RIOT OF EXILED VILLAINS

This event of two centuries ago has been written about at great length. Despite the literature it is still one the vaguest episodes in the Russian history. We are talking about the so called Benevskiy Riot.

Picture the end of the 18th century. Kamchatka, the remote land of the Russian Empire and its former capital city, Fort Ust-Bolsheretsk,--just 40 residential houses, a church, and an office. It happened that by the start of 70-s the destiny brought here dozens of people of different walks of life: Cossacks, military officers, merchants, and tradesmen, industrialists, and exiles.

In the fall of 1770, two transport vessels, St. Peter and St. Ekaterina, arrived in Kamchatka, with the next group of secret convicts aboard. A Pole, Mauritsiy Benevskiy, a Swede, Adolph Winbladt, a retired captain of cavalry and former landlord Ippolite Stepanov, ex-lieutenants Ioasaf Baturin and Vasiliy Panov masterminded the plan for escape already under way, and managed to get hold of weapons in the City of Okhotsk.

On April 27, 1971, deep in the night, an armed group of tradesmen of Merchant Kholodilov, led by Steward Mikhail Chuloshnikov, and exiles headed by Mauritsiy Benevskiy, broke into the house of Kamchatka Commander, Captain Grigory Nilov. Nobody of Cossacks and soldiers, staying in the house that night, tried to offer resistance.

The Commander's son, scared of the noise, rushed to his father's bedroom. When the shouts and tramping feet were heard closer to the bedroom door, he burst toward the window and got outside. There is no way of knowing what happened next in the Commander's room. Was Nilov indeed trying to suffocate Benevskiy, grabbing at his neck scarf, and Panov shooting at Nilov trying to rescue his leader, or was it just a fiction version? This way or the other, incidentally or premeditatingly, Commander Nilov was dead. Everyone in the house was arrested. Setting the guards, the rioters moved on to the office.

A Cossack Artemiy Pashkov happened to go strike the bell on the hour, when he spotted a group of armed people. The only thing he could do was to scream blue murder, when he was pushed into the outer entrance room, and Benevskiy, Winbladt, navigator Churin, and a bunch of tradesmen followed after him into the office building. Then the tradesmen and exiles collected all the weapons around the residential houses.

Fort Ust-Bolsheretskiy surrendered without resistance, if not for a few shots made from the house of the Cossack sotnik Cherniy. In the morning the locals were informed that Commander Nilov died of an excessive intake of vodka. Although his drinking was not a big news, they did no believe the story, but willing not to share the fate of the arrested, showed no signs of curiosity or bewilderment.

On Benevskiy's order, the clerk Spiridon Sudeikin was called for. They made him write a text of the oath of allegiance to Cesarevitch Pavel, and then go to he church and swear in everybody Benevskiy would send, which was what Sudeikin did "out of fear".

The first to swear in were the marine servicemen, led by the navigator Churin, Master of the St. Peter sailboat.

Benevskiy made a Manifest in Latin, specifying the details of his journey to Kamchatka. The Manifest carried two signatures: Benevskiy’s and Winbladt’s.

On April 19, using newly built ferries, picking all the weapons, gun powder, provisions, cash money, and "soft junk", the team set out from Ust-Bolsheretsk along the Bolshaya River toward its estuary. It took several days to free of ice a marooned vessel found in the Chekavinskaya Harbor. All works finished, the St. Peter sailboat under command of Navigator Maxim Churin headed for the high seas taking 70 people, no longer subjects of the Russian Empress Ekaterina, from Kamchatka.

Over two centuries this event in the history bothers researchers. A superfluous view of the literature on the subject leaves an impression of understatement and controversy, while further work with archival materials raises a number of questions most of which remain unanswered. Few of fiction writers made use of the court file documents. The best part of works dedicated to the Bolsheretskiy Riot based on the materials published in the press.

First of all, it concerns Benevskiy's memoirs, published in many European languages--French, English, German, Chech, Polish --and believed to have been bestsellers for nearly two hundred years, though not yet translated in Russian. They became the very basis for the literary legend and the distinctive national hero's halo spinning around the Mauritsiy Benevskiy's name. The works of Yuliush Slovatskiy and Watslaw Seroshevskiy played the major part in this, bringing up many generations of Poles and contributing to national awareness.

Besides Benevskiy's memoirs, one should note a partial publication by Russian historian V.N. Berkh of the "Journal, written by ... clerk Spiridon Sudeikin in the Syn Otechestva Magazine of 1822, called for some reason "Clerk Ryumin's Notes". Many authors researching the subject referred to S. Sgibnev, who allegedly offered the official version of the events, with attachment of a detailed list of the escapees, though not complete. While exiles and Cossacks were named correctly, the tradesmen were presented as one homogeneous mass. However, it was them who were the main force of the Bolsheretskiy Riot. Behind each listed name was an individual with his fate, woes and fortunes. It is fates that make the times. It would be impossible to understand an epoch having not perceived the thoughts, aspirations, and hopes of its people.

The first who ventured to review the Benevsiy's case, from the viewpoint of some Russian participants of the riot and on an archival basis, was Sergei Vakhrin in his article "Crew of Mutinous Galiotte" (The Vokrug Sveta Journal, Is. 2-3, 1990). Vivid images of the St. Peter's crew, that's what we get as a result of this work. I would like to add just little touches.

Certain traditions have been established in literature as to approaches in consideration of some facts. One of them associates with Benevskiy, who has been presented as a genius and protagonist. However, a detailed analysis of documents sheds some light on many a dark side of the story, notorious and vague as it was, and helps to destroy stereotypes in relation to this or other individual.

By way of example, prior to St. Peter's departure, Benevskiy wore to God to, under any circumstances, protect the interests of his followers and keep his oath of allegiance to His Majesty Emperor Pavel Petrovich. The ensuing events testified how hypocritical had been the oath of the "noblest" of men.

When at the Port of Macao, Benevskiy sells the galiotte St. Peter to a Portuguese Governor and charters two French vessels. The whole ex-crew of the St. Peter is to go to France. Except for Ippolite Stepanov jailed for insubordination, plus seventeen other seamen, frustrated by the humid and hot climate, and, possibly, by their leader's perfidy. "Died in Macao" read seventeen times in the lists passed to N.K. Khotinskiy, Russian Representative in Paris. Seventeen fates. Seventeen tragedies.

However, of those who left Macao for safety, few survived. At a Mauritius shore hospital, four more seamen were left deadly ill. But let's make it one thing after another. On Sergei Vakhrin's opinion, the reason for the riot was in the conflict between the tradesmen and their master, merchant Fedos Kholodilov, who, for some speculations of his own, had not sent them trading for 3 years on end. Then, during a stormy season ordered them to go trading. Their vessel ran aground. The tradesmen returned to Ust-Bolsheretsk, where they harassed their master until he died of a stroke. Then they joined the team of the exiles.

At first glance, everything was clear and simple. Although questions swarmed as soon as we turned to the sources. Why the court files did not mention the incident before the riot? How that could have happened that Navigator's Mate Sofyin, charged with interrogations, when entering every detail from a rotten saber to a tin-mug, had missed the whole merchant dead at the hands of the bastards? All these questions would have remained unanswered if it had not been for the criminal case of 1768 (the same, Kholodilov's case), which document inventory has been stored at the State Archive of Irkutsk Administrative Area, Russian Federation. The whereabouts of the file itself, as well as the very possibility of its survival up till today, are unknown. Nonetheless, the inventory issued in the Irkutsk Criminal Chamber, allows to draw certain conclusions.

Sergei Vakhrin is absolutely right about the three years spent by tradesmen at Ust-Bolsheretsk, although not at their master's whimsy: by the time of the Ust-Bolsheretskiy Riot he had been long dead. The inventory was clearly stating the premeditated murder case where the accused of the crime had been four people: Maxim Churkin, Mikhail Novograblenny, Sidor Krasilnkov, and a Cossack Ivan Vasitinskiy. Still, were the reasons and circumstances of the murder the same as Sergei Vakhrin described? Possibly so. The unavailability of the court files themselves makes it impossible to give a more definite answer. (After Fedor's death all his property formally passed to his nephew, Alexey Kholodilov, on whose absence Kamchatka Commander Captain-Lieutenant Izvekov, then in charge, passed the grounded fishing boat and, evidently, the crew to Kholodilov's Steward, Mikhail Chuloshnikov.)

The arrested Vasitinskiy and Krasilnikov were left at Ust-Bolsheretsk, while Churkin and Novograblenny sent to Okhotsk, possibly, for further interrogations. However, the investigation got procrastinated. So, in order for Okotsk poll-tax payers not to carry the burden of extra expenses on the part of the prisoners, the local authorities ordered to send them back, which was done on a first state-owned vessel departing to Kamchatka. The vessel did not arrive to the destination: evidently, she got wrecked or ran aground. Even some of the crews or passengers did survive, there is no formal way to prove it, any way. Approximately at the same time, the third prisoner, Cossack Vasitinskiy, died at Ust-Bolsheretsk. Sidor Krasilnikov had waited in custody for the court’s award until the April, 1771, when he joined the riot and left Kamchatka among the crew of the St. Peter.

The inventory says, that he did so on advice of clerk Portnyagin. What was that person? What was his role in Krasilnikov's fate and in the riot? Investigation files mentioned the name several times, with no association with Benevskiy or Krasilnikov. Why? There is no answer.

Sidor Krasilnikov's story did not finish at Mauritius. Polish researcher Edward Kaidanskiy stated that Krasilnikov returned to Kamchatka, lived there for a long time, and in 1794 (years after the riot) told about his adventures with Benevskiy to a Polish exile. Perhaps, some documents existed confirming his return. But they are nowhere to be found. So, Kaidanskiy's version cannot be confirmed or refuted.

The absence of documentary proof affected another issue. It is well known that the City of Irkutsk was the administrative center of the whole province, including Kamchatka. Therefore, Irkutsk's General-Governor A.I. Brile by the call of his duty was to be aware of all events in Kamchatka as well. This was no the only thing connecting Irkutsk with Benevskiy's riot. Out of seventeen rioters, forgiven by Empress, and returning home, nine were supposed to reside in Irkutsk. There the traces of eight tradesmen, Krasilnikov's companions, who witnessed Kholodilov's murder and participated in Nilov's. These people could tell a lot. Possibly, they did tell to Irkutsk residents something about their life at Ust-Bolsheretsk, about hardships of trade and dangers of sea voyages, about the betrayal on the part of Benevskiy, about the far-off France, about how the crews of the St. Peter died out one by one, and how the survivors awaited with horror whom would be the next on the death row. They could tell a great deal more. Unfortunately, we cannot know the whats an hows: the notorious fire of 1879 in Irkutsk destroyed all the precious testimonies.

One of the ninth was navigator's apprentice Dmitry Bocharov. He appealed for a permit to stay in the Navy in Okhotsk and study the land-survey in Irkutsk. Only the second request was satisfied. Bocharov retired from the Navy and lived for a certain period in Irkutsk. Unfortunately, nothing can be said about this period of his life either.

Two more people of Benevskiy's team happen to visit Irkutsk: navigator's apprentice Gerasim Izmailov, and kamchadal Alexey Paranchin. Left by Benevskiy on one of the Kuril Islands, they managed to come back to Kamchatka. After the first interrogations in Ust-Bolsheretsk and Okhotsk, they were sent to Irkutsk for the second row of interrogations. They were detained in custody until the special order of the General-Prosecutor of Knight A.A. Vyazemsiy's Senate. Here also was detained another prisoner on Benevskiy's case. Priest Alexey Usyuzhaninov was not on the team of the "Mutinous Galiotte" but took part in the riot preparations. He did not join at the last moment due to circumstances, but his 14-year-old son, Ivan, did. Knight Vyazemskiy ordered to exempt the priest from punishment, considering he had been punished enough having lost his son. However, Ivan followed his teacher and leader until his very death. He returned to Russia only in 17 years, and worked at Nerchinskiye Mills all his life. Did he meet his farther? Or was his father dead by then? And if the did what they talked about? Alas, these questions do not have answers.

It can be seen from the interrogation materials, that none of the rioters or associates was punished.  How can like Monarch's mercy be explained? Was Empress underlining her status of enlightened sovereign. Or was she trying to hush up the case, for which end any records of the Bolsheretskiy Riot were forbidden and classified for the Secret Office.

They say, a man dies not in bed but in memories of people. So let us remember those who left us yesterday, whose footprints were lost in time. It's true, they deserved it.