 |
More About the History of the Dukhobortsy of Kharkov Province
by
Vladimir Ivanovich Savva
The Russian
province of Sloboda-Ukraine (Kharkov) was the cradle of the birth of the
Doukhobor faith at the beginning of the eighteenth century. However, during
the reigns of Catherine the Great (1762-1796) and Paul I (1796-1801),
Sloboda-Ukraine Dukhobortsy endured tremendous persecution, and hundreds
were exiled to the Baltic and to Siberia. When the liberal reformer
Alexander I ascended the Russian throne in 1801, one of his first acts was
to pardon the exiles. This act proved inadequate, however, as the
Dukhobortsy who returned to their homes from exile were almost immediately
persecuted anew by local authorities and Orthodox neighbours. When Orthodox
clergy attempted to ‘admonish’ the newly-returned exiles, rebellion ensued.
The following important and little known article brings to light the role played by Russian
Senator Ivan Vladimirovich Lopukhin (1756-1816), who intervened on behalf of
the Sloboda-Ukraine Dukhobortsy, helped ease their sufferings, and
engineered their resettlement to the Molochnye Vody (“Milky Waters”) region
in Tavria. Reproduced from Vladimir Ivanovich Savva’s article, “K istorii dukhobortsev Khar’kovskoi
gubernii” (Kharkov, Kharkov
Historical-Philological Society, 1893) as republished in P.N. Malov,
Dukhobortsy, ikh istoriia, zhizn' i bor'ba,
it
supplements material published previously on the Sloboda-Ukraine
Dukhobortsy. Translated by Vera Kanigan,
with additional translation and editing by Jack McIntosh, for the Doukhobor
Genealogy Website.
Preface by the Author
The article presented here contains information
on the history of the Dukhobortsy (Doukhobors - ed.) of Kharkov province
found in materials preserved in the Kharkov Historical Archives of the
Historical-Philological Society ("Delo o vypushchennykh Dukhobortsakh
Slobodsko-ukrainskoi gub. po Vysochaishemu poveleniyu 1801 g.", No. 56 [File
on Doukhobors from Sloboda Ukraine province released by Imperial Command in
1801], No. 56). These materials were not covered in Professor A. S.
Lebedev’s study entitled "Dukhobortsy v Slobodskoy Ukraine" [Doukhobors
in Sloboda Ukraine].
These archival materials are supplemented by
Senator Lopukhin’s interesting notes which he revised in 1801 with the
assistance of the other senator from Sloboda-Ukraine Province. Imbued with
Tsar Alexander I’s spirit of tolerance, and interested in the fate of the
Dukhobortsy who at that time had only just been resettled from exile to
their former places of residence, Lopukhin, while in Belgorod on the way to
Kharkov, was already gathering information about them.
Within five days of his accession to the throne, on March 17, 1801, Tsar
Alexander I issued a royal command releasing all of the exiled Dukhobortsy
from Dünamünde (present-day Daugavgriva, Latvia - ed.) in the Baltic, a total of
203 persons of both sexes from Sloboda Ukraine and the provinces of Novorossiya ("New
Russia", the historic name of Southern Ukraine - ed.). As well, from Ekaterinburg (in Siberia
- ed.), nineteen
persons of both sexes were sent back to the village of Bereky, Zmiev
district, Sloboda Ukraine. A large number of the Sloboda Dukhobortsy had
been imprisoned in Dünamünde Fortress – 148 persons, transferred there in
1799 from Ezel Island (present-day
Saaremaa,
Estonia - ed.). The surnames of the Dukhobortsy point to their Great Russian
origin, for example: Shchekin, Golishchev, Gremyakin, Poznyakov, Malakhov,
Makhonin and so forth.
The released exiles were given funds gained from the sale of their
confiscated property. However, from the archival documents it is evident
that only odnodvortsy (a class of peasant smallholders - ed.) from the
village of Bereky, Zmiev district received such funds: Mikhail Stroev – 283
rubles, 18 1/2 kopecks, Trofim Baev – 64 rubles, 97 kopecks, Onisim Kukhtin
– 34 rubles, 65 3/4 kopecks, and Kukhtina – 122 rubles, 63 3/4 kopecks.
All of the returning Dukhobortsy returned in groups, first to the city of
Kharkov, from which they were sent out to their previous places of
residence. The first group appeared in Kharkov in May 1801. Their fellow
villagers did not give the returning Dukhobortsy a warm welcome. When they
arrived at the village of Saltovo-Ternovo, the Dukhobortsy were not
permitted by the villagers to enter their dwellings and so were forced to
stand in a field for over 24 hours. In their complaint submitted to the
Vice-Governor over such treatment by the people of Saltovo-Ternovo, the
Dukhobortsy requested that they be moved to another location, because the
anger directed to them by the villagers was great, and already the latter
had submitted a petition alleging that the newcomers were enticing members
of the Orthodox Church into their heresy.
|
 |
|
Early 19th century lithograph of the Island of
Ezel (present-day
Saaremaa, Estonia) in the Baltic where over two
hundred Dukhobortsy from
Sloboda-Ukraine were exiled in the 1790's. By F.S. Stern. |
When several Dukhobortsy rented space in a coach house from a landlord in
the village of Liptsy, the volost (rural sub district - ed.) administration
appealed to the Kharkov land court requesting that the Dukhobortsy be
forbidden to live in the coach house because they would spread their heresy
among Liptsy inhabitants. The relationship with the villagers became more
aggravated because the Dukhobortsy desired once again to occupy their
original property, which had subsequently already changed hands three times.
The Dukhobortsy proposed to the new plot owners that they would pay the same
price for their property as that for which it had been sold; however the
latest owners did not agree, because they had spent money improving the
farms.
On account of the complaints of the Dukhobortsy, to the effect that they
were ruined and could not restore their original dwellings, and that given
the hostile treatment by their neighbours they would have to provide for all
their own farming needs, the Governor of Sloboda Ukraine ordered, through
the lower land court, that the authorities be charged with making sure that
there was no ill-treatment or oppression against the Dukhobortsy either on
the part of the local residents or the nearby population. However, the local
authorities had not given the Dukhobortsy satisfaction, and so the latter
subsequently appealed to Senators Lopukhin and Neledinskiy-Meletskiy while
they were in Kharkov.
At almost the same time as the Dukhobortsy complained about their ill
treatment by the villagers, the villagers rejoined with complaints against
the Dukhobortsy, saying that they were openly practicing their heresy, were
trying to entice Orthodox people into it, and were uttering abuse against
Russian Orthodoxy. The provincial authorities were assigned to investigate
the problem; the accused Dukhobortsy were taken into custody and found
guilty of rebellion
(see Dukhobortsy v Slobodskoy Ukraine [Doukhobors in Sloboda Ukraine]
by Professor A. S. Lebedev, Kharkov 1890, pg. 12 & ff.). Governor Zilbergarnish appeared before Lopukhin and
Neledinskiy-Meletskiy, who were then in Kharkov, with news about the revolt
of the Dukhobortsy.
Previously, when Lopukhin found out about the dispatch of church luminaries
and the lay judge of the Izium lower land court, along with a team of
dignitaries, to "admonish"
(literally “to
give friendly earnest advice or encouragement" but in Tsarist Russia,
tantamount to summary incarceration, interrogation and in some cases,
torture - ed.) the Dukhobortsy of Petrovskiy village to abandon
their heresy, he had told the Governor that such actions might provoke a
revolt, because the Dukhobortsy had just returned from exile and as yet had
not had an opportunity to catch their breath. The Governor, however, made
the excuse that the instructions to admonish the Dukhobortsy had been made
in his absence by the Vice-Governor while he (Zilbergarnish) was on leave.
Lopukhin then ordered him to recall the dispatched team, along with the
church officials who had been sent, and to have a word with the bishop about
the return of the latter group, as it was not yet time to admonish the
Dukhobortsy, who had not succeeded in recovering after their exile. He
blamed the revolt itself on the admonishments, supposing that when the
Dukhobortsy had been asked whether they would pay taxes, they refused
because they had been brought to ruin and were themselves in need of
assistance
(see “Zapiska niekotorykh obstoiatel’stv zhizni i sluzhby dieistvitel’nago
Tainago Sovietnika, senatora I. V. Lopukhina” [A note on some circumstances
in the life and career of Acting Privy Councillor, Senator I. V. Lopukhin],
Chteniia v Obshchestvie istorii i drevnostei rossiiskikh (Moscow),
no. 2, 1860: 1-82; no. 3, 1860: 83-193;
Book 3, page 93 and
ff.).
After a discussion with Lopukhin, the Governor directed the Izium lower land
court not to exert even the slightest amount of pressure on the Dukhobortsy,
not to place any under guard, to release those that were under arrest
without delay, and in general to treat them gently and with patience, not to
constrain them, give them freedom and cease all investigation of them. In
reply to the Governor’s directive, the Izium land court sent him the
statements taken in evidence from the Dukhobortsy who had been in custody,
which had been the basis for their arrest.
One of those arrested, Sergei Ivanovich Popov, 67 years of age, testified as
follows: “[I was] born in Belgorod province of a father and mother who made
profession and took the holy sacraments in worldly (Orthodox) churches;
about 40 years ago [I] moved with them to live in the sloboda (free village
- ed.)
of Petrovskiy, where in the Petrovskiy church [I] married Praskoviya, the
daughter of a villager, Andrei Dergachev”. Popov’s wife and three sons
supported all of his testimony, the former testifying as to her husband, the
latter as to their father, adding that, although during the time the father
was serving in the military and in exile, they went to church and took the
sacraments yearly, they did so at the insistence of the priest and under
coercion from the village heads, whereas now they rejected that, and in the
future intended to abide permanently in the Dukhobor faith.
The other Dukhobor who was interrogated, Ivan Abramovich Sukrutov, gave
testimony similar to Popov's; in response to a question about how old he
was, he said that he was “12 years old in spirit (that is, from the time
that he had entered into the Dukhobor heresy), but as to how old in the
flesh, [I] do not know.”
One of the Dukhobortsy who had returned to Orthodoxy after being admonished
testified that he had been seduced into the Dukhobor faith during the time
that he was serving with the Ekaterinoslav Cossack troops, in the small town
of Kaushany, at the time of the seizure of the town of Bender (from the
Turks in 1770 - ed.). After he became a member of the Dukhobortsy, he continued in all matters to
follow Christian rituals because he did not wish to reveal his apostasy.
|
 |
|
18th century
lithograph of the Fortress
of Dünamünde (present-day Daugavgriva, Latvia) in the Baltic where
over two hundred Dukhobortsy
from Sloboda-Ukraine were exiled from 1799 to 1801. |
Having insisted on a halt to the admonitions meted out to the Dukhobortsy
and their release from custody, Lopukhin and his colleague Senator
Neledinskiy-Meletskiy sent their report to the Tsar about the Dukhobor
affair (on November 12, 1801). With this report, Lopukhin appended an
extract about the Dukhobortsy in which he laid out a history of the
emergence of the sect and the essence of their teaching.
(“Vypuska o dukhobortsakh…” [Extract on the Doukhobors], by Senator Lopukhin,
Chteniia v Obshchestvie istorii i drevnostei rossiiskikh, 1864, Book
4, page 47.). Lopukhin characterized the way of life of the
Dukhobortsy as abstemious and respectable, supposing that their fanaticism
had been provoked by harsh measures directed towards them.
In their report to the Tsar (November 12, 1801), Lopukhin and
Neledinskiy-Meletskiy, the latter playing a secondary role in all of
Lopukhin’s arrangements regarding the Dukhobortsy, explained their
intervention in the Dukhobor situation as resulting from the Tsar’s
injunction to be “attentive to all that was noteworthy in Sloboda Ukraine”,
the province they were inspecting.
“Before our arrival here in Kharkov,” the Senators reported, “the local
authorities, by virtue of their excessive zeal, of course, but without
having penetrated into the exact essence of Your Majesty’s orders concerning
the aforementioned Dukhobortsy, undertook to admonish and convert them,
although they had only just been freed from their heavy bonds and permitted
the mercy and wise tolerance enthroned in the Holy Personage of Your
Imperial Highness. During this formal admonishment, the questions, which
were not, of course, skillfully crafted, wrested from those admonished, as
the exhorters reported, responses contrary to the duties of a loyal subject.
But it is highly probable that the newly aroused fanaticism of those who
responded, oppressed and brought to ruin by their former misfortunes,
wrapped their words with a brutality not present in their hearts; or
possibly their insufficiently enlightened interrogators wrongly understood
them, and prejudice already engendered against those speaking caused their
interrogators to apprehend their utterances in darker colours than their
words intrinsically deserved” (Chteniia v Obshchestvie istorii i
drevnostei rossiiskikh [Readings at the Society of Russian History and
Antiquities], Book 3, 1860, page 95: “Zapiski … Lopukhina” [Lopukhin’s
Notes]).
Explaining the irritation of the Dukhobortsy as due to the incompetence of
the advisors, the Senators reported to the Tsar that from their discussions
with the Dukhobortsy they detected in them feelings of special gratitude to
the Tsar who had liberated them, and a willingness to submit to the ruling
monarch and fulfill all duties and responsibilities required of loyal
subjects. As a result, the Senators ordered that all investigation of the
Dukhobortsy be halted and those who had been arrested released.
To the district authorities, they explained His Royal Highness’s will
concerning treatment of the Dukhobortsy thusly: “[you are] enjoined to call
upon ecclesiastical personages to instruct the Dukhobortsy on the path of
truth without any compulsion on their part, meaning they should not by
untimely and unduly elegant means, as in a court of law, confuse and inspire
fear of those in power who are carrying out the admonitions, but to do this
at opportune moments, being attentive to the situation, striving in their
own places of settlement to engage at the churches clergy who are not so
much distinguished by the brilliance of their schooling and their artistic
eloquence, as they are by their genuine piety and zealous love for the law
of God and Gospel teaching, by their lives bearing witness to their
sensitivity and principles. Such pastors will naturally inculcate a good
opinion of themselves and therefore will attract trust; they will find time,
occasions and places for their conversations and with the most simple
methods will discover ways to influence their hearts and minds, minds that
desire enlightenment and have inner zeal towards God’s law, but are confused
as to ways and means. As for the duties and responsibilities of a loyal
subject, then in harmony with Your Imperial Majesty’s wisdom and pleasure,
by treating them with gentleness and patience, they should, just like
everyone else, be required to abide by the obligations prescribed by the
decrees of Your Imperial Majesty and the laws of the state, both general
civil and rural land law. As for those who do not fulfill the above, they
should be punished in accordance with the same laws, and without entering
into the ideas or reasons behind non-fulfillment, if someone in actual fact
proves to be in direct revolt against the authorities and the common order,
he should be dealt with to the full extent and the letter of the law” (Chteniia...page
97).
At the same time as this dispatch from Lopukhin and Neledinskiy-Meletskiy,
the Governor of Sloboda Ukraine also sent his “humble report” to the Tsar
with his explanation of the affair, influenced by Lopukhin, who did not
regard the words and actions of the Dukhobortsy as a revolt
(“Doukhobors” – Professor A. S. Lebedev, page 18.) .
The Dukhobortsy who had gathered at Kharkov, encouraged by the mild attitude
of the Senators, started to present different requests. Two of them,
Cossacks from Okhochei sloboda (Baev and Sidorov), requested of Lopukhin
that the houses acquired by them (while in exile) on Ezel Island, for which
one of them (the former) had been offered 325 rubles, and the other (the
latter) 158 rubles, be sold and the proceeds from the sale be given to them.
In their directions to the governor to see to satisfying these requests, the
Senators again expressed the desire that the governor take care to protect
the Dukhobortsy “from the oppressive consequences of prejudice and
misconceptions on the part of the district authorities,” who had not
understood or interpreted correctly the testimony of the Dukhobortsy. The
Senators and the Governor himself had had occasion to be convinced of this
when the Dukhobortsy testified to them in contradiction to what the
authorities had reported about them.
When the Dukhobortsy were in Kharkov, Lopukhin had daily conversations with
them. They took a liking to him and talked openly with him. “Apart from
their boundless – one might say fanatical – prejudice against everything
exterior, their skeptical aloofness and preference for themselves, I found
their concept of Christianity to be most radical and correct,” wrote
Lopukhin in
his
Zapiski (page
98).
He paid particular attention to the circumstance
that although amongst the Dukhobortsy there were hardly any who knew how to
read and write, and that of those whom he met, only one of them could write,
and very poorly at that, nevertheless each one spoke “like a book”.
|
 |
|
18th century
lithograph of Kharkov, the provincial capital of Sloboda-Ukraine.
The Dukhobortsy returned here from
exile in 1801 before
dispersing to their home villages throughout the province. |
After repeated discussions with the Senators, the Dukhobortsy delivered to
them a formal petition that expressed their loyalty and zealousness to the
Tsar, requesting that they try to obtain from him permission to resettle in
another area. Then Lopukhin and Neledinskiy-Meletskiy dispatched a second
message to the Tsar (December 3, 1801), explaining the way of thinking of
the Dukhobortsy, passed on their request to settle in a special place, and
recommended that the Tsar not permit them to establish their own volost
administrations independently, but to establish over them an administration
made up of honest and unprejudiced officials of high moral character, and to
locate their settlements near cities and settlements where the priests, by
the good example of their lives and persuasive preaching, would attract the
Dukhobortsy to themselves. In this humble petition the Senators attested to
the extreme poverty of those who had returned from exile. Although they had
indeed been given money from the sale of their property, it had been sold
after their exile for a very low price.
On the eve of their departure from Kharkov, Lopukhin and
Neledinskiy-Meletskiy received an official royal reply (rescript) in which
the Tsar, expressing his appreciation for all of their dispositions in the
matter of the Dukhobortsy, directed them to make sure that all of them would
be enforced. At the same time, the Tsar commanded the Sloboda Ukraine
Governor to follow the Senators’ example in his treatment of the
Dukhobortsy, to involve himself with the needs of the Dukhobortsy and report
to him as to the status of their farming economy, whether they have housing,
whether they have commenced tilling the soil, whether they have money to pay
duties; whether indeed they have means for building homes; then, having
determined how much they need in total for that purpose, to report back
right away, thereby demonstrating that the government was concerned about
them.
The idea of relocating the Dukhobortsy was approved by the Tsar. The purpose
of this resettlement was the desire to protect the Dukhobortsy from people’s
hostility while distancing Orthodox believers from the Dukhobortsy’s
corrupting influence. The places chosen for Dukhobor settlements were
located along the Molochnaya River (Melitopol district, Tavria province -
ed.),
where they were settled by the Imperial Decree dated January 25, 1802, under
the following favourable conditions: that relocated persons receive 15
desyatinas (imperial land measure equivalent to 2.7 acres - ed.) of land per
head, and that for five years, all resettled persons would be excused from
paying any state taxes. At the time of the relocation itself, 100 rubles
were issued from the treasury to each family as a loan, with the
understanding that after ten years this sum would then be collectable from
the settlers within twenty years, such that annually each family would have
to pay no more than five rubles
(Polnoe sobranie zakonov
[Compete compendium of laws], volume XXVII, No. 20.123).
The first 296 settlers along the banks of the Molochnaya River were
Dukhobortsy from Sloboda Ukraine and Ekaterinoslav provinces, who
established the village of Bogdanovka and took up farming
(For
information about the Doukhobors after their relocation to the banks of the
Molochnaya, see Dukhobortsy: ikh istoriya i vierouchenie [Doukhobors,
their history and beliefs], O. Novitskiy, 2nd edition;
Skalkovskiy, Kievskaia starina, April 1887, page 777; and Yuzov,
Russkie dissidenty [Russian Dissidents].
To join them there,
with the permission of the government (starting early in 1805), Dukhobortsy
from Tambov and Voronezh provinces, 494 in number, began to arrive there,
followed by Dukhobortsy from other parts of Russia (the Don Cossack lands,
and Kherson, Tavria, Astrakhan, and Penza provinces). By the end of 1808
they already had nine villages: Bogdanovka, Spasskoye, Troitskoye, Terpeniye
and Tambovka on the banks of the Molochnaya River, and Rodionovka, Efremovka,
Goreloye, and Kirilovka near the estuary of the same river where it flows
into the Sea of Azov
(Dukhobortsy…
– Novitskiy, 2nd edition, pages 63–85).
In the latter years of Alexander I’s reign, the attitude of the government
towards the Dukhobortsy changed, for which the Dukhobortsy themselves were to blame, and during the reign of Tsar Nicholas I, in 1830, a decree
was issued according to which heretics – Dukhobortsy, Ikonobortsy, Molokans,
and Judaizers – accused of spreading their heresies, riotous conduct and
insolence against the Church, clergy and faith, had to be brought to trial;
that those found guilty were to be subject to military conscription. By this
same decree the resettlement of the Dukhobortsy to Novorossiya was stopped, but migration to
the Transcaucasus of those wishing to do so was allowed. In 1839 an Imperial
Decree followed, ordering all the Dukhobortsy to be moved from the banks of
the Molochnaya River to the Transcaucasus. The reason for this, in the words
of the inquiry that was conducted, were actions of the Dukhobortsy
themselves: they had been harbouring evildoers and criminals,
and had been subjecting their own people suspected of defecting from their
heresy to cruel torture and death. The forced migration of the Dukhobortsy
from Novorossiya to the Transcaucasus took place from 1841
(when there
were 9 settlements and as many as 4505 residents – see Skalkovskiy’s study
in Kievskaya starina)
until 1845.
Altogether there were over 4000 migrants
(in Novitskiy, page 154).
Note
Senator Ivan Vladimirovich
Lopukhin's (1756-1816) involvement in the "Dukhobortsy Affair" would determine the fate
of the sect throughout Russia for the next forty years. For the first time,
the Dukhobortsy had in Lopukhin a sympathetic high official who spoke up for
the sectarians and stressed their virtues as well as their faults. He
acted as a conduit between the Dukhobortsy and the highest circles of
Russian society, transmitting their beliefs using the language and metaphors
of the Imperial Court, and in doing so, helped lay the basis for Tsar
Alexander's policy on the Dukhobortsy. But for his intervention, the
Dukhobortsy of Sloboda-Ukraine and elsewhere would have remained isolated,
dispersed, voiceless and oppressed. It is through his
efforts that the Dukhobortsy owed a great measure of release from
persecution, and also an opportunity to exist and develop as a
self-contained community on the Molochnaya. Sadly,
his role and influence in the history of the Dukhobortsy remains
largely unappreciated and forgotten. To find out more about this important benefactor
and sympathizer see:
Ivan Vladimirovich Lopukhin:
His Life and Role in Doukhobor History.
|
 |