximum. He hoped to accomplish this “with the help of built-in settlements.

Immediately after the war of 1812 - 1814, brutal drills began again in the army. Even Konstantin, brother of Alexander I, an avid “Gatchina resident,” was forced to admit: “I have been serving for more than twenty years and I can tell the truth, even during the time of the late Emperor I was one of the first officers at the front; but now they are so too clever that you won’t even be hired... Yes, I have such thoughts about the guard now... that I told the guard to stand on their hands with their feet up and their heads down and march, so they will march" (N. Epanchin "Tactical preparation of the Russian army before the campaign of 1828 - 1829", p. 2 , 3).

The growth of revolutionary sentiment among the peasantry, caused by the War of 1812, also pushed Alexander I towards the path of eliminating all troubles through military settlements.

The militarization of the peasantry and the introduction of military order in the countryside were, in the opinion of Alexander I, to ensure complete order in the country. Alexander I began to implement his plan in the fall of 1816.

In fact, military settlements, in which Alexander I saw salvation from all troubles, absorbed huge amounts of money and, as a result, turned out to be unprofitable.

The "Code on Military Settlements" sets out the principles of organizing military settlements. A plot of land inhabited by state peasants was allocated for the regiment being settled. If it included landowners' lands, they were either bought out from the landowners together with the peasants or exchanged for others located outside the area of ​​military settlements. This area received the name of the district of the settled regiment. State-owned peasants living in the district turned into military villagers.

The settled regiment was divided into two parts: 1) active, consisting of two battalions, and 2) settled, consisting of one battalion. In addition, there was a reserve battalion.

The settled battalions were composed of soldiers of the active part of “impeccable behavior”, mostly married and always former farmers, from the wealthiest peasants, aged from 18 to 45 years. Those included in the settled battalion were given the title of master-villagers. They made up the bulk of the settlements. The owner-villagers had to support the soldiers of the two active battalions and their families. For each owner there were two soldiers from active units, who were called guests. The treasury was supposed to issue some provisions to the guests, transferring them into the hands of the owners. The guests were obliged to help their owners during their free time from military service, and the soldiers' families were completely dependent on the latter. The owner-villagers were also obliged to supply fodder.

The owner-villagers had their own farm: land, lambing, equipment. The treasury supplied those entering the army as masters from the soldiers. The settled part was provided with complete settled life, and it never went on a campaign. The owner-villagers, in addition to farming, also had to engage in front-line service: three days a week were devoted to military activities and three days to agricultural work.

That part of the indigenous population that, due to poverty, was not included in the settled battalion, was distributed into active units and non-combatant units, or was used in government work.

The children of all military villagers were considered cantonists. Cantonists were divided into three ages: 1) small - up to 7 years, 2) medium - from 7 to 12 years and 3) large - from 12 to 18 years. Older cantonists were enrolled in the reserve battalion and trained in military affairs, but lived with their parents and were obliged to help them in their work.

These are, in the most general terms, the principles of organizing military settlements. But in reality, life in military settlements was not built according to these principles at all.

The settlement began in August 1816 with the battalion of the grenadier Count Arakcheev regiment in the Vysotsk volost, Novgorod province. Two settlement areas were planned: Novgorod and Mogilev provinces - for the settlement of infantry regiments - and the southern provinces (Kharkov, Kherson, Yekaterinoslav) - for the settlement of cavalry.

By the end of 1818, there were military settlements in the following places: 6 regiments of the 1st Grenadier Division in the Novgorod province, streams of the 2nd Infantry Division in the Mogilev province, 3rd Ulan division in the Kharkov province, Ulan Bug division in the Kherson province . and one artillery company at the Okhtensky powder factory.

In 1821 and 1824, the number of settlements was increased, and by the end of the reign of Alexander I, the military settlements consisted of: in the Novgorod settlement - 90 battalions, in the Mogilev settlement -

In a military settlement.

From an engraving by M. V. Dobuzhinsky. Museum of the USSR Revolution.

12 battalions, in Sloboda-Ukrainian - 36 battalions and 240 squadrons, 32 Furstadt companies, 2 sapper companies and 3 companies of the Okhtensky pea plant.

On January 1, 1826, in the districts of military settlements there were all the lower ranks, including the troops assigned for work, 156,043, cantonists - 154,062. The number of all those under command: gr. Arakcheev reached 748,519 people (Report for 1825 to Nicholas I. Based on the book by P. P. Evstafiev “The Uprising of the Novgorod Military Villagers.” M. 1934).

Military settlements were a large organization, covering hundreds of thousands of people. Alexander I firmly intended to settle the entire army, and Arakcheev “drew up a special settlement map for the entire army.

Until 1831, Nicholas I continued to expand military settlements. Only the grandiose uprising of the Novgorod villagers, which threatened to develop into an all-Russian peasant war, forced Nicholas I to abolish military settlements.

Already from a cursory presentation of the general principles of organizing settlements, one could notice that the conversion of peasants into military villagers played a huge role in this event.

Only state peasants, who were the freest part of the Russian peasantry, were subject to conversion. They were personally free and only contributed a certain rent and taxes to the treasury. Thus, they had some incentives to develop their farm. Transformation into military peasants meant the cruelest military-serf bondage, almost slavery, in comparison with which even the position of the landowner peasants seemed enviable.

As already indicated above, the most prosperous part of the peasants were converted into master villagers. Since some soldiers from the active army were also made master-villagers, the number of farms increased sharply, which led to a decrease in the land norm. “To feed one tax in all steppe places, therefore the most fertile, at least 6 acres of arable land and 3 acres of meadows are assigned. In the settlements of the Novgorod province, only 4.5 acres of arable land and 1 ,5 tithes of meadows and pastures,” says a note to Nicholas I (“Century of the War Ministry,” vol. IV, book I, appendix No. 15, p. 57).

The situation was further complicated by the fact that the number of guests only in rare cases

page 118
yah was legal, i.e. 2 people, but usually it significantly exceeded the norm and reached 9 people.

Very soon after the creation of the settlements, the owner-villagers stopped issuing soldiers' salaries and provisions for their guests. Arakcheev set the task for the district commanders - “to take care of accelerating the transition of food in his district to the duties of military settlements.” To encourage him, he introduced a complex bonus system that stimulated the activities of the command staff in this direction.

The officers, striving to earn bonuses, began with all the ardor to carry out this event. An example of such enterprise can be the head of the Old Russian settlement, Gen. Mayevsky. In an effort to prove that it is very profitable for the villagers to keep guests, Mayevsky wrote in his order: “And if we take as an example the proverb, justified by time and experience, that at three the fourth is always full, then from this it is obvious that the significant benefit of any owner who adopts thus: a new member in his family" ("Novgorod Collection". Issue IV, p. 239. Novgorod. 1866).

But this was by no means the only form of exploitation of the owner-villagers. There were dozens of other methods of robbery.

Very often the owner-villager was torn away for government work. At the same time, he received 10 kopecks per day, while the usual daily wage of a farm laborer was 50 - 60 kopecks, and sometimes reached a ruble.

They were forced to do some work for free. It was the refusal of the villagers to mow government-issued hay in the time of need (and 103 thousand poods of it had to be mowed) that served as the reason for the famous Chuguev uprising of 1819.

Running your own farm was extremely complicated by the fact that very often the meadows were 40 - 50 versts away, and the pastures were sometimes 10 - 12 versts away. The villagers systematically lacked hay, and their livestock died of hunger. In 1824, the villagers of the Old Russian districts were forced to buy at their own expense a huge amount of hay - 1,169,672 pounds.

It seems that there was not a single event in military settlements that was not aimed at robbing the villagers. For example, there was a situation:

“To support the military villagers-owners in unforeseen financial needs for the household, a loan capital is established in the settled battalion...”

It was formed by “a deduction from each military villager-owner when issuing a salary of 1 ruble per third” (“Institutions on military settlements.” Part 1, § 157).

Under such a plausible pretext, a very significant amount of money was forcibly withheld from the villagers' salaries. The villager was almost never able to get a loan, because the committee in charge of issuing loans was personally responsible for the money and, in case of non-repayment, was obliged to compensate for losses from personal funds. Of course, there were no people willing to risk both pockets.

In fact, the management had complete control over this borrowed capital.

The establishment of spare bread stores was of the same predatory nature. The funds of these stores were made up of one-time collections after the harvest. Soon the villagers borrowed the same bread with the obligation to return it in double and triple amounts.

There was also a system of monetary fines for violating the rules; and since all life was minutely regulated, there was no way to avoid them.

In general, Arakcheev’s ingenuity in pumping money out of the villagers was inexhaustible. So, he obliged all villagers to go to the company bathhouse every Saturday, for which they charged 4 kopecks. per person. This amounted to a large amount for a family.

All these levies were three to four times higher than the amount of taxes levied before.

The serf-like nature of military settlements was reflected with particular force in the fact that with the transition of the peasant to the position of a peasant, he no longer owned his farm. At any moment he could be deprived of everything.

“Bad and careless owners are deprived of their house, land, all benefits from the treasury in the settlement presented to them and are discharged from military village-owners to active battalions,” says the “Institution on Military Settlements” (Part I, § 87).

The villager kept the household from the treasury and for this he served corvee (government and public works), contributed quitrent (borrowed capital, fines, penalties), paid in kind (maintenance of guests, supply of firewood, bricks) and finally paid the blood tax (his children completed settled regiment).

Unlike the landowner peasant, the peasant, instead of one type of duty, served all three. With all this he was

page 119
still a soldier, completely devoid of personal boots.

Since military service took up most of men’s time, the entire burden of housekeeping fell on women. Their life was also strictly regulated. None of them had the right to sell any of their property without the permission of the company committee: no chickens, no eggs, no butter, no wool.

In general, Arakcheev was a virtuoso in the field of regulation. But only the lives of people, but also the behavior of livestock were strictly prescribed. “The route of daily marches was written with equal precision for the soldier and the cow... the cow was treated like a gun,” recalls the gene. Mayevsky.

A textbook on the history of the USSR talks about the military regulation of the life of villagers:

“Twice a day, a non-commissioned officer walked around the houses, keeping an eye on cleanliness and order, and brutally punishing those who violated them. Field work was carried out under the command of a corporal. Getting up, going to the field to work, having dinner, going to bed - the villagers did everything according to military signals and the drum battle. All peasant women had to light the stoves at the same time; it was strictly forbidden to turn on the light at night... For the slightest disobedience, the settlers, their wives and children were subjected to cruel corporal punishment" ("Russia in the 19th century", p. 118. Vol. II. Edited by Prof. M. V. Nechkina).

This was the situation of the main part of the peasantry converted into military settlers. The situation was no better for the other part - the soldiers of the reserve, active and working battalions.

As mentioned above, the poor part of the peasantry, unfit for military service, was used in government work.

In the districts of military visits, enormous construction work was going on: forests were cut down, swamps were drained, stone was broken, bricks were made, peasant huts were demolished and extertsirhauses, guild houses, headquarters houses, churches, infirmaries, shops, and stables were built. Such a scale of construction would have required enormous strain on the treasury, but Arakcheev found an easy way out by using cheap soldier labor.

The daily wage of a soldier per day was 25 kopecks, while the daily wage of landowners and other private individuals ranged from 60 kopecks to 1 ruble.

The same system of cheating and abuse that was applied to the owner-villagers flourished here completely.

The everyday side of life for soldiers in active units was even more difficult than for other villagers. They lived 8 people in one room, and if one of them got married, then his family settled right there, in the same common cramped room. They ate very poorly, as they received grub from impoverished villagers, who “often go without salt for 10 days. The villagers cook food - cabbage soup with cabbage, whitened with milk or vegetable oil; but never with meat...” ("Count Arakcheev and military settlements", p. 205. St. Petersburg. 1871).

An exhaustive description of the soldier’s position is given by the already quoted author of “A Look at Military Settlements”:

“Here it is again impossible to refrain, Most Gracious Sovereign, from the question: what is the prosperity promised to this, perhaps, wounded warrior? He lives in a barracks, in which exorbitant cleanliness is required of him, he does not know women, he has no property, he bears the entire burden of military service and, in addition, performs other hard work, such as: digging canals, carrying stones, clearing tulle, making roads, helping the owner in field work, and if he enjoys good food, then only by donating part of the salary he receives "Bot Sovereign, the position of an active soldier!" (“Centenary of the War Ministry.” Part IV. Book I. Appendix No. 15, p. 58).

The life of the officers also took place under strict supervision. They tried in every possible way to isolate them, to rob them from any outside influence.

The enormous importance Alexander I attached to this can be seen from his letter to Arakcheev, received by the latter on March 4, 1824. Alexander I writes: “Paying vigilant attention to everything that relates to our military settlements, my eyes are now diligently looking through notes about travelers. Everyone who travels to Staraya Russa becomes wonderful to me. On March 2, retired Major General Verigin went to Staraya Russa , 47 Jaeger Regiment, Colonel Aklecheev. Maybe they went about their own business, but in the present century caution is not useless" (Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich "Alexander I". T. II, p. 645). The letter ends with a stern order: “In general, order Morkovnikov and the military authorities to pay vigilant and thoughtful attention to those coming from St. Petersburg to the region.” So the king himself exercised personal control over his beloved brainchild.

All even somewhat progressive elements within the army itself were immediately “seized.” Even the simply educated

Drilling soldiers in a military settlement.

From a painting by A. V. Moravov.

and cultured people who had an interest in public issues were not allowed into the officer corps of military settlements. The bet was placed on rude, ignorant “fruntoviks” - real Gatchina residents.

“In the life of the settled officer,” writes an eyewitness, “there were no dark or bright ones; there was only one, so to speak, colorless side, an oppressive heavy routine that ate away at every human ability - a decisive absence of any reasonable thought and word. In the life of our officers mental life, higher needs and the like could almost not exist... books were considered an unaffordable luxury" (Krymov, "Memoirs of officers of the Novgorod settlement", p. 443. 1862).

An analysis of the situation of soldiers and peasants in military settlements fully confirms the conclusion that the settlement was a further enslavement of the peasants.

Most researchers recognized that military settlements were the crudest form of serfdom. But from this situation they did not draw the logically inevitable conclusion that the military settlements were an attempt to solve the peasant question as a whole, for all of Russia. This was a solution to the peasant question not only because in order to settle the entire army, which Alexander I strove for, it was necessary to convert 75% of all state-owned peasants into peasants. This is an important but not decisive factor. The main point was that the existence of military settlements was possible only if there was serfdom in the rest of Russia. This means that Alexander I, introducing settlements, sought to strengthen and strengthen serfdom.

In the “Institution on Military Settlements,” the prescription to combine farming with military service is motivated by a reference to the landowner peasants, “obligated to do the master’s work in relation to their landowner.” Here the connection between the settlement and the presence of serfdom is clearly revealed.

It is known that even after 1816, i.e. after the beginning of the mass introduction of graying, Alexander I pretended to be interested in projects for the liberation of the peasants. Moreover, in 1818 he ordered Arakcheev to draw up a project for the liberation of serfs. In fact, during the entire period of Alexander I’s activity, it is impossible to indicate a single real event aimed at even limiting serfdom.

Alexander I took into account the heterogeneity of the nobility, took into account the strength of its progress

Chuguev military settlements. XIX century.

Museum of the USSR Revolution.

the main part, the strength of public opinion at home and abroad, which is why he did his dirty, feudal work under the guise of liberal speeches.

The common mistake of all researchers of the reign of Alexander I and his time was the assertion that military settlements were Alexander’s personal business; I and Arakcheeva. But the very idea of ​​military settlements did not raise objections from the reactionary part of the nobility, and, if there were no threat of a revolutionary explosion, they would have welcomed it; The landowners, however, knew too well what a colossal reserve of revolutionary energy was accumulated in the peasants, and therefore were afraid to put weapons in their hands. The landowners were not firmly confident in the strength and power of soldier drill and in this they disagreed with the emperor, who believed that the peasant, turned into a soldier and isolated from the “liberalists,” he can rebel.

One can cite hundreds of statements confirming that only the fear of an uprising of armed peasants set this part of the nobility against military settlements. Vigel vividly expressed this thought: “What one and a half million people, dissatisfied, exhausted, driven out of patience with weapons in their hands, cannot do!” (Wiegel "Notes". Part II, p. 119).

“It is in the order of things,” writes Longinov, the Empress’s secretary, “that sooner or later Russia will not escape revolution... The fire will begin with these notorious settlements” (“Russian Archives of 1912.” Book 7, p. 367 ).

The progressive part of the nobility and, first of all, the Decembrists had a different attitude towards military settlements.

Pestel attacked the introduction of this event with the greatest anger: “The mere thought of the military settlements established by the previous government fills every right-thinking soul with torment and horror. How many innocent victims fell for the satiety of that unheard-of evil power that furiously tormented the unfortunate villages, the days of this institution were given away ... No government can have any right to separate a part of it from the general mass of the people in order to impose on this part, to the exclusion of the rest, the most difficult and cruel duty, which is military service. How can all feelings of justice and conscience be to such an extent reject in order to designate certain families for war, with all their children, grandchildren and posterity in general... Don’t military settlements have the same feelings, don’t they the same citizens of your fatherland, don’t they have the same rights to prosperity , like other Russians, don’t other Russians have the same duties to the fatherland, so do they, and isn’t the defense of the fatherland a sacred duty for each and everyone” (P. I. Pestel "Russian Truth". Ch. III, § 9).

The Decembrists understood the feudal essence of the settlements, and the fight against the settlements was a fight against the hated serfdom. Moreover, they even relied on the villagers in their revolutionary plans. This is stated in “A Look at Military Graying”: “And didn’t we see in the last riot that the intention of the rebels was, in case of failure, to retreat to the settlement.”

page 122
3

But the victims of this grandiose experiment themselves understood the essence of military settlements best of all. The peasants grasped the connection between the settlements and serfdom. This was most clearly revealed in their fierce struggle against military settlements.

It is worth reading Arakcheev’s letters in those days when he planted military settlements in order to feel what kind of fear he was overcome with, expecting an uprising of the peasants. When creating the Old Russian settlements, Arakcheev slept for 3 nights without undressing, preparing every minute to gallop away from reprisals. Peasants of the Vysotsk volost , appointed first to the settlement, responded by setting fire to their own village of Arakcheev, hoping in this way to get rid of the soldiers.To turn the village of Yasenevo (13 versts from Novgorod) into a settlement, it was necessary to call the Semenovsky Life Guards Regiment from the capital, which blocked the village for 6 weeks. “The peasants, pushed back to the last hut, exhausted by hunger and cold, submitted” (“Count Arakcheev and military settlements”, p. 3).

The campaign of the Semenovsky regiment was mockingly called the “Yasenev campaign.”

The peasants of the Kholynsky volost refused to obey the decree to move to the settlement. Many of them, right there at the gathering where the decree was announced, were surrounded by troops and driven into the courtyard. There, the peasants resisted all offers of surrender for 12 days without food and water and, only exhausted by hunger, surrendered.

The struggle against settlements in the south, where there was a tradition of freedom and special rights of the Cossacks, was especially acute. Strong unrest took place in 1817 during the transfer of the Bug Cossack army to the settlement. The Cossacks refused to obey the decree on the transition. Among them, a rumor persisted about the existence of some kind of charter from Catherine II, according to which the Bug Cossacks were not subject to transformation. The movement was led by Captain Bravinsky, who undertook to find the “missing letter”. His assistants were the Cossacks Bibichenko and Germanenko. 3 regiments with 4 horse guns were sent to suppress resistance. Cossacks were sworn in under the muzzles of loaded cannons with lit wicks.

Nothing could stop Alexander I from carrying out his plan, “There will be military settlements no matter what,” and even if the road from St. Petersburg to Chudov had to be paved with corpses” (a distance of more than 100 kilometers. - N.L.), - declared the emperor.

The uprisings did not stop in subsequent years. The largest of them were the uprisings of 1819 and 1831. The first of them broke out in the districts of the Chuguev and Taganrog Uhlan regiments. The villagers of the Chuguevsky regiment refused to go mow state-owned hay at this hot, strange time. The settled lancers also joined the rebels. The excitement quickly spread to the district of the Taganrog regiment. From all sides, villagers rushed to Chuguev to help the rebels. The uprising took on an increasingly threatening character.

Arakcheev hastily left St. Petersburg. But by his arrival, Gen. Lisanevich had already suppressed the uprising. He arrested 1,104 people from the Chuguevsky regiment and 899 from the Taganrog regiment. A military court sentenced 275 people to “deprivation of the belly.” The hypocrite Arakcheev overturned the court's verdict, replacing the death penalty with spitsrutens: "every thousand people twelve times." This was the cruelest form of reprisal, because almost no one could endure such execution.

The convicts were told that those who showed repentance and asked for mercy would be forgiven. But the royal satraps were mistaken in their calculations. The convicts showed exceptional heroism, and almost all resolutely refused pardon. Most of those subjected to execution died under the blows of the spitzrutens.

The most significant in scope and significance was the uprising of Novgorod military villagers in the summer of 1831.

From the very beginning this uprising is official; the name of the "cholera riot". By this they tried to hide the class nature of the struggle of the military villagers and pass it off as a manifestation of barbarism and ignorance. But cholera served only as a pretext, and the real reasons for the “rebellion” were the military, economic and moral oppression to which the villagers were subjected.

The uprising began on July 11, 1831, in Staraya Russa. The artisans of the 10th military labor battalion beat their officers, saying that they wanted to poison them, and rushed into the city. They were joined by city townspeople and merchants. The latter, however, soon abandoned the rebels, confused by the scale of the movement.

The rebels became the masters of the city. The artisans went to the district to raise the landowner peasants. Soon the uprising covered all districts of settlements (with the exception of one) and spread beyond their borders. “The alarm sounded through the villages. The revolt of the settlers covered the entire space from Novgorod to Kholm and Demyansk and was ready to spread to the Tver province.”

The uprising raged over an area of ​​200 miles.

Riot in Novgorod military settlements. XIX century.

Museum of the USSR Revolution.

The military villagers sought to destroy not only the settlements, but also the landowners. They clearly understood the reasons for the uprising. Lieutenant Colonel Panaev, a participant in pacifying the uprising, turned to one villager with a request to explain to the rebels that cholera is not caused by drugs. To this the villager answered him: “What can I say! Poison and cholera are for fools; but we need your noble goat tribe not to exist” (“Revolt of Military Villagers in 1831,” p. 121). Essentially, it was not a soldier's uprising, but an uprising of peasants against the nobles.

The uprising shocked the authorities and Nicholas I himself. The head of the settled corps, General. Euler was in a panic. The soldiers refused to obey their superiors and betrayed their officers to the villagers. When a crowd of rebel villagers entered Staraya Russa, the soldiers offered no resistance to them and handed over their officers.

The uprising was suppressed through deception. Nicholas I urgently issued a manifesto to the rebels, guaranteeing them forgiveness in case of sincere repentance. He even went to the area of ​​the uprising himself. At the same time, troops under the command of General. Samsonov and fraudulently, under the pretext of the highest review, all reserve companies in Gatchino were withdrawn from the settlement area.

By the end of July, Samsonov's reins arrived and the reprisal began. About 5 thousand people were put on trial. All of them were severely punished.

It was this uprising that was the reason for the abolition of military settlements. Immediately after the Novgorod uprising, in the same year, 1831, the Novgorod and Mogilev military settlements were reorganized into districts of infantry soldiers, in which troops were stationed on a general basis. From this moment on, military settlements began to play a secondary role.

At first glance, such a reform of military service (combining agriculture and military affairs) served to save money on the military. But the emperor and his favorite had other, more interesting motives.

Reforms of Alexander I: goals

The first military settlements appeared back in 1810, but they became widespread after 1815. Of course, the combination of farming and military training of peasants was supposed to serve to save army costs, but this was not the main thing. The reform was seen as an act of humanism and a reward for a victorious army. In 1814, the emperor announced: “We hope […] not only to bring the maintenance of the soldiers to a better and more abundant state than before, but also to give them a settled life and add families to them.” In the settlements, soldiers could live with their families, something that previous recruits were deprived of. After all, the soldier was drafted for 25 years. If he returned home, it was already at a very mature age. While creating military settlements, Alexander stopped recruiting for several years.

Alexander I. (wikipedia.org)

The most important purpose of military settlements was associated with the emperor's love for military order and discipline. According to his plan, the army, as the bearer of these ideals, could transform agriculture in this spirit. General Count Arakcheev, appointed head of military settlements, was the best suited for this role - his personal estate and the life of his peasants were a rare example of an ideally organized economy, in which even the care of peasant women for children was carried out according to the instructions of the landowner, and the villagers looked well-fed and healthy and happy with life. Such peasants, educated and disciplined, seemed to the emperor an absolutely necessary condition for their future liberation - after all, without proper education in the spirit of discipline, responsibility and hard work, they would not be able to enjoy the fruits of freedom.

Count A. A. Arakcheev. (wikipedia.org)

So, the army had to educate the Russian peasantry, subordinate the life of the peasants to order according to the Prussian model. Philip Wigel, a Russian official and friend of V. A. Zhukovsky, recalled that in military settlements everything was “in the German, Prussian manner, everything was counted, everything was by weight and measure.” Alexander here followed the example of Peter, who forcibly, despotic, but educated his people, accustomed them to order.

Military settlements of Arakcheev

This often happened. Military settlements were established throughout Russia. For example, this was done like this: in 1815, the emperor ordered the deployment of the second battalion of the grenadier Count Arakcheev regiment in the Vysotsk volost (Novgorod province). The peasants of “conscription” age (21-45 years) who lived there were dressed in uniforms, sworn in and taught the art of war. The peasants lived with their families (with the permission of their commanders). At each regiment, a headquarters town was built with apartments for officers, a hospital, a church, an exercierhaus, a guardhouse, a stud farm, etc.

Military settler. (repin.in.ua)

Over ten years, the number of residents of military settlements grew to 750 thousand people. Good roads, schools and hospitals appeared, all children were dressed and shod at public expense, there were no drunkards or tramps, tidy villagers and their children were encouraged with gifts and access to free education in military schools. Well-organized military settlements were assessed by some contemporaries as units superior in the quality of military training even to the guard.

Chuguev. (timeua.info)

But sometimes it turned out “as always.” Despite all the advantages, military settlements still have a bad reputation. Why were the settlements scolded? First of all, for drill, cane discipline. Military regulations were extended here to agricultural activities, which caused resistance from the peasants. The officers not only measured the angle of leg elevation during a training inspection, but also controlled the cleanliness of the peasant’s shirt, his hut, the installation of fences and the beauty of the ditches. Every thing in the settlement had its own number and had to be in a certain place. Many officers themselves didn’t like it, but “no matter how disgusting, it’s service!”

The villagers were deprived of their usual ways to relieve stress, entertainment such as drinking and gambling. In a number of cases, the settlement authorities went too far and made the life of the peasant soldiers unbearable. During Alexander's reign, a fairly large uprising took place. In 1819, in Chuguev, where the lancers were located, several thousand settlers demanded the liquidation of the settlement and their return to their previous normal peasant life. The emperor's policy was incomprehensible to people, but they felt its hardships.

The uprising was brutally suppressed, and this story made a strong impression on society. Arakcheev was called “the devil, the devil” because he added military exercises to peasant labor. The peasants did not like to shave their beards (for a long time in Rus', shaving beards was considered unacceptable), wear uniforms, and in everyday life be under the supervision of bosses, sometimes not the most reasonable ones. Rumors quickly spread that cruelty was commonplace in the settlements. Some Decembrists, relying on these rumors, hoped that under certain circumstances it would be the military villagers who could support them. However, this did not happen. Most of the villagers nevertheless adapted to the changes, and new public buildings, roads and farms appeared in Russia. Educated society saw in the settlements only another experiment of absolute power, inspired by the influence of the despotic Arakcheev.

Much in military settlements, as in the army today, depended on many factors - from the character of the officers of individual units and the greed of military officials to the climate. The settlements were closed to the gaze of most Russian and foreign contemporaries. They could be seen either by military personnel and officials associated with their work, or by individual people invited by “highest command.” Accepted observers noted that, for example, in the north of the country, where the climate is cold and harvests are low, settlements do not achieve their goal and only generate expenses without increasing the military power of the state. The soldiers, occupied with construction and agricultural work, devoted less time to military training.

Nicholas I, despite his personal hostility towards Arakcheev, did not abolish military settlements. By the end of his reign, the settlers numbered more than 800 thousand. But they still did not fully achieve their goal and became outdated as a method of military training. During the Crimean War, the old training system showed its weakness, and Alexander II liquidated the settlements in 1857, saying goodbye to another institution, unpopular in a society that was facing grandiose reforms. The army also faced big changes, and it was no longer tasked with transforming the mentality of the Russian peasantry.

Sources

1. Davydov B.B. Military settlements in Russia in the first quarter of the 19th century in the assessment of a Prussian officer. // Archivist's Bulletin. 2009. No. 1. P. 150 - 154
2. Feathered Battalion. The story of a Novgorod old-timer // Russian Archive, 1889. Book, 2. Issue. 8. pp. 562 - 563
3. Zubov A. Reflections on the causes of the revolution in Russia. // New World, 2006. No. 7
4. Image for the announcement of the material on the main page and for the lead: news.ru

At the end of 1815, Alexander I began to discuss the project of military settlements, the first experience of implementation of which was carried out in 1810-1812 on the reserve battalion of the Yelets Musketeer Regiment, located in the Bobylevsky eldership of the Klimovsky district of the Mogilev province.

The development of a plan for creating settlements was entrusted to Arakcheev.

Project goals:

create a new military-agricultural class, which on its own could support and recruit a standing army without burdening the country’s budget; the size of the army would be maintained at wartime levels.

free the country's population from constant conscription - maintain the army.

cover the western border area.

In August 1816, preparations began for the transfer of troops and residents to the category of military villagers. In 1817, settlements were introduced in the Novgorod, Kherson and Sloboda-Ukrainian provinces. Until the end of the reign of Alexander I, the number of districts of military settlements continued to grow, gradually surrounding the border of the empire from the Baltic to the Black Sea.

By 1825, there were 169,828 regular army soldiers and 374,000 state peasants and Cossacks in military settlements.

In 1857, military settlements were abolished. They already numbered 800,000 people.

Forms of opposition: unrest in the army, secret societies of the nobility, public opinion

The introduction of military settlements met with stubborn resistance from peasants and Cossacks, who were converted into military villagers. In the summer of 1819, an uprising broke out in Chuguev near Kharkov. In 1820, peasants became agitated on the Don: 2,556 villages were in revolt.

Oct 16 1820 The head company of the Semenovsky regiment submitted a request to cancel the strict orders introduced and change the regimental commander. The company was deceived into the arena, arrested and sent to the casemates of the Peter and Paul Fortress.

The entire regiment stood up for her. The regiment was surrounded by the military garrison of the capital, and then sent in full force to the Peter and Paul Fortress. The first battalion was put on trial by a military court, which sentenced the instigators to be driven through the ranks, and the remaining soldiers to exile to distant garrisons. Other battalions were distributed among various army regiments.

Under the influence of the Semenovsky regiment, fermentation began in other parts of the capital's garrison: proclamations were distributed.

In 1821, secret police were introduced into the army.

In 1822, a decree was issued banning secret organizations and Masonic lodges.

The first wars against the Napoleonic Empire. 1805-1807

In 1805, through the conclusion of a series of treaties, a new anti-French coalition was actually formed, and on September 9, 1805, Alexander left for the active army. Although the commander was M.I. Kutuzov, in fact, Alexander began to play the main role in decision-making. The Emperor bears primary responsibility for the defeat of the Russian-Austrian army at Austerlitz, however, serious measures were taken against a number of generals: General. A.F. Langeron was dismissed from service, General. AND I. Przhibyshevsky and Loshakov were put on trial, and the Novgorod Musketeer Regiment was stripped of its honors. On November 22 (December 4), 1805, a truce was concluded, according to which Russian troops were to leave Austrian territory. On June 8 (20), 1806, a Russian-French peace treaty was signed in Paris. In September 1806, Prussia began a war against France, and on November 16 (28), 1806, Alexander announced the Russian Empire would also act against France. On March 16, 1807, Alexander left for the army through Riga and Mitau and on April 5 arrived at the General’s Main Apartment. L. L. Bennigsen. This time Alexander interfered less in the affairs of the commander than in the last campaign. After the defeat of the Russian army in the war, he was forced to enter into peace negotiations with Napoleon.

Military settlements are a special model for the existence of military units in peacetime, which functioned in Russia from 1810 to 1857. The soldiers combined army service and economic activities. The first settlement was formed in 1810, but it was a “pilot project.” The Patriotic War suspended this process and only from mid-1815 the issue of military settlements began to be discussed again by Alexander 1, and in 1816 large-scale implementation of this project began.

First settlement

The creation of military settlements was entrusted to Alexey Andreevich Arakcheev. In Soviet historiography, this man was portrayed as a simple-minded warrior. This characterization is partly correct - Arakcheev was a poorly educated person, but had other advantages. He began his ascent back in the time of Paul 1, distinguished by his devotion to the king and patriotism.

The first military settlement in Russia was formed by Arakcheev in 1810 in the Klimovitsky district of the Mogilev province. The Yelets Musketeer Regiment was stationed here. For this purpose, all the peasants living in the Klimovitsky district were resettled to the Kharkov province. It was planned to work out the basic management mechanisms at this settlement. The outbreak of the Patriotic War changed these plans.

Reasons for creation

There are several important reasons for the creation of military settlements, as a result of which Arakcheev began to actively implement his plan in 1816:

1. Russia needed to maintain a large army, but there was no money. The country was exhausted by the war and money was needed to restore industry and cities. Therefore, it was assumed that the settlements could become self-sustaining in the shortest possible time.
2. An attempt to create residential areas for soldiers. They served in the army almost their entire lives, so it was assumed that discipline and productivity from soldiers would be higher if they lived in one place, created families, equipped their homes, and raised children.
3. Maintaining discipline in the army. For some reason, historians don’t talk much about this, but any army after a long victorious war experiences a decrease in the level of discipline. The reasons for this are natural - just yesterday soldiers fought and won victories, but today they are forced to return to the barracks routine.

For the reasons for the creation of Arakcheev's military settlements in Russia, one should look for the continuation of the European policy of Alexander 1. The Emperor needed a huge army, with the help of which it was possible to maintain order in Russia and in European countries.

A.N. Pypin

The essence of military settlements

The general idea was that entire territories were taken out of civilian control and transferred to military control. Lands with state peasants were chosen. They were exempted from any duties, but in return the peasants were obliged to staff military units from among themselves and maintain them. If this scheme is simplified, then the territory of the settlement should have been inhabited by soldiers’ families, forced to work as farm laborers to support the army and their own maintenance.

The government created conditions for the villagers, providing them with equipment and livestock. Loans totaling up to 5 million rubles were also issued annually. The problem was that the settlers did not have any civil rights, and all spheres of life were strictly controlled. Moreover, initially the settlement system created conditions under which peasants could not live independently. The peasants were exempted from taxes, but were given an insignificant land plot, which was impossible to feed themselves with. Therefore, peasants were forced to hire out for work in settlements.

Organizational structure

Initially, military settlements were formed without a clear management structure. The main rule was that soldiers had to combine military activities with economic activities. The army was now trained not only in the art of war, but also engaged in agricultural work.

The settlement zones were formed on the principles of strict discipline and control. This also concerned the formation of families. Everything required permission from the boss. In Soviet historiography, an example was often cited of the stupid approach to forming families within the soldiers' Pale of Settlement Zones. The “line” method was used. A line of men was built, opposite it a line of women - those who were opposite each other became spouses. Lottery principles were also used to determine married couples. This really happened, but these were exceptional cases and not universal.

Everyone who lived in military settlements formed an army. The typical life of the villagers was as follows:

• Until the age of 7, the child stays with his parents and has no obligations.
• From 7 to 12 years the child is educated.
• From 12 to 18 years old he performs household chores.
• From 18 to 45 years of age he performs military service, combining it with household work.
• After 45 years of age, a person is exempt from military service and is engaged only in minor household work.

There was unity of command and a system of subordination in the settlements. Life here was controlled by the Chief, the Headquarters, the Main Headquarters of His Imperial Majesty.

In what territories were settlements formed?

The idea of ​​Alexander 1, the implementation of which he demanded from Arakcheev, was that military settlements would not have any impact on the landowners and their possessions. Therefore, for the “zones of settlement” of the military, exclusively territories inhabited by state peasants, that is, state-owned lands, were taken. During the reign of Alexander 1, the following settlements were created:

• For infantry in St. Petersburg, Novgorod, Vitebsk and Mogilev provinces.
• For cavalry in the Sloboda-Ukrainian and Kherson provinces.

Later the geography of places expanded. In particular, in 1837 a military settlement was created in the Caucasus. However, his tasks were somewhat different. A stronghold was being created in the Caucasus and the settlers were supposed to contribute to this. After 1857, Caucasian troops were equated to Cossack troops.

Numerical indicators

By 1820, all Russian military settlements consisted of 126 infantry battalions and 250 cavalry squadrons. At the beginning of the reign of Nicholas 1, there were 370 thousand people from state peasants in the active army. That is, in just 10 years of Arakcheev’s reform, ⅓ of the Russian army consisted of peasant settlers.

Military settlements existed until 1857 and their leaders were:

• Arakcheev A.A. (1816-1826)
• Kleinmichel P.A. (1826-1832, 1835-1842)
• Korf N.I. (1842-1852)
• Pilar von Pilchau (1852-1856)
• Virigin A.I. (1856-1857)

Population attitude

Due to the weak organizational structure, military settlements were negatively received by the people, primarily by peasants who found themselves in the lands of the “Pale of Settlement”. The situation was aggravated by Arakcheev’s decrees, which can only be called narrow-minded. Indicative is the decree for settlements on the birth of children.

Every woman should give birth every year. Moreover, she must give birth to boys. If she gives birth to a girl, there is a fine. If she gave birth to a stillborn child, there is a fine. If she doesn’t give birth in a year, she’s fined.

A.A. Arakcheev

Living conditions for the peasants in the settlement were difficult. It was established that at all times of the year, except winter, peasants could have neither weekends nor holidays. Before lunch they were engaged in military affairs. From lunch until evening they did housework. From evening to night - again with military affairs. The physical and psychological stress was excessive - people could not stand it. Hence the uprisings. Major uprisings in military settlements:

• 1817, 1831 - in the Novgorod province
• 1819 - in Chuguev province

Why the idea failed

Alexander 1 instructed Arakcheev to create military settlements largely in order to relieve the budget. Theoretically, this could have worked out, but in reality everything turned out like with most reforms of that time - they wanted the best, but it turned out as always. There are several main reasons why military settlements were ineffective:

1. Embezzlement. Because of this, both the financial support of the state and the income of the settlement itself were insufficient. There was only enough money for survival.
2. It was not possible to convey to the soldiers the idea that they should be as excellent cultivators as they were military men. It was like chasing two hares. As a result, agricultural productivity sank, and the army gradually lost its combat effectiveness.
3. Peasant resistance. Such living conditions were created for ordinary people that serfdom seemed a much more attractive form for peasants than settlements. It is no coincidence that the peasants repeatedly appealed to the authorities to be made serfs, but removed from the settlements. There was no reaction from the authorities, hence the numerous riots.

One cannot even hope that the soldiers will calm down and discipline will improve. On the contrary, in the coming years after the introduction of military settlements in Russia, we can expect a decline in the morale of soldiers, as well as discontent among the indigenous population.

Barclay de Tolly

The economic efficiency of military settlements is highly questionable. In history textbooks it is customary to say that in the period from 1825 to 1850 the treasury saved 45.5 million rubles. At the same time, they forget to say that about 100 million rubles were spent on construction work alone during Arakcheev’s period.