(^366) Towards a Modern Army, 1825-1874
fatigues and extra turns of duty.^71 A soldier so penalized had the right to com-
plain, and even to choose someone to present his case; his superiors were obliged
to hear him out patiently and to satisfy valid objections; but if a man alleged
that his legal rights had been infringed he had to complain formillly at an
inspection parade, which was bound to be an intimidating experience.12
Those whose offences were serious enough to warrant court-martial 'could
also expect to be treated less harshly than before. Nicholas I had not been
totally indifferent to the fearsome penalty of running the gauntlet: in 1830·he
laid down a limit of 6,000 blows and four years later halved that figure; but the
rulings were not publicized, lest discipline be undermined, and in practice they
were not regularly enforced.^73 To mark his coronation Alexander II is said to
have reduced the number of blows to 1,000 and to have reserved the penalty
solely for 'serious disobedience and impertinence'.^74 In the ensuing discussion
attitudes towards its abolition became something of a talisman. Advocated by
Kapger as well as Milyutin, its 'complete elimination' was ann6unced by the
tsar on 17 April 1863 'as a fresh example of paternal concern and to raise
morale'. Characteristically, this elevated sentiment wa~ followed by a provi-
sion that offenders could still be given up to 200 blows with rods-in
public-until such time as sufficient prisons were built. This penalcy could be
inflicted only by court order on men in the 'punished' category.7S A contem-
porary writer noted that conservatives offered less resistance to this reform
than they did to the easing of disciplinary penalties.^76
We need not explore here the whole range of pe11alties, extending from
reprimands and fines to exile with forced labour and capital punishment, but a
word must be said about imprisonment. The detention companies first set up
in 1823 had grown into a major.institution under Nicholas I, who made provi-
sion for 55 companies with up to 13, 750 detainees. Prisoners of all categories
were lumped together indiscriminately; with heads shaven and their legs often
in fetters, they did construction work and drilled in their 'spare titne\^77 These
units, 'schools of dissolution' as one writer called them, were replaced in the
reform era by so-called correctional companies, in which the emphasis was
shifted from labour to rehabilitation. The authorities prescribed in Claborate
(^71) Bogdanovich, /st. ocherk, iv. 462-3, and for the 1869 revisions p. 468; cf. also Kudryavtsev,
'O distsiplinarnom ustave 1875 g.', p. 92.
72 II PSZ xxxviii. 39830 (6 July 1863), VII,§§ 63 ff.; Bogdanovich, Isl. ocherk, iv. 469.
(^73) Klugen, 'Neskol'ko slov', p. 199; cf. Keep, 'Military Style', p. 77; Vish, 'Telesnye
nakazaniya ', II, p. 117.
74 Klugen, loc. cit. (not in PSZ).
7l II PSZ xxxviii. 39506, 39508 (17 Apr. 1863); Bogdanovich, /st. ocherk, iv. 456-7. Birching
procedure was as formalized as that of the gauntlet had been, men of the victim's company being
obliged to watch as the blows were administered an an NCO counted each one aloud; there was no
longer a provision for a medical officer to be in attendance, but instead the escort had to 'watch
vigilantly to prevent any breach of order on his [the victim's] part': II PSZ xliii. 4'892 (23 May
1868).
76 Shatilov, 'Mysli', p. 364.
(^77) A. V. Tavamhern, 'Arestantskiye roty', VE iii ( 1911 ), 18-19 and more fully in SVMxii. 306-
33; Afanas·yev, 'Distsiplinarnye bataliony', p. 117.
wang
(Wang)
#1