The main aspects of the introduction of conscription in Russia at the beginning of the XVIII century

Demina Irina Aleksandrovna Assistant; Department of Humanities; Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation 49/2 Leningradsky Ave., Moscow, 125167, Russia idemina86@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

One of the most important reforms carried out by Peter the Great was the reform of the Russian army and navy. The young tsar, who received his first military skills as a child, could not help but realize the need for transformation in this area. Indeed, at the time of Peter's accession, the Russian army was a rather bulky, heterogeneous and poorly organized structure. The basis of the infantry were the Streltsy regiments, and infantry regiments of the foreign system. The role of the latter increased significantly at the end of the XVII century, due to better training and armament. The cavalry was based on the noble militia. Thus, at the disposal of the tsar, in case of the outbreak of hostilities, there were actually only a part of the regiments of the foreign system serving on a permanent basis, and the Moscow archers, whose combat capability was maintained only by rare military campaigns. It took a significant amount of time to mobilize the noble militia and Streltsy located outside Moscow, the loss of which in the conditions of military operations could be tantamount to defeat.

The economic organization of the army looked even more chaotic. The regiments of the foreign system were financed from the treasury; the Streltsy were forced to earn their own bread by doing farming in peacetime, and received monetary allowances only for military campaigns; the average nobleman did not receive anything from his military service status, although he could significantly increase his fortune in wartime.

Such an army was not only incapable of solving foreign policy tasks, but also became dangerous for the government itself, which was clearly demonstrated by V.V. Golitsyn's campaigns in the Crimea in 1687, 1689 and the Streltsy uprisings of 1682, 1698. Peter faced a number of tasks to reform and strengthen the army, and subsequently, since the Azov campaigns, to create a navy. In this article, we will be primarily interested in the reform of the ground forces and, as its most important component, the reform of the army recruitment system. The main purpose of the work can be formulated as follows: to consider the main aspects of the introduction of conscription in Russia at the beginning of the XVIII century. The intermediate tasks will be to consider the prerequisites for the reform, its implementation, the legislative framework and the results.

Since there is still no consensus among researchers of this topic on the date of introduction and final registration of conscription, the chronological framework of the study was chosen taking into account the most frequently put forward versions: 1699, 1705, 1710, 1711.

The main source is the "Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire" (The first Collection), published in 1830 in St. Petersburg. The collection contains 45 volumes and chronologically covers the period from 1649 to December 12, 1825. Work on the creation of a complete collection of legislative acts of the Russian Empire was carried out by decree of Nicholas I by the Second Branch of the personal Imperial Chancellery ^[1]. At the same time, the originals of the laws (from 1649 to 1711) were used, which were in the archives of the Discharge and Local Orders, and later combined in the Patrimonial Archive at the Senate and in the archive of the Board of Foreign Affairs in Moscow ^[1]. The archives of the Senate and some collegiums were mainly used to collect decrees issued after 1711.

The topic of the introduction of conscription in Russia at the beginning of the XVIII century is well covered in the works devoted to the military reforms of Peter I. At the same time, in Russian historiography, the main discussions unfold on two issues: 1) the sources of conscription; 2) the time of the introduction of conscription.

Regarding the prerequisites for military reform in general and, in particular, the recruitment system, there were two opinions in both pre-revolutionary and Soviet historiography ^[1]. Representatives of the "School of Academicians", based on borrowings from foreign charters identified in the "Military Charter" (1716) and in the "Naval Charter" (1720), put forward the thesis that foreign models played a leading role in the transformations of Peter the Great. These views were held by R.M. Zotov ^[5], P.O. Bobrovsky ^[2], I.K. Seidel ^[2]. Russian Russian School representatives opposed them, who considered the Russian tradition of military art to be the basis of transformations (conscription originated on the basis of sets of datable people ^[3]) – D.F. Maslovsky ^[7], V.D. Verhodubov, E.V. Tarle, etc. ^{[5, p. 51]}.

The issue of the date of introduction of conscription is probably the most difficult. In pre–revolutionary historiography, 1698-1699 is mainly mentioned, when for the first time forced conscription into the army was carried out unnecessarily ^[5]. Later, the appearance of a new recruitment system was associated with the defeat at Narva, and 1705 was singled out as the main date ^[7]. At the same time, it was emphasized that until 1705 the army was completed both at the expense of daters and at the expense of freemen, and after that only daters became the basis ^[7]. In modern historiography, it is customary to consider the formation of conscription as a long process that began in 1699 and developed throughout the first decade of the XVIII century ^{[6, p.45]}. In particular, P. Epifanov denied the version about the introduction of a new recruitment system in 1699, based on statistical data confirming the predominance of free employment at that time, rather than forced service ^[6]. L.G. Beskrovny comes to the opposite conclusion (again based on statistics) ^{[3, p. 22]}. However, it must be borne in mind that the author, like many other Soviet historians, considered the problem from the point of view of the class struggle. In particular, the creation of a regular army, in his opinion, was dictated by the need to strengthen serfdom ("the army as an instrument of domestic policy") ^{[3, p. 19]}.

The most complete historiographical review of the problem under consideration was written by a modern researcher V. Gavrishchuk. The author not only summarizes the material of all previous studies, but also expresses his point of view on poorly covered and controversial issues, in particular, regarding the concept of the regular army, the distinctive features of conscription from the system of recruiting datable people ^{[5, p. 38]}. Of foreign works, the historiographical review of X. is of interest. The bugger. The Danish scientist systematizes the conclusions of the researchers of Peter I's reforms.

Richard Pipes, in his work "Russia under the old regime", holds the opinion that, introducing conscription in Russia, Peter I did not use any new methods of recruiting the army ^{[8, p. 134]}. So, in 1631, a decree was issued according to which the owners of lands that do not give service people (possessions of monasteries, widows, etc.) were obliged to put one foot soldier from every five hundred acres of arable land ^[8]. These are the so-called "dateless people", in fact, according to R. Pipes, the first recruits in Europe (in Spain, for example, compulsory conscription was introduced in 1637, and in other European countries it became the norm only after the French Revolution) ^{[5, p. 164]}. Indeed, the institute of recruitment of "daters" served as a prototype of the recruitment system created by Peter. However, at the initial stages of the reform, the government was looking for other ways to replenish the ranks of the army and navy. One of the important sources was the "free woman". The decree of December 23, 1700 defined the procedure for recruiting "volunteer soldiers" ^{[1, No. 1820]}. It is clear from the text of the decree that there were extremely few soldiers (runaway peasants were enlisted in the regiments if there was no robbery behind them; escape was punishable by death; a wide age range of potential recruits was from 15 to 30 years old), and at the same time the government was still cautious about serfs (soldiers requested by the fortress were returned to the owner). On a voluntary basis, by decree of 1701, the bombardier company of the Preobrazhensky Regiment was staffed ^{[1, No. 1873]}. They continued to recruit "daters", so the army was replenished comprehensively. During the years 1699-1700, Peter recruited 10,727 daters and 11,787 freemen ^{[6, p. 45]}. Based on these data, P. Epifanov refutes the opinion of pre-revolutionary historians who called the date of the introduction of conscription 1699. The reviewed data from the source for 1699 also do not provide grounds for confirming this dating.

Another argument of P. Epifanov was that instead of supplying recruits, it was allowed to contribute money – 11 rubles per person, which gave the army an additional 50055 rubles ^[6].

In 1703, Peter ordered Siberian merchants and nobles to submit "fairy tales" about their household and business people to take them into service (from the household of the fifth, from the business of the seventh person) ^{[1, No. 1944]}. The moral and combat qualities of such recruits probably left much to be desired, therefore, the decree requires them to be "doubled" for inspection, so that there is someone to choose from. It is obvious that the shortage of recruits by 1703 increased significantly in relation to 1699-1700, the government attracted almost all possible sources of recruitment, a clear confirmation of this is the postscript to the decree of 1703 on the inclusion of Tatars, Kalmyks, Poles and Swedes in the "fairy tales" ^{[1, No. 1944]}. Although they were not brought in for examination, they obviously also fell into the category of potential recruits. For the future, young people (from 10 years old and older) were rewritten, "fairy tales" about which boyars, "duma nobles" and "tent people" ^{[1, No. 1960]}, clerks ^{[1, No. 2023]} were supposed to submit. By decree issued in April 1704, the youngsters brought to the review were inscribed in the dragoon regiments ^{[1, No. 1978]}. By decree of October 28, 1704, one person from two residential yards was taken as a soldier from the Moscow Yamsky settlements ^{[1, No. 1996]}. In January 1705, again in Moscow, one person aged 20 to 30 years was recruited from 20 yards to the field artillery ^{[1, No. 2020]}. At the same time, the Government is tightening measures to combat desertion. Soldiers for escaping were punished by lot of three people, one with death, and two with a whip and exile to eternal hard labor ^{[1, No. 2019]}. Those who voluntarily returned from the run were whipped, exiled to hard labor in Azov for five years, after which they were returned to the troops (which once again emphasizes the shortage of enlisted personnel in the army) ^{[1, No. 2031]}.

Thus, based on the experience of recruitment in 1699-1704, the main prerequisites for the formation and use of conscription, and not any other method of recruitment, as the main one, have developed. Taking into account the peculiarities of the social, political and economic situation in Russia at the beginning of the XVIII century, it is possible to talk about the inexpediency of using other methods of recruitment at that time. Given the geographical location, foreign policy and domestic political tasks, Russia needed a permanent large army. It was impossible to staff it completely on a voluntary basis, since: a) most of the potential soldiers were in serfdom; b) the moral and disciplinary qualities of those who entered the service from the free were quite low, since mostly those who did not have stable earnings outside the army went to soldiers; c) the treasury did not allow economic methods to stimulate the influx of new soldiers and provide motivation for the old ones; d) significant time was required for the initial staffing of formations and to make up for combat losses. Despite the fact that Peter's government attracted the resources of the freemen, probably the question of staffing the entire army on a voluntary basis was not raised. Most of the decrees are based on forced recruitment into the army, so the issue of staffing was not the choice of a new method, but the method of converting the old one – forced recruitment. The essence of the recruitment reform was precisely the modernization of this method to meet and solve modern needs and tasks. This required: a) to make the recruitment regular; b) to include a larger number of estates in them; c) to create an organizational structure; d) to create a legislative framework fixing the scope and timing of conscription.

Thus, the need for reform arose in the context of the ever-increasing need to attract new recruits, social tension caused by frequent and disorderly recruitment into the army, and lack of funds. In 1699, conscription was not introduced, since the compulsory recruitment carried out covered only a part of the population and was not the main method of recruiting the army. Nevertheless, the institution of "datochnichestvo" served as the basis for the introduction of conscription, as well as, probably, foreign experience. Taking into account the foreign policy, economic and social situation in Russia at the beginning of the XVIII century. the use of forced recruitment was the most logical solution to the problem of recruiting the army.

The decree of Peter I of February 20, 1705 introduced conscription in Russia ^{[1, No. 2036]}. Since its entry into force, landowners from every 20 yards were required to supply one recruit aged 15 to 20 years to the army.

A fundamentally new system, introduced only under Peter, was the system of levying conscription on a certain number of households (it was used before decree 1705) ^{[1, No. 1996]}. The rationality of this approach is particularly clear in comparison with the recruitment system of dateless people in the XVII century: by decree of 1631, recruits were supplied from a certain area of arable land, while the number of yards belonging to the owner of the land was not taken into account.

The government of Peter the Great sought to take into account all potential recruits – in August 1704, a decree was issued on the general census of households and peasants ^{[1, No. 1990]}. The census was unsuccessful and therefore its results were only partially taken into account when recruiting ^{[6, p.48]}. The statistical basis of the sets at the time of the decree was the census books of 1678, which were kept in the local order and originally served to collect taxes. That is why the first stage of recruitment was led by the local order, and not by the order of military affairs created in 1701 (actually the decree of 1705 was addressed to the local order).

So, at the first stage, a local order was issued to collect recruits at special stations and in townships. To do this, retired nobles, boyar children "from the cottage", area clerks, gunners, warriors or zatinschikov were sent to the counties "with instructions to bring recruits". The landowner was obliged to deliver the required number of recruits to the station within the announced time frame (according to the decree under consideration - before May 1, 1705) and present them with a "fairy tale" - a list containing names (nicknames) and age data. The selection was made on the spot – the "crippled", unsuitable in age and unsuitable due to any other shortcomings were automatically eliminated - they were not counted to the owner, and it was necessary to put others in place. To keep track of arrivals, employees of different ranks worked at the stations, who checked the "fairy tales" with census books and took "personal" signatures from recruits. Personal signatures had a dual function: they served, firstly, as confirmation that the owner had supplied the required number of recruits, and secondly, as an assurance to the recruit himself that he would not escape from the station and would not desert by joining the troops. Copies of the statements were sent to the military and local orders, recruitment statistics throughout the country came into the hands of Peter personally. In fact, from the moment the recruit put his signature, he transferred to the department of the military order and acquired, from a legal point of view, a new status, and with it new responsibilities, which are discussed in more detail in the appendix to the decree of 1705 – "Articles given to the Officers on the collection of date soldiers and recruits" ^{[1, No. 2036]}.

The stations housed from 500 to 1000 or more recruits, and inns served as housing. It was advantageous to place such a number for the further formation of units and their training. First of all, they taught military formation, for which ordinary soldiers and constables were at the stations. Discipline was already maintained according to military rules: escape was punishable by death; drunkenness, "extortion" and fighting were whipped. Corporals and corporals were appointed from among the recruits. Apparently, regiments were formed, which were located at the stations before the command order was received ^{[1, No. 2251]}.

It is important to note that the decree of 1705 mentions two different terms at the same time – "recruits" and "date soldiers". At the same time, there are often cases when recruits are called dateless people, but not vice versa. Obviously, one term gradually replaced the other from everyday use, for example, in the title "Articles given to the Staff about the collection of date soldiers or recruits."

The principle of constant staffing of the compound established by the decree is extremely important. If a recruit escaped, was maimed or killed in the service, his owner was obliged to put another in his place. Thus, according to Peter's idea, combat and non-combat losses were to be replenished automatically. Moreover, the owner was obliged to provide his recruit with clothing and food throughout his service.

Conscription affected almost all segments of the population. Recruits were recruited from townships, palace volosts, stable settlements, from church lands, lands of boyars and okolnichy, and "other ranks of landlords", from peasant yards, yards belonging to minors and widows.

Thus, by decree of February 20, 1705, the government laid the foundation for the creation of a regular army recruitment system. There was no separate state recruitment organization. Employees and means of Military, Local, Discharge and other orders were used. The age and physical parameters for the recruits provided by the owner were strictly set. The amount of duty and the deadlines for its fulfillment are clearly indicated. A legislative framework has been created for conducting recruitment. The main part of the duty was borne by landowners, however, directly, it fell on the shoulders of the dependent population, as L.G. Beskrovny noted ^{[3, p. 200]}.

The recruitment announced by the decree of February 20, 1705, apparently, was not fully carried out by the specified date. By decree of May 4, it was extended until June 1 ^{[1, No. 2050]}. According to the same decree, the posadsky, who did not have people dependent on them, were obliged to supply a hired recruit ^{[1, No. 2050]}. There was a rather interesting situation: in relation to his employer, this recruit became a mercenary, and in relation to the state – a dateless person. However, this was a special case that affected a relatively narrow stratum of society, so it cannot influence the assessment of the general principle of recruiting the army. The decree of July 14 on the recruitment of mounted recruits (from 80 yards per person) has a slightly different character ^{[1, No. 2065]}. A set of mounted recruits, taking into account the features that distinguish it from recruitment into the infantry, in our opinion, can be distinguished into a subspecies of conscription. The following characteristic features should be identified: 1) the recruit was supplied with weapons, ammunition and a horse; 2) the sets were not regular ^{[1, № 2065, 2095, 2106, 2114]}; 3) the number of yards from which one recruit was taken was not fixed; 4) recruitment could only be carried out in some districts ^{[1, No. 2114]}. "Serving people in regiments and cities" were exempt from military service – this is the first, albeit one-time privilege in the performance of conscription.

Based on the analysis of the source and research on the topic under consideration, the following conclusions were drawn.

The introduction of conscription should not be regarded as a one-time act, this system began to take shape in 1699, its base was formed by 1705, and finally, after all the changes and transformations, it entered the state system by 1711.

Until 1705, the army was replenished comprehensively – due to forced recruitment and "voluntary" soldiers (the latter even prevailed somewhat). Nevertheless, this method of recruitment did not satisfy the ever-increasing needs of the army. The government, based on the economic, social and foreign policy situation of the country, begins to increase compulsory recruitment and since 1705 has been using them as the main source of replenishment of the army and navy. At the same time, they continue to use free hiring, but only as an auxiliary source ^[7].

In 1705-1709, recruitment throughout the state was carried out with a period of one year. Since 1711, the sets have been coordinating the orders of the Senate, and a controlling body, the General Kriegs Commissariat, has been created.

Conscription caused discontent among the population, and desertion became the main form of passive protest against recruitment. In general, for this period, forced recruitment was the most rational and effective method of replenishing the army in Russia, since the deficit of the treasury and serfdom did not allow maintaining a mercenary army, and the state could not be content with the capabilities of the militia due to its vulnerable geopolitical position and numerous foreign policy tasks.

Conscription has become one of the cheapest methods of recruiting the army, as it did not require serious costs for material stimulation of soldiers and ensuring their livelihoods. The costs of recruiting and training recruits were reduced as much as possible by using the resources of government agencies involved in recruitment, in parallel with the main type of activity.