Soon after the death of Nicholas, desires, until then only muttered,

were publicly expressed for the recall and the amnesty of the Martyrs of

the Conspiracy and the Insurrection of December, 1825. Pestel, Ryleieff,

Bestujeff-Rumin, and the other leaders, had been strung up on the

gallows. Many of those transported to Siberia had died a miserable

felon's death in the lead-mines. Brought up in the lap of luxury, they

ended like galley-slaves, because they had loved freedom more than

wealth and ease. It is reported of one of the political prisoners, a

nobleman, that he died in Kamtschatka with a chain round his neck,

fastened to the wall. Others had been sent to the Caucasus, which in

Russia was long ago said to be "not so much a frontier as a grave-yard."

There they had fallen in a hateful war against brave, independent

mountain tribes, as the unwilling tools of an aggressive tyranny. Still,

some of the sufferers were yet alive--among them men of the foremost

families of the country. They had to be allowed to come back. They

came--mere shadows and ruins of their former selves. But their decrepit

condition was the most telling evidence of the infamy of the Tyrant who

had fortunately passed away.

In the salons of the upper classes these suffering witnesses of a

terrible past received lavish proofs of admiration. Men would listen

with sympathetic avidity to the tales of horror told by them. All those

present at such a gathering made it a point to be profuse towards the

martyrs with little attentions such as only women ordinarily receive

from the other sex. Thirty years--a long time--had passed since the

armed struggle in the streets of St. Petersburg. Now, all of a sudden,

memories were revived. Political tendencies, which some imagined had

died out, came up afresh among a younger generation, for whom the

"December Conspiracy" was surrounded with a poetical halo. There was

danger in the air for the autocratic principle.

Count Rostoptchin, the same who ordered the burning of Moscow in 1812,

said in 1825 he could not understand that attempt at a revolution. He

"could understand the French Revolution, because there the ordinary

citizen wished to become an aristocrat, but he could not conceive

aristocrats wishing to become simple burghers." That was the version of

a cynical, though otherwise clever, member of the nobility, who was

unable to comprehend the spirit of self-sacrifice for noble aims showing

itself even among the wealthy and the "noble" by birth. However, had

Count Rostoptchin only been capable of feeling the degradation under

which the Russian aristocracy itself lies in its relations with a

despotic Crown, he might, even from his own point of view as a mere man

of the world, have found a reason for the uprising of independent

characters among men of his own rank.

IV.

The more cultured and wealthier classes again came to the front as

political agitators, at the accession of Alexander. They wanted to throw

down the Chinese Wall which Nicholas had built around them--if it is not

an insult to the Chinese to compare the wall they erected as a

protection against barbarism with the barrier set up by Nicholas against

Western ideas of culture and freedom. At first, Alexander II. did not

hold out any hope of reform. Driven to straits, he busied himself with

throwing a sop to public opinion by various small relaxations in

administrative matters. They were small enough; and they were given with

a niggard hand.

Anyone taking a survey of the earlier part of the reign of Alexander II.

must see that the main object of his government was to foil the tendency

towards the introduction of parliamentary institutions, which was

sullenly but perceptibly making its way among the better educated

section of the nation; that, with the view of attaining this reactionary

end, he pursued the traditional despotic policy of approaching the lower

classes on the one hand, and engaging the country in fresh warlike

enterprise abroad on the other. Foiled in Europe by England and France,

he throws his armies, after the conclusion of the Peace of Paris, with

renewed fury upon the Tcherkess tribes. They had long barred the way of

Russia towards Asia Minor and Persia, thereby insuring the safety of

India from that side. Now Schamyl, the hoary-headed warrior-prophet, is

compelled to surrender in his last mountain stronghold. From his lofty

Alpine home, which is filled with the renown of his romantic deeds, he

is carried a prisoner to St. Petersburg, there to be stared at by the

crowd of decorated slaves of autocracy.

With this "pacification" of the Caucasus, the Czar obtained the

unimpeded use of the high-road leading into Asia Minor. He then struck a

blow against the independent tribes on the eastern shore of the Caspian.

With the Court of Teheran he entered into relations calculated to

threaten Turkey with a double danger from the Asiatic side, in case of a

renewal of war. Again, he enlarged his Empire, at the cost of China, by

filching territories as extensive as some of the greatest European

countries. In what once was Independent Turkestan, his armies overran

one Khanate after the other, thus coming nearer and nearer to India from

the north-west. There is a striking war-picture by Vereshagin, with a

pyramid of skulls as its centre--a very Golgotha of the horrors of

massacre; but Russian monarchs, in their ceaseless career of conquest,

out-Tatar the Tatar in the fiendishness of their atrocities. Witness the

order given by General Kaufmann, the pampered tool of Alexander II., in

these Turkestan campaigns:--"_Kill all; spare no age, or sex!_" Witness

also the death-dance that took place when his Majesty, the crowned head

of Holy Russia, the magnanimous Champion of Religion and Humanity, made

his victorious entry into Plevna,[48] carousing there jubilantly,

whilst the Turkish wounded lay unattended in the town for fully two

days--a helpless mass of men, dying in raving agony.

I have anticipated for a moment the course of events. In glancing at the

reign of Alexander II., the eye involuntarily runs over the full

panorama of tyrannic outrages. From the time of the wholesale

proscription of the Tcherkess and Abchasian tribes to the heart-rending

horrors committed against Toork populations and wounded Ottoman

prisoners of war, there has been, in his career, a perfect climax of

inhumanity. Conferences for the professed humanization of warfare were,

with him, only the hypocritical precursors of fresh barbarities. But it

is not necessary to forestall events. Enough was done in the way of

atrocities even in the earlier years of his rule.

Between the conquests made in the Caucasus and the annexations on the

Amoor or in Central Asia, Alexander II. bullied, and at last put down,

by unspeakably cruel means,--even as did his predecessor,--the national

aspirations of unhappy Poland. Like Nicholas, he kept the road to

Siberia alive with the wretched convoys of unfortunate exiles. Even in

the Baltic Provinces, whence the Russian Government draws so many able

administrators, diplomatists, and military leaders, whose capacities

might be employed in a better cause, he began a system of persecution

against the German population, of so galling a nature that it

threatened, in course of time, to alienate that very mainstay of the

public administration. The special towns' charters of the Baltic

Provinces were infringed. The German tongue, hitherto possessing full

privileges, was threatened. A process of Russification was attempted;

the superior civilized element being pushed and annoyed by the inferior

and barbarous one.

These acts of the earliest years of the reign of Alexander II. have to

be kept in mind, in order to understand that humanitarian motives were

not the ruling ones in the final adoption of the Serf Emancipation

measure. On his death-bed, Nicholas is stated to have said to his

son:-- "Thou hast two enemies--the nobility and the Poles. Emancipate

the serfs; and do not allow the Poles any Constitution!"

It is impossible, with the mystery which envelopes the last days of

Nicholas, to know whether these words are authentic. At all events,

Alexander did not give back to the Poles the Constitution they

possessed until 1830. Nor did he grant a Constitution to the Russians

either. He emancipated the serfs--but not before the principles which

had actuated the Conspirators of 1817-25 once more began to show

themselves among the upper strata of society; and in passing his

measure, he mainly sought to deprive a restive nobility of some of its

influence, and to take the wind out of the sails of those Liberal

agitators who would have made the abolition of bondage the outcome of

the establishment of a freely-chosen Legislature. When, finally, the

Poles, counting upon a corresponding movement in Russia, resolved upon

that heroic, though desperate, rising which by anticipation I alluded to

in the last article, such fresh cruelties were practised by Alexander

II. against the vanquished victims, that every human heart worthy of the

name must shudder at the mere recollection of them.

From those days, however, the Conspiratory Movement in Russia began to

assume larger proportions. What I have said in the preceding pages, goes

far to explain the violence by which that movement has latterly been

characterized.

V.

Partly from the aggressiveness which is the natural bent of a despotic

military monarchy, partly from the wish to check the home-growth of

Liberal sentiments by frequent blood-letting abroad, the government of

Alexander II. has tried to meet the danger which has been gathering

round the autocratic system by lighting up foreign wars. Central Asia

has served him for that purpose. So has Turkey. The flag of ambition was

flaunted before public opinion as soon as there was a revival of the

Opposition tendency in internal affairs.

An attempt at opening up the whole Eastern Question was made as early as

1870, when France and Germany were locked together in deadly embrace.

The confidential despatches and cypher telegrams exchanged in 1870

between Mr. de Novikoff, the Russian Ambassador at Vienna, and Mr.

Ionin, the Russian Consul-General at Ragusa, which fortunately came to

light some years ago, have fully proved that even then Muscovite policy

busied itself with getting up a phantom insurrection in Herzegovina,

preparatory to an attack upon Turkey. Nor is it a secret that a

Bulgarian Committee of Insurrection, affiliated to Russia, had been in

existence at Bucharest for years previous to the late war. All these

propagandistic intrigues were in a measure designed to occupy some of

the more active minds in Russia, who hesitated, between home reform and

Panslavistic ambition.

The Czar has indulged in his warlike enterprizes, but he has deceived

himself in his calculations as regards home policy. All his frightful

spilling of blood abroad has not been able to prevent the formation and

extension of what is called the Nihilist Conspiracy. Side by side with

his wars, the Secret League has grown apace, overshadowing all his

glory. So extensive have the ramifications of that Conspiracy become

that the liveliest interest is now awakened as to its origin and its

earliest germs.

In the nature of things it is impossible, at present, to speak with full

certainty on this subject. The Russian revolutionists, being engaged in

a desperate struggle, have neither the leisure necessary for writing

such statements; nor is it their interest to go into details. Judicial

inquiries have lifted, here and there, some corner of the mysterious

winding-sheets in which the secret _Vehme_ is enveloped. But more light

can only be expected after the Conspiracy has been entirely crushed,--in

which case, however, owing to the heroic silence which its adherents

generally maintain, a great deal of knowledge will for ever be buried in

the grave,--or the fuller clearing up will come when, as I would fain

hope, this fierce struggle ends with a triumph, whether complete or

partial, of the cause of freedom.

Even under the iron rule of Nicholas, there were, many years after the

St. Petersburg insurrection of 1825, still some faint traces of Secret

Societies, in which the spirit of Pestel and Murawieff was continued.

One of these occult Leagues was that of Petrascheski, detected in 1849,

whose members were sentenced to forced labour and to banishment to

Siberia. A nearer approach to the plebeian element than was observable

in the Conspiracies of 1817-25, characterized this later association.

Altogether the more educated classes gradually began to seek closer

contact with the people at large.

This task was in so far facilitated by the tyrannical Czar-Pope

Nicholas, in that he not only trod under foot that portion of the

nobiliary class which aimed at a Constitutional share of the political

power, but also persecuted the various dissenting sects in the most

barbarous fashion.

Under an outward gloss of official orthodoxy, Russia is eaten up with a

chaos of sects. The Raskolniks, or Old Believers, profess to be the real

Church; yet the simplest civic rights were always denied to them.

Besides those Old Believers, numerous other sects exist. They in their

turn are surrounded by a strange fringe of "Runners," "Jumpers,"

"Flagellants," "Self-Mutilators," and other eccentric or anti-social

pests which crop up most thickly in the dank shadow of an obscurantist

despotism, whose very roots, however, they gradually destroy and

encroach upon. Persecuted men often seek solace in wild hopes and

prophetic beliefs, which, if strongly nurtured by agitation, are apt to

imperil the persecutor. Under Nicholas, the persecutor of all

Dissenters, popular seers occasionally arose, who in their occult

meetings predicted from the book of Esdra that, after the reign of

Nicholas should be over, the Monarchy would fall down under his son and

that "the people then would be happy and free."

Such a state of feeling in the lower and more backward social strata

rendered it at all events easier for would-be reformers of the

conspirator type to enter into closer contact with the plebeian

element. Though educated men could not have any sympathy with the

mystic views and tone, they found a practical ally in the sullen

dissatisfaction which drove Dissenters to opposition against the

Government. So it was under Nicholas. So it still is under Alexander II.

It may suit the sacerdotal Ritualists, who would fain establish a

connection of High Church Anglicanism with the official orthodoxy of the

East, to promote the aggressive policy of the Czar. But English

Dissenters, who prize their freedom from clerical trammels, might

remember that Autocracy in Russia represents all that is worst in

political as well as in religious fields. Besides upholding the Stuart

doctrine with the means of a Gengis Khan and a Tamerlane, it pretends,

in Church matters, to a Papal authority, crushing the Bible Christian,

the eccentric Mystic, and the religious Rationalist, with an equally

heavy hand--and, if need be, as in the case of the Greek Uniates under

Alexander II., with the Cossack knout.

In the educated class of Russia, two very different political currents

are observable: the one inclining towards Western Liberalism, whilst the

other cultivates the Nationalist sentiment under rather antiquated

forms. The "Westerners," "Europeans," or "Liberals," are often regarded

by the more stolid adherents of Katkoff as men lacking in patriotism.

Between these two parties--if we could speak of parties in a country

which has no ordered public life--a third group is observable: the

Panslavists, many of whom pursue, under a Liberal mask, aims favourable

to the aggrandizement of Czardom. Not a few of the Panslavists are in

reality mere Government tools. Others, who, like Aksakoff, began as

independent workers in the Panslavist cause, finally yielded to

Government temptation; but after a while even they were found to be too

much imbued with reforming ideas, and consequently were placed under

police surveillance.

The great mass of the Russian people has nothing to do with Panslavism;

it does not even know what it is. The idea of a Slav brotherhood is

foreign to it. It can be made, by much priestly preaching, to take a

sort of bigoted interest in alleged co-religionists who are said to be

ill-treated by "unbelieving Turks;" but the interest and the

understanding do not go beyond that. Such is the distinct statement made

lately by one of the best observers, Ivan Turgenieff, the novelist, in a

conversation with a German writer. As to the revolutionary party in

Russia, it has more and more become estranged from the Panslavistic

tendency--so much so that at present it stands in direct opposition to

it.

Alexander Herzen,[49] who favoured the Panslavistic cause, could still

speak, retrospectively, of Russian Czars as being "Robespierres on

horseback"--an expression of so doubtful a value that it rather reminds

us of the pseudo-revolutionary language of Napoleonism than of the purer

Democratic principles. Herzen's idea being that Constantinople should

become the capital of a great Russo-Slav Empire, we can easily

understand that he should have represented Muscovite history under such

a deceptive garb. Bakunin also was a Panslavist for a time, but of a

different type, aiming as he did at a loose Democratic Federation of the

various Slav tribes. The impossibility of this federation all those will

acknowledge who think it equally chimerical to form a Romanic Federation

between nations so dissimilar in origin, history, language, and

aspirations, as are the Italians, the French, the Spaniards, the

Portuguese, the French-speaking section of the Swiss, and the Roumans of

Moldo-Wallachia and Hungary. Or would it be less chimerical to try to

form a Teutonic Federation among Germans, Dutch, Danes, Swedes,

Norwegians, Icelanders, German-Swiss, Englishmen, North Americans, and

the various English colonies?

Nihilism, on its part, has nothing in common with those Panslavist

intrigues which mainly cover an Imperialist ambition. Nihilism, as at

present known, is, in fact, the very negation of such dangerous

ambitious schemes.

The first Nihilist Society, properly speaking, is said to have been

founded by Russian students about the year 1859. German works on

philosophy and natural science were then much in demand, as forbidden

fruit among the aspiring youths of Russia. The books not being allowed

to pass the frontier, stray copies were smuggled in, and lithographed

translations passed from hand to hand. The Agricultural College of

Petrovski, near Moscow, is considered to have been one of the first

places where young men became imbued with such advanced ideas. In this

neighbourhood the Netchaieff tragedy was enacted. Among literary men,

Tchernitcheffski was one of the first who became a "Nihilist." He

suffered for it by being banished to Siberia.

The word "Nihilist" is, however, a somewhat misleading one. It was

conferred at first as a nickname. Afterwards it was adopted (like the

name of the _Gueux_) in a kind of dare-devil mood; and has covered, ever

since, a great many varieties of political and social discontent, as

well as of philosophical Radicalism. There are Nihilists who, from the

sheer hopelessness engendered by a tyranny lasting a thousand years,

have come to cultivate a Philosophy of Despair, of Disgust, and of

Destruction, without troubling themselves as to the constitution of the

Future. These are men that profess a wish to do away with all State

organizations, for the sake of a morbid Individualism. Others there are

who, in the semi-revolutionary vein of Comte, incline towards a

socialist Collectivism in a rather utopian, not to say hierarchic, form.

To them the word "Nihilist" is scarcely applicable.

Strictly speaking, the word "Nihilist" covers, at most, a small group of

persons of a brooding and impracticable temper, such as is sometimes

created under the darkest tyrannies. It may be doubted whether the

majority of those who use the dagger and the revolver without

compunction against the vile _sbirri_ of an intolerable despotism would

call themselves Nihilists, or even Socialists. The greater number of the

members of the secret leagues are believed to hold views not far removed

from those which have found a practical expression in some freely

constituted countries. The violent means employed are, with many, only

the outcome of a feeling of revenge easily to be understood under the

circumstances; or else they are regarded as a dire necessity in

insurrectionary warfare. True, there have been Russians abroad who spoke

of "abolishing the Family and Property." But nothing warrants the

assumption that this is the principle of the Nihilists in Russia itself.

If either mere anarchy, or a system of barrack Communism, be the object

of the majority of the men and women whose deeds have of late riveted

the attention of all Europe, it is hard to comprehend that these

conspirators should have secured so many friends among classes which by

education and position cannot possibly have any sympathy with mere

destructive or utopian schemes. Of the existence of numerous friends of

the Nihilists in the higher classes there is, however, no doubt. Thus

only can the hold be explained which the occult propaganda of this _hic

et ubique_ conspiracy has obtained upon the commonwealth.

VI.

I have mentioned the participation of women in the present desperate

struggle. Students, lawyers, officers, Government officials, landed

proprietors, merchants, all kinds of men of the more educated or

well-to-do classes, have been found to be mixed up with the "Nihilist"

Conspiracy. By far the most characteristic feature, however, is the

share which women have taken in the late startling events. When women

thus actively and enthusiastically step forth in a revolutionary or

national movement, even to the extent of sacrificing their lives, it is

always a sign of a people's feelings being wrought up to the highest

tension. So great a strain upon the more delicate nature of the fairer

sex cannot be borne very long. It is only at a time of extreme crisis

that the unusual event occurs; and Russia is now at the very acme of

such a crisis.

We have seen, in succession, Vjera Sassulitch, a captain's daughter;

Sophia Löschern von Herzfeld, a lady of high rank; Nathalie von

Armfeldt, the daughter of an Imperial councillor; Mary Kovalevski, who

also ranks as a noble; Katharina Sarandovitch, the daughter of a

_tchinovnik_, or official; and several more, of equally prominent

position, playing in the revolutionary contest a most remarkable part.

They have suffered imprisonment; they have risked their lives; some of

them have been condemned to hard labour. One of them was sentenced to

be shot--but this latter decision even the Czar, though having to wage

war against women, dared not carry out. This extraordinary mixing of the

female sex in a widely ramified conspiracy is of so phenomenal a

character that a sketch of the educational and emancipatory movement

which led up to it, may well be here in its place.

By way of contrast, let us first look into times which seem to lie ages

behind us, but which are yet in the recollection of a great many.

The Contemporary Review, Volume 36, September 1879 · 第 16 / 25 段