Violence, Publicity, and Incitement in the Russian Revolution of 1905–7

Abstract

Violence, Publicity, and Incitement in the Russian Revolution of 1905–7 Susan K. Morrissey (bio) In 1907, the prominent writer and journalist Vladimir Korolenko published The Tragedy of Sorochintsy, in which he recounted a drama of the revolutionary years of 1905–7.1 This story begins in December 1905 in the township of Sorochintsy, Poltava Province, where residents—mostly peasants—had gathered to listen to an agitator and pass political resolutions.2When authorities detained a local schoolteacher on political grounds, they appealed unsuccessfully for his release and “arrested” two local officials in the hope of securing an exchange. Dispatched to dispel these “disorders,” Cossacks shot into a large crowd armed with makeshift weapons, such as scythes and pitchforks, killing 18 or 20; one police officer accompanying the Cossacks was also killed. Over the next days, a punitive expedition—a detachment of Cossacks led by F. V. Filonov, an official in the provincial administration—swept through the area, targeting Sorochintsy before moving on to a neighboring village. The second act moves to the city of Poltava, the provincial capital where Korolenko had lived since 1900. A newspaper reported on events in Sorochintsy, generating talk and rumors but no official response: this was just one episode in an empire-wide crackdown on unrest and dissent. Outraged by what had happened, especially upon learning of another punitive expedition in a village where no prior unrest had occurred, Korolenko had [End Page 489] resolved to lend his influential voice to a public campaign when 12 people from Sorochintsy came to Poltava, having themselves decided to appeal to the press for justice. He personally investigated, conducting interviews and correlating testimonies, and wrote a scathing rebuke to the leader of the punitive expedition. Published on 12 January 1906, his “Open Letter to State Secretary Filonov” was a sensation. Using deliberately provocative language to emphasize both the brutality and the illegality of the state’s actions, he called for Filonov to face a court—or failing that, for Korolenko himself to be prosecuted for his words, secure in the knowledge that he had the facts on his side.3 The edition sold out, prompting the newspaper to reprint the letter as a supplement before being closed down by administrative order two days later on 14 January. On 18 January, however, a revolutionary terrorist shot Filonov on the streets of Poltava and escaped into the crowd. Instead of a public campaign culminating in a showdown in court, as he had intended, Korolenko faced a political storm driven by the media. On the day of the funeral, another local newspaper, this one close to official circles, published Filonov’s open letter in reply to Korolenko (later revealed as a forgery), and a surging right-wing press then accused Korolenko of inciting the murder, an accusation subsequently repeated in the Duma. The “tragedy” concluded with two legal processes. In the first, Korolenko and the newspaper editor were charged under press regulations, but the prosecution was dropped early in 1907 because the official investigation had found the factual content of his letter to be accurate. At this point, he published The Tragedy of Sorochintsy, which narrated events and reprinted the “Open Letter” with detailed footnotes citing the state’s own investigation. The second process resulted in a trial of 19 men from Sorochintsy in September 1907; 11 would be acquitted and 8 convicted with relatively lenient sentences of 6–18 months. Korolenko attended, having supported the accused and their families throughout this period, but his attempt to use the press to compel legal due process had failed. This trial focused solely on the actions of the defendants, excluding the actions of state actors and the punitive expedition from its purview despite the motions of defense attorneys.4 [End Page 490] ________ This case occurred at a critical juncture in Russian history, linking two of its central features: the unleashing of the press following the collapse of censorship and a sharp rise in both state and insurgent violence, including punitive expeditions and terrorist acts.5 Even before 1905, the censorship regime had been under severe strain due to chronic understaffing, a rapid expansion of the press in tandem with urbanization and...