"1812" : $b Napoleon I in RussiaVereshchagin, Vasilïĭ Vasilʹevich
History
"1812" : $b Napoleon I in Russia
Vereshchagin, Vasilïĭ Vasilʹevich
Napoleonic Wars, 1800-1815 -- Campaigns -- Russia; Russia -- History -- 1801-1917
“It was horrible,” relates the daughter of a merchant. “The Russians
themselves were burning Moscow.”—“We were struck with terror at seeing
fires all round us,” says another witness.—“Moscow,” says yet another,
“was burned to drive out Bonaparte. I do not know how it happened, but
one thing is certain, that our house was set on fire.”
A drunken man, dressed in a peasant’s smock, was seen leaving the house
of Prince Kourakin, the steward and four footmen driving him out with
blows. He uttered a shout of triumph, exclaiming, “How well it burns!”
Kourakin’s servants declared that he was an incendiary, and that they
were about to give him up to the French. He was at once shot.
It is impossible to attribute the burning of Moscow to a concerted
plan. It was due in great measure to the fact that a large proportion
of the houses were built of wood, and to the determination of the
Russians not to allow their property to fall into the hands of the
enemy. At first the responsibility was thrown on Rostopchin, who
assured Bagration that if the worst came to the worst he was resolved
to reduce the city to ashes. The fact that the Governor caused all
fire-extinguishing appliances to be removed may suggest the theory
that the destruction of the city was due to the action of the
Governor-General. But subsequent inquiries demonstrated that the
conflagration was, in the main, accidental, and Rostopchin himself
confirms this idea. “It is a trait in the Russian character,” he says
in his _Explanation_, “to destroy rather than to suffer anything to
fall into the hands of the enemy. Let everything perish!” After
Napoleon and his army occupied the city, several generals and officers
visited the principal carriage-manufactories. Each selected a carriage
and wrote his name upon it. The merchants, of one accord, set fire to
their shops that they might not become “purveyors” to the enemy.
On the other hand, the French officers seem to have suspected their own
men, and this suspicion was a source of no little vexation. Ségur states
that a number of officers took refuge in the halls of the Palace. Other
generals, among them Mortier, who had been fighting the flames for
thirty-six hours, arrived in a state of exhaustion. Some were taciturn.
Others charged their companions with responsibility for the outbreak.
All believed that drunkenness and want of discipline among the soldiers
had helped to spread the conflagration. They looked at each other with
dismay. What would Europe say? They spoke with downcast eyes, as if
awestruck by so terrible a catastrophe, which tarnished their glory,
destroyed the fruits of their victory, and endangered their lives. Would
not Providence—the whole civilized world—punish such criminals?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account