264 Gentlemen to Officers
be understood only against the background of the protest movement which
was developing in the army at the time, in which the secret society members
Vf·cn: to son1c cxtt:11i. iu vui vt:<l.
It will be recalled that in Paul's reign malcontents had inurld,ated ' the
authorities with discharge applications. In September 1820 the same step was
taken by officers of the Izmaylovsky regiment,^65 and the next year thei~.com
rades in the Novorossiysk Dragoons 'went sick' in a body to publicize 'their
resentment at the unduly severe punishment of an NCO for some trifling
fault.~ So far as is known these were both spontaneous acts which owed
nothing to any clandestine group, but in May 1822 a similar incident involved
two captains in the Litovsky regiment, N. N. Pushchin and P.A. Oabbc, who
did have clandestine connections.^67 They acted in a more d~sive fashion,
actually rebuking their commander in public, yet their protest, like the others,
was an impromptu affair. The same was true of the 'Norov incident' (March
1822), which differed in that the victim was not a soldier but an <ifficcr, Captain
V. S. Norov of the Chasseurs guards regiment and a former member of the
Union of (Public) Welfare. When Grand Duke Nicholas sharply reprimanded
him without due cause, his comrades took the view that he had been personally
insulted and ought to 'receive satisfaction'. Nicholas neither could nor would
appear on the duelling-ground-Russian history might have talcen a different
turn had he done so-and accordingly about 20 officers put in for transfer to
a line regiment. Six of them, including Norov, were arrested, and after
a period in detention had their request granted by way of punishmenL 68
Each of these incidents was in itself of minor consequence, but the con-
spirators evidently felt that a significant protest movement was under way. It
seems to have subsided once the Northern Society was formed, perhaps
because its members wanted to husband their resources until the organization
had consolidated its strength. By 1825 it had built up its position in several
guards regiments (Moscow, Horse, Finland, lzmaylovsky, and First Orenadiers)
as well as in the naval infantry (morskoy ekipazh). However,_ these units
comprised only a fraction of the entire corps, which had 13 rcgimen!s, each
of 3,000 men, plus a few smaller detachments.^69 Moreover, all the Units just
listed, elements of which participated in the insurrection of 14 December,
were in one of the two infantry divisions, which was under the nominal com-
mand (shefstvo) of Grand Duke Michael. The other, subordinate to Nicholas,
resisted the 'revolutionary contagion'. Nicholas was not popular personally,
so that the reason for this may simply be that he exercised closer <:antrol over
his senior officers, and that they in turn followed his example.
6l Volkonsky, 'Arkhiv', pp. 648-9; Gangeblov, "Kak ya popal', pp. 186-7; Chemov, 'lz
istorii', p. 95.
66 Fedorov, Soldotskoye dvi;.hemye, pp. 174-5.
67 Ibid., pp. 176-8; Beskrovnyy, Potentsial, p. 223.
68 N. Polivanov, 'N. S. Norov, dekabrist, 1793-1853", RA 37 (1900), I, pp. 273-304; VD viii.
138; Nechkina, Dvizheniye, i. 374; Fedorov, Soldatskoye dvii,heniye, p. 17S.
69 Gabayev, 'Gvardiya', pp. 164-72; Lavrov. 'Diktator', p. 191.