Directory of RSS feeds
Statistics

RSS feeds in the directory: 2786

Added today: 0

Added yesterday: 0

Entertainment / Entertainment magazines

The whole truth about the duel of Lermontov with Martynov

True Life 07.09.2016 at 10:49

Incredible facts and true stories

The participants of the duel of Lermontov and Martynov vs hid from the investigation the fact of gross violation of the dueling rules, in which the poet died. But it could not be decisive in determining the court penalties that the defendants had been prosecuted merely for participating in prohibited by the law of the duel, and the responsibility for the deviation from the unwritten rules of the "fight two" the law is not provided.

15 Jul 1841, about seven o'clock in the evening near the city of Pyatigorsk held a duel of Lieutenant tenghinka infantry regiment Mikhail Lermontov with a retired major Nikolai Martynov, culminating in the death of the poet. Less than five years ago Lermontov responded to the death of Alexander Pushkin, streamsage with a French citizen society, Georges d'anthes, a poem "Death of a Poet", which began with the lines: "the Poet Died! – slave of honor -// Fell, slandered by a rumor...". Poetic image – "slave of honor" – best characterizes the situation in which it was considered unthinkable to shy away from the fight without sacrificing honor. Therefore, the so-called dueling ritual involves, first, determining the severity of the insult. However, familiarity with the criminal and military cases of judgment the fight of Lermontov with Martynov leads to a shocking conclusion: the reason a retired major, demanded satisfaction from his classmate in the Cadet school, by no means "dealt to his honor."

the Beginning of the duel in Russia put a distant relative of Lermontov

Duel, as a way of protecting honor, tragically ended the life of two great Russian poets in Russia had its own traditions. However, in the eleventh century the Eastern Slavs practiced judicial duels, which were legitimate (they were written in the Russian Pravda, the legal code of criminal law, inheritance, commercial and procedural legislation) method of resolving the litigation in favor of who won. - Known expert on the history of duel military investigator Colonel Peter Svejkovsky wrote: "the Court fight is the proof, on the basis of which the decision is issued; the duel is the very decision of the case." (Svejkovsky P. A. Court of honor and the duel in the armed forces of the Russian army. Handbook for officers of all the armed weapons. SPb., 1912. P. 108.)

the Beginning of the duels of the Western model in the Russian state put the match in Moscow in 1666 two foreign mercenaries – the Scotsman Patrick Gordon, and the Englishman major Montgomery. Ironically, one of the ancestors of Gordon, QC, was married to Margaret Learmonth, who, according to the researchers of Lermontov's biography, is his cousin. From the surviving diary of Gordon can be seen that the reason for the call was a quarrel on the feast in his house, about which he says nothing, claiming only that "he [Montgomery] was just wrong, and rather insulted me". The officers agreed "to come together tomorrow and solve the case by equestrian duel". "We parted, raced each other – describes fight with Gordon, and both were shot, being very close, without any harm. I whirled [...], and it went away. I jumped after him, and though on military and dueling law could use his very disadvantageous position, all the same reined in his horse and shouted to him to come back. Stopping his and as he approached, he replied: "We'll kill each other – the fight on foot!" I replied that I was content with any way...". However, as subsequent entries in the match interfered by outsiders and failed to follow through. "So we left the field without reconciliation, writes Gordon, and agreed to meet tomorrow or another time, however, the English merchants we reconciled". (Gordon Patrick. Diary. Per. D. G. Fedosov. Moscow, Nauka, 2002, p. 162)

Slave of honor

In Tenghinka regiment the Lieutenant of the Life guards hussar regiment Mikhail Lermontov was set after the duel with the son of the French Ambassador in Russia, Ernest de Baranton. In February 1840 de Barante accused of Lermontov that he allegedly spread about him in the society "unprofitable things." The fight was held at the sabres, during which Lermontov received a tangential wound, but after his blade was broken, opponents continued to duel with pistols. After a miss de Barant Lermontov shot into the air, after which the seconds recognized the duel took place (and again the irony: three years earlier from one of these pistols, which are de Barante borrowed Dantes was mortally wounded Pushkin). In April of the same year, the Commission of the military court sentenced to three month Lermontov content the serf in the dungeon with the subsequent statement "in one of the army regiments of the same rank...". However, Nicholas I restricted the punishment Lermontov only transfer to the Caucasus, and his second – a retired Lieutenant Alexei Stolypin (great-uncle of the poet), the Emperor ordered to "be free from liability." And de Barante and his second count Raoul d Angles with impunity out of Russia.

"What is the punishment for someone guilty"

relative to the duel from the point of view of public opinion succinctly expressed by well-known lawyer and lawyer Vladimir Spasovich: "the Custom of the duel is among the civilization as a symbol of what man can and should in certain cases to sacrifice the dearest of his good – life – for things from a materialistic point are of no significance and meaning of the faith, the Motherland and honor". And Svejkovsky into the above-mentioned work about duels emphasized that "society puts extreme difference between a murderer in a duel and an ordinary killer". And cites a number of grounds, highlighting the duel of honor out of the total number of murders: first murder committed without the victim's consent, out of the corner and fight by mutual consent, second, the duel gives equal chances fighting.

However, in the Russian law fights was regarded as a criminal offence. The exception is the period from 1894 to 1910, when "in order to strengthen morale in the army" by order of the war Department, duels among the officers was permitted, and in some cases, by the court of society officers was mandatory. Lermontov in a duel with de Baranton and Martynov for the murder of Lermontov judged on the basis of the provisions of the uniform code of military decrees enacted according to the Manifesto of Nicholas I, from 1 January 1840. The edition of the code was preceded by the codification of military laws, starting with the Petrine Military regulations of 1716, which was the basis for the reform of legal systems, conducted under Peter I.

it is considered that it was he who established the bans on duels. However, such a ban in October 1682 was stipulated in the decree of the Princess Sophia (the eldest sister of Peter) on the resolution of serving people to carry side arms. But Peter went further, details writing "articles" that define the responsibility of all participants of the duel ("what someone is punishment for guilt"). Article 139 Article (Military Charter) has determined that "all the challenges, fights and duels through that namjestite prohibited in such a way that no one, even used who he was, of high or low rank, a born local or a foreigner, although one who, by words, signs or otherwise than by that excited and stimulated was by no means dare your opponent to call, below to fight him with pistols, or swords Bitsa. Who is against this commit skoneczna aforesaid, as a calling, and who will come, has to be executed, but it hanged, though one was wounded or killed, or even both injured from that move. And if sluchitsa that both or one of them in this game ostanettsa, their dead legs hang". Article 140 provided for the same penalty for the seconds, could be punished even the servants who betrayed "vizuelno cedula" knowing its content.

"the court For unauthorized and lawless vengeance"

the code of military regulations significantly lowered the scale of punishments for the duel, and equated killing in a duel to premeditated murder. "Who, causing the other to fight, to inflict a wound, injury or murder, he shall be punished as wounds, mutilation and murder intentionally put" – says the article 395 paragraph 5 of book 1. Article 376 States that "the deliberate certovica subject to deprivation of all property rights, punishment shpitsrutenami and exile to hard labor". To witness the punishment contained in article 397: "the mediator and the mediators or the seconds, had not managed to reconcile and have committed to fight, not announcing properly, suing as members of the match and are punished as committed harm, that is, if you commit murder as accomplices and participants in the murder; if the wound or injury as participants and accomplices in the wounding or mutilation; if murder, wounds or injuries not committed as members of the court unauthorized and lawless vengeance, in violation of peace, love and harmony".

It is interesting that earlier in the Manifesto of Catherine II "On the duels," published in 1787, the duel is also an offence against public order. Guilty of the call was considered an offender of the judiciary, which would be the case on the complaint of a grudge. Therefore, "a person who discovers the desire to become a judge in his own case, resorted to lynching" exposed "collection of judicial dishonesty". Received the call was subject to punishment "for the enemy of the law" and "the accomplice to the lawless case", and caused the enemy wounds, injury or death is punished as a deliberate crime.

However, some researchers place the duel in the criminal law system, agreeing that it is a separate offense is "a special kind", did not consider it a crime against judicial authority since it is not always the reason for it served punishable by court or insult the court, in their opinion, was unable to restore the violated honor. Proponents of this point of view is not classified as a duel to the criminal acts against the public peace, because it is devoid of publicity, and the deadly outcome of the duel is not considered murder, because "man himself creates a danger."

the jurisprudence of that time shows that in relation to persons participating in duels, never used the upper limits of punishment, and the very scale of punishments with the development of the legislation steadily declined. In the penal Code criminal 1845, the fight is already regarded as a crime against "personal benefits" for which the envisaged punishment in the form of imprisonment in a fortress from 6 to 10 years with the preservation of the nobility's rights even in the event of the death of one of opponents (the seconds and physicians were exempted from prosecution). However, these measures were not requested by the judicial authorities. However, it is impossible not to agree with Svejkovsky, who claimed that "...the willingness of both parties would rather lose life than to lose honor, leads to the basic conclusion that greater or lesser severity of the punishment for duelling in terms of impact on the number of duels may not have any value". (Svejkovsky P. A. Court of honor and the duel in the armed forces of the Russian army. P. 135.).

Who led the military-judicial proceedings

have Recently published the book "the Duel of Lermontov and Martynov", of which the law firm "yustina" in the framework of the project "the Russian trials" continued with the publication of authentic materials most high-profile judicial cases from the history of Russia. In the book (introductory article of the managing partner "Justina" Vadim Zlobin) collected authentic materials of the investigation "About the incident match, where retired major Martynov killed from a pistol tenghinka infantry regiment of Lieutenant Lermontov" and military judgment of the case "the tradition Of the court martial of retired major Martynov, cornet Glebova and titular Counsellor of Prince Vasilchikov for the first with the Lieutenant Lermontov duel". They give an idea about who and how were established the actual circumstances of the incident of the fight, as was conducted in the military court proceedings that were taken into account when sentencing participants.

On the incident of the duel in Pyatigorsk commandant Colonel Vasily Ilyashenko told his direct chief – commander of the Caucasian line and black sea coast to adjutant General Pavel Grabbe (in turn, the commander reported to the commander of a Separate Caucasian corps, General of infantry Golovin, Eugene): "...Located in the city of Pyatigorsk to use disease of the Caucasian Mineral waters, dismissed from the service of the Greben Cossack regiment, major Martynov and tenghinka infantry regiment the Lieutenant of Lermontov [this spelling of the surname of the poet is constantly found in the documents of] this month 15 th in the four miles from the city, at the foot of the mountain Masugi, had a duel in any way Lermontova Martynov was wounded from a pistol in the side through, from which wound Lermontov died on the spot. Seconds they had located here for the use of mineral waters of the life-guard Horse regiment Kornet Glebov and serving in the II Department of his Imperial Majesty's Chancellery with the rank of titular counselor, Prince Vasilchikov. According to this proisshestviy is a legitimate consequence, major Martynov, Kornet Glebov and Prince Vasilchikov arrested; and as conveyed to the Emperor...".

Earlier, on 16 July 1841, Platz-major (assistant commandant), Colonel Philip Untilov received the order Alashankou "immediately to begin production [...] of the investigation when identity of the assessor of the Pyatigorsk court of the land and the physician who will be seconded from the hospital office, Preece letting you know that on sending assessors to the County the solicitor I suggested that along with these territorial court, and the physician directed the hospital office."

the investigative Commission, headed Untilova, entered noble assessor of the land court Cherepanov, supervisor maruszewski correcting the position of solicitor of Pyatigorsk Olshansky 2nd and a resident of Pyatigorsk hospital doctor Barclay de Tolly, and Lieutenant-Colonel of the gendarmerie of Kushinnikov, exercise political oversight in the army in the Caucasus. Its work the Commission of inquiry began on July 17. In accordance with the procedure of carrying out investigative actions prescribed in the code of laws of Russian Empire in edition of 1832, were questioned by the participants of the duel, carried out a forensic examination of the body of the deceased and the examination of the scene.

the Medical examination of the body of the victim, visiting the scene of the duel and the inventory of guns

Examination of the body of Lermontov produced the doctor Barclay de Tolly. In that time the doctors were guided by the Instruction of the doctors at the judicial inspection and autopsy of the dead bodies, established in 1829. According to the first paragraph of instructions for "inspect dead bodies and opinion on that meter on the cause of death, is one of the most important duties of the forensic doctor. His opinion is often based sentence, decisive honor, freedom and life of the defendant". However, Barclay de Tolly anatomical dissection is not conducted, limited to external examination. In a medical report, he stated that "pistol bullet hitting in the right side below the last rib in the knitting of rib cartilage, broke his right and left lung, rising up, came between the fifth and sixth rib left side and cut the soft part of the left shoulder." It is known that before the shot the opponent Lermontov stood him right side under the guise of a bent elbow arm and gun. Some researchers have expressed doubts that in such a situation perhaps similar to the location of the wound channel. Others, denying them suggested that the specified location of the entrance and exit holes could be due to, for example, gapping the bullets into the barrel of a gun (deterioration of the channel), in which she when meeting the obstacle has changed a rectilinear trajectory.

the Picture could clarify the proper investigation of the murder weapon, but the court was presented with only a brief inventory of guns: "Guns are single-barreled with fistname with silver straps and a blue notch on the barrel, of whom one has no cleaning rod and no silver tube. The number of things 2". The name, characteristics (caliber, range, etc.), and also the state of pistols, and their affiliation is unknown. In the future, the physical evidence was generally taken from the criminal case (Stolypin wished to have them as a memory of Lermontov, and the commandant of the Pyatigorsk on the last day of the court substituted another couple).

Investigative Commission in the presence of the Glebov and Vasilchikov the next day after the duel has examined the site of the fight and the location of the duelists. The results of the inspection were drawn up. However, the document did not place the evaluation of the position of each of the duelists from the point of view of equal conditions (some researchers believe that the position Martynov shooting was preferred). Contrary to the then existing rules, the investigation was not for the court and the graphical layout of the place of the fight.

the interrogation of the participants of the duel that they were hiding from the investigation and trial?

Investigative Commission and then to circuit court, where they should have handled the case, was represented by Martynov, Glebov and Vasilchikov questions in writing (called a form of "interrogation points" was used mainly against the nobles). During the period of investigation Martynov and the seconds were able to correspond among themselves, to agree and to change the testimony, they took advantage.

is Not called all the participants and witnesses of the fight...

for Example, the question about how the participants of the duel got to the venue, Martynov, in one case, said that he and Lermontov came on horseback, and "vasylchikov, and Glebov cross-country sulky," another has already claimed that riding came and Vasilchikov. And further: "in addition to the seconds and the two of us, nobody was on the site of the duel and no one strongly didn't know about it."

Dueling rules prescribed seconds to refrain from sharing the journey to the duel, to prevent possible collusion against any of the opponents. In the same courtyard they what slip Martynov, could be the only case that was not the only Manager of the upcoming "fight". The interviewee has concealed the fact that the duel was another couple of seconds – Prince Sergey Trubetskoy and the uncle of Lermontov, Stolypin, who directly supervised the duel and played a fatal role. They, at all costs, tried to avoid trial: the Stolypin feared severe punishment for repeated participation in a duel, and troubetzkoy – for being in Pyatigorsk without permission. Therefore, Glebov and Vasilchikov, who possessed impeccable service forms, conspired to take responsibility for themselves and write, "what to us is four, two seconds and two duelists".

the Participation in a duel, Stolypin and Trubetskoy found many years later confirmed in the memoirs of Prince Vasilchikov. In addition, a number of sources considered it likely that the duel could observe avid duelist Rufim Dorokhov, whom Lermontov closely brought together service in Tenghinka regiment (the presence of a duel of friends and family rules is not forbidden, although it was not considered good form).

have Distorted the true distance between the duelists...

To the question about the conditions of the duel Martynov wrote, "was the measured barrier in 15 steps in each direction for another ten. We are extreme points. The condition of the duel, each of us had the right to shoot when he pleases, standing still or approaching the barrier. Misfires should have been considered for the shots. After the first miss, the enemy had the right to call the shots on the barrier. More than three shots on each side was not allowed on the condition. I first came to the barrier. Waited a few time of the shot Lermontov, then pulled the trigger". Vasylchikov, and Glebov, of course, repeated readings Martynov.

it was Only after many years vasylchikov, admitted that the distance between the barriers was not 15, but 10 steps – seconds "measured out thirty paces; the last barrier was put on ten." Due to the fact that on the eve of the duel Lermontov said that will not shoot to Martynov, these conditions made him the enemy of the true intentions of which no one knew, in the most favorable conditions – the distance is almost excluded the possibility of mistake. Meanwhile, the French dueling code, which was guided by Russian and duelists, provided the rivals "gentle" conditions: barrier distance generally equal to 30-35 steps. However, the seconds Lermontov and Martynov has chosen the "deadly" option.

Some researchers of the biography of Lermontov, in particular Professor Paul Viskovatov, who spoke with witnesses of the last days of the poet, inclined to the conclusion that the lack of on-site match doctor and the crew for possible transportation of the wounded, taking part in a duel, Stolypin and Trubetskoy, which if released there would be serious problems in the service, shows that attended the match were hoping for a peaceful outcome. "Next to the poet people with so little faith in the possibility of a serious interchange, which decided to have lunch in the colony of Karras and after lunch to go to the match. [...] Somehow, in the circle of young people dominated by the belief that it's all a joke, – the belief, supported playful mood of Mikhail Yurevich. Drove more like a picnic, not a fight to the death," wrote Viskovatov. Vasylchikov, in conversation with the biographer also said that the duelists "so lightly staring at the thing that was admitted many omissions".

reported that Martynov shot, when to shoot was impossible...

In the responses to the "question points" the defendants have shown that a duel took place with the convergence of the enemy team could start the movement from the established baseline to the barrier and to fire the shot at any time, including staying put. But silent about certain features of the shooting. After the command "go head to head!" Stolypin began the countdown to "three" with a period of time no more than 10-15 seconds. The first shot of the duelists could only produce between two and three. However, neither the artist nor Martynov during this period not a shot. According to the rules of a duel had to be stopped for further decisions about termination or continuation. But Stolypin in violation of the rules that is not allowed is not specified in advance of the teams, called out: "Shoot, or I build a duel!". After that Lermontov said, "I'm the fool, will not shoot" (according to another version, he said he has a habit of shooting over nothing), and Martynov shot. "Lermontov remained motionless and vzvoda the trigger, raised the gun barrel up [ ... ]" – recalled Vasilchikov. [...] Martin's quick steps came up to the barrier and shot".

Tried to confuse the question of from whom came the challenge to a duel

"I first called him," – said Martynov to a question of the Commission of inquiry. But he referred to the words allegedly uttered in his address the arch, and which, in his opinion, "has been in some way call", so he had nothing to do, how "formal" request from Lermontov's satisfaction. Approval of the retired major, he asked him to stop obnoxious jokes and warned that if he again decided to elect him "for the subject of your mind", it will force him to "stop". "He didn't let me finish, and repeated several times in succession, – says Martynov – that he the tone of my sermon is not like that; I can't forbid him to speak about me what he wants, and to top it off he added: "Instead of empty threats you would be much better made if we had acted. You know I never turn down duels...". Martynov again and again in his testimony tried to convince the investigation that, in essence, the challenge followed on the part of Lermontov, and the path to reconciliation was cut off: "Glebov tried to convince me but I firmly told him that he is from the words of the Lermontov will see that, in fact, I call, but I call". And another testimony: "I answered them (Vasilchikov and Glebov): [ ... ] now it was too late when he told me that I needed to do. In particular, I heavily depended on the advice he gave me yesterday, and showed them that the Council was nothing more than a challenge." Vasylchikov, after the duelist said, "... In the day of strife, when the major Martynov when I approached the Lieutenant Lermantov [meanwhile, Martin repeatedly testified that their conversation with Lermontov was eye to eye], and asked him not to repeat the ridicule, for it is offensive, this latter replied that he had no right to forbid him to talk and laugh, that, however, if you have a grievance, you can call him, and that he is always ready to satisfaction". Vasylchikov, characterized it as "attempted call."

"Abuse me any was not applied"

Some of the circumstances of the duel, hidden Martynov and seconds from the investigation and their own shortcomings the Commission has significantly affected the quality of the investigation, in particular, not all of its members, the facts of gross violation of the rules of the duel. However, even if everything is different, it is unlikely to have played a decisive role in determining court-martial punishment in the direction of its tightening. Judges would be faced with a unique legal case: on the one hand, defendants had been prosecuted for participating in prohibited by the law of the duel, and on the other the legislation does not stipulate responsibility for the violation of unwritten rules of the game.

did not affect the verdict of the military court and the nullity of the cause of the duel, which ended in the death of Lermontov. Meanwhile, it could not be unnoticed by the consequence and court it from Martynov answers to questions about what reason he gave Lermontov for quips and one-liners ("as without it would it to happen"), what was caused him resentment and "was not concerned whether his words more a friendly joke or to insult Your honour?" "Since his arrival in Pyatigorsk Lermontov did not miss a single case to tell me something unpleasant, wrote in response Martynov. – Sharpness, barbs, ridicule at my expense – in a word, all that can annoy the person, not referring to his honor (Italics – the author)". "The reason for his witticisms at my expense, probably, it is not that other, as desire to be witty; at least I do not know other reasons – continued Martynov. – As to the nature of such ridicule and taunts, they remember not the word but the intention." And further: "I have had the honor to explain to the gentlemen investigators that the abuse caused me any was not".

Why the defendants sought to fall under the jurisdiction of the military court

4 Aug Nicholas I "his Majesty deigned to command" to bring the duelists "by a military court, not arrested, so that trial was completed immediately" (earlier it was planned that the case will be considered by the district court). The legal grounds for this decision were: the rules of jurisdiction provided for consideration by a military court of a crime committed by a group, which included military (Lieutenant Glebov). However, there has been interest as the Caucasian generals, not wanting to wash dirty linen of the barracks and, above all, Martynov: "civil", the court could sentence the murderer of Lermontov to the graft. So retired major ahead of time petitioned the authorities on the replacement of the court. "The sentence of the military court can give me the chance to atone for the transgression of my own blood in the service of King and Fatherland," he wrote.

"Major Martynov committed the murder, as he was forced to duel by Lermontovym"

the Board of the military court was formed of the combatant officers, chaired by the commander of the Caucasus line No. 2 battalion of the Lieutenant Colonel Vasily, Manaenko. The trial was also attended by the auditor (military lawyer), Olexander Yefremov, who was an adviser to the Commission members on legal issues. On the basis of a code of military regulations in part 5 of the UN Charter military criminal, books 1st articles 376, 395 and 398 sentenced Martynov, Glebov and Prince Vasilchikov to the deprivation of rights rank and status, finding no grounds to "send in hard labor".

According to the established order while, your opinion on the sentiments expressed by the highest representatives of the military administration in the Caucasus, adjutant General Grabbe and General of infantry Golovin. Both warriors declared in one voice that "the major Martynov committed the murder, as he was forced to duel by Lermontovym" and that "Lermontov himself told him what to do, and that his counsel given to him the day before, is nothing more than a challenge," and proposed to "write it [Martynov] soldiers to service without deprivation of the noble dignity." And seconds Glebov and Vasilchikov "to impute a punishment of detention before trial, to withstand some time in the fortress with napisaniem fine this formulary lists".

"Appeal" the decision of Nicholas I

Report to Nicholas I on the outcome of the military judgment of the case for final sentencing Martynov, Glebov and Vasilchikov was presented by the General auditor Adam Noinsky (he also represented to the Emperor for approval a sentence Dantes in the case of the duel with Pushkin). Nicholas I ordered: major Martynov plant in the Kiev fortress in the brig for three months and to bring the Church to repentance, titular Counsellor of Prince Vasilchikov and cornet Glebova to forgive – "first in attention to the merits of the father, and the second by the respect he received in battle wounds". The term of Church repentance for Martynov was determined Kyiv spiritual Consistory at the age of 15. It involved the wearisome prayers, long fasts and pilgrimages. After requests Martynov on mitigation of punishment, the Holy Synod in 1843 reduced the period of repentance from 15 to 5 years, and in 1846 Martynov was released.