Recruitment and Service in the Ranks 161
was to ensure greater uniformity and neatness; it was also expected to help in
identifying deserters. The measure thus had the ambiguous character typical of
so many of Alexander's 'reforms'. In 1813, for instance, the men lost their fur
shuba, which was replaceci by a greatcoat (shir:d).^9 R One may duubt whether
this was a step in the right direction. On the other hand they were now promised
an improved diet, with meat or fish according to the season, as well as an issue
of spirits three times a week.^99 A more flexible arrangement was introduced
with regard to the provisioning of recruits: donors could hand over, in lieu of
foodstuffs in kind, a cash sum which varied according to the cost of products
in each locality.^100 However, this was difficult to administer, and one wonders
how many recruits actually received the hot stew (privarok) which their
solicitous sovereign prescribed. For Alexander practised the art of public rela-
tions: in manifestos he would commiserate with his subjects over the bitter
necessity for each fresh levy, yet he did little to better either the juridical or the
material condition of those who were called on to soldier in his vast armies-as
the survivors of Borodino and Leipzig had every right to expect.
Once allocated to a regiment, there the Russian soldier remained until death
(or, more rarely, discharge) supervened. The 25-year service term introduced
in 1793 was ostensibly a reward for the troops' loyal conduct during the second
Russo-Turkish war of Catherine's reign (1787-91).^101 The privileged servitors
had won the same concession half a century earlier (see below, p. 000), but no
mention was made of this precedent and it is not certain whether it affected the
government's decision. Probably more important were the example of Prussia,
where the service term had been reduced to 20 years rhe previous year,^102 and
the positive experience gained with the 15-year term for certain categories of
troops in the south. Given the low level of life expectancy among soldiers, the
measure may not have made much difference in practice. In 1810 Alexander I
contemplated a further reduction,^103 but nothing came of these plans until
1834.
Each soldier's service record (formulyarnyy spisok) contained a column for
officials to enter the amount of leave he had been granted-but in almost every
case these columns were left a pristine blank. The regulations did not prohibit
leave; but neither did they provide for it. To be sure, for several years after
1727 and again in 1742 one third of the army was sent home,^104 but it seems
that the only men who benefited from this were those from privileged
backgrounds who had estates to go to. In the cavalry units in the south, which
98 PSZ xxxii. 25477 (19 Sept. 1813).
99 PSZ xxxii, xliii. 25363 (26 Mar. 1813); Shchcpetil'nikov (SVM iv) p. 167.
100 PSZ xxx. 23036, 23961 (23 May 1808, 8 Nov. 1809), xxxiii. 26301 (8 June 1816), xliii. 24381
(20 Oc1. 11110); Shchepctil'nikov (SVM iv) pp. 164, 166, 168.
101 PSZ xxiii. 17149 (2 Sept. 1793), §§ 5-6. io2 Busch, Mi/itarsystem, p. 46.
IOJ Petrov, Russkaya voyennaya sila, ii. 319; Tanski, Tableau, p. 159.
104 PSZ viii. 5492, 6085 (20 Dec. 1729, 3 June 1732), xi. 8642 (18 Oct. 1742); cf. Vyazemsky,
Verkhovnyy taynyy sovet, pp. 345-6.