Paul I (short biography)
After the death of Catherine the Second, her son Pavel the First ascended to the Russian throne. During his lifetime, his mother actually removed him from power and their relationship was strained. In 1794, she tried to deprive him of the right of inheritance, transferring power to her grandson, but this was not destined to happen.
Having become emperor, Paul completely changes the order that had previously existed at his mother’s court. His policies (both foreign and domestic) were distinguished by their inconsistency. He restores the abolished boards, changes the administrative division of Russia, returning the previous forms of government. Paul deprives the nobility of privileges, limiting the effect of letters of grant and constrained local self-government. In 1797, he established a standard for peasant labor (three days of corvee per week) - the first of the restrictions on the power of landowners. But during the four years of his reign, he was able to distribute to the same landowners more than six hundred thousand peasants who belonged to the state.
In carrying out his ruling activities, Paul the First allowed extremes, pursuing inappropriate policies. For example, he banned the use of the words “club”, “citizen”, “council” and “fatherland”. The ruler also prohibits certain clothes and dances.
He grants amnesty to prisoners convicted of political crimes under Catherine II, but continues to fight manifestations of revolution in society. In 1797 - 1799, he established the most severe censorship - more than three hundred publications were banned, and on July 5, 1800, printing houses were sealed for a special censorship inspection. In addition, Paul intervenes in the affairs of the clergy, trying to unite Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
In 1798, an anti-French coalition was formed which included Russia, Turkey, Austria, and England. A year later, a major battle takes place for the island of Corfu and Russian soldiers enter Rome and Naples.
A year later, the second phase of the war begins, but already in 1800 Paul ceased hostilities, breaking the alliance with Austria and England and withdrawing his troops. After this, an agreement is concluded with France and Prussia against Austria.
The aggravation of relations with England causes great discontent among the nobility, because it was Russia’s main partner in the purchase and trade of grain.
Paul the First was killed as a result of a conspiracy and palace coup, which took place on the night of March 11th to 12th, 1801 and was organized by senior guards officers.
After death Catherine 2 her son ascended the throne Pavel 1. During her lifetime, Catherine actually removed Paul from power; their relationship was very cool. In 1794, she tried to deprive him of the right to inherit the throne and transfer power to her grandson. However, the empress could not carry out her intention.
Having become emperor, Paul changed the order that existed at Catherine's court. His policies in all areas were extremely inconsistent. He restored the abolished boards, changed the administrative division of Russia, reducing the number of provinces, and returned to the previous forms of government of the provinces of Russia. Paul deprived the nobility of their privileges, limited the effect of letters of grant, and constrained local self-government. In 1797, he established a standard for peasant labor (three days of corvée per week), this was the first limitation of landowner power. However, during the 4 years of his reign, he distributed more than 600 thousand peasants belonging to the state to the landowners.
In all his activities, Paul 1 allowed extremes and pursued inappropriate policies. He banned the words “club”, “council”, “fatherland”, “citizen”. Banned the waltz and certain items of clothing. He amnestied prisoners for political reasons arrested under Catherine 2, but at the same time continued to fight against revolutionary manifestations in society. In 1797-1799 he established the most severe censorship, banning 639 publications. On July 5, 1800, many printing houses were sealed for censorship inspection. Paul interfered in religious affairs, trying to introduce elements of Catholicism into Orthodoxy.
The emperor repealed the law prohibiting the purchase of peasants to work in enterprises. Without any justification, contrary to the meaning, he restored the collegial system, abolished by Catherine II.
Among the innovations introduced by the emperor, the creation of the Medical-Surgical Academy, the Russian-American Company, and a school for military orphans stands out positively.
The Emperor attached great importance to regulations in military relations. The drill in the army acquired unprecedented proportions, which caused discontent in the guard and among senior officers.
In 1798, an anti-French coalition was created, which included England, Austria, Turkey and Russia. The Black Sea squadron under the command of F.F. was sent to the Mediterranean Sea. Ushakova. The Russian fleet liberated the Ionian Islands and Southern Italy from French occupation. In February 1799, a major battle took place for the island of Corfu, where a three-thousand-strong French garrison was defeated. Russian troops entered Naples and Rome.
In 1799, Russia began the land phase of the war. At the insistence of the Allies, command of the troops was entrusted to A.V. Suvorov. In a month and a half of fighting, Russian troops managed to oust the French from Northern Italy. Fearing the growth of Russian influence in Italy, Austria achieved the transfer of Suvorov’s troops to Switzerland. On August 31, 1799, to provide assistance to the troops of General A.M. Rimsky-Korsakov, Suvorov makes a heroic transition from Northern Italy through the Alps to Switzerland. Russian troops defeated the enemy in the battles of St. Gotthard and Devil's Bridge. But help was late, and Rimsky-Korsakov’s troops were defeated.
In 1800, Paul 1 made a sharp turn in foreign policy. He ceases hostilities, recalls troops to Russia and breaks the alliance with England and Austria. Having made peace with France, Paul 1 entered into an alliance with Prussia against Austria and with Prussia, Switzerland and Denmark against England. The worsening relations with England caused discontent among the nobility, since England was Russia’s main partner in trade and the purchase of grain.
But palace coup on the night of March 11-12, 1801, interrupted plans for war against England. Paul 1 was killed as a result of this coup, organized by senior guards officers who did not forgive him for the oppression and the will taken away from them.
Potemkin Grigory Alexandrovich born in the village Chizhovo in the Smolensk region (Russia) in a noble family. In 1762, Potemkin G.A., while serving in the guard, participated in a palace coup, as a result of which Catherine II received the Russian throne. Potemkin G.A. - participant in the Russian-Turkish war of 1768-1774. Becoming a favorite of Catherine II in 1774, he gained a decisive influence on state affairs. With his participation, the peasant war led by E. Pugachev was suppressed. In 1775, on the initiative of G.A. Potemkin, the New Sich was liquidated. In 1776 Potemkin G.A. appointed Governor-General of Novorossiysk, Azov and Astrakhan. For the annexation of Crimea to Russia in 1783, he received the title of “Prince of Tauride”. G.A. Potemkin contributed to the development of the Black Sea region. According to the decree of Catherine II addressed to G.A. Potemkin, Kherson was founded on June 18, 1778. For the first time G.A. Potemkin arrived in Kherson in May 1780 with considerable funds for the construction and improvement of the city. He summoned 2,000 craftsmen, carpenters, blacksmiths and masons from Russia for ship and city construction, and transferred 10 infantry regiments from his fourth division to Kherson for the construction of a fortress and settlement in the city. Potemkin G.A. visited Kherson in 1782 and 1783, and from 1786 until the end of his life he visited the city regularly, carefully following its development. Talented engineers and architects from St. Petersburg and Moscow, France, Holland and Germany worked in Kherson. The right of free trade granted to Kherson contributed to the opening of foreign trading offices in the city. During the period of management of G.A. Potemkin settled the region in Novorossiya. New villages, cities, and foreign colonies arose. Kherson, Sevastopol, Nikolaev, Ekaterinoslavl (Dnepropetrovsk) were built under his leadership. G.A. Potemkin carried out a number of measures to reorganize the Russian army and organize the Black Sea Fleet. During the Russian-Turkish War of 1787-1791. Potemkin G.A. - Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Army. During peace negotiations with Turkey, he fell ill and died on the way from Iasi (Moldova) to Nikolaev. Many plans of Potemkin G.A. regarding Kherson remained unrealized. He was buried by order of Catherine II in the Catherine Cathedral of Kherson, where his remains are kept in a crypt to this day. Two islands on the Dnieper near Kherson are called Potemkin Islands - Big and Small. In the Kherson city park, a monument to the “Prince of Tauride” was erected in his name; one of the city’s schools bears his name.
Petr Aleksandrovich Rumyantsev was one of the outstanding Russian commanders. His successes in the wars with Prussia and Turkey marked the beginning of the glory of Russian weapons in Europe. He gave rise to the future successes of Suvorov and Ushakov. 
In August 1756, the Seven Years' War began in Europe. On one side were the participants in the Whitehall Treaty of England and Prussia, on the other side were the participants in the Triple Alliance of Russia, Austria and France. On August 19, 1757, the first battle between the Russian army and Prussian troops took place.
The Russian losses were huge, vanity and confusion began. The outcome of the battle was decided by Rumyantsev, who, without an order from the commander-in-chief, reorganized the infantry under artillery fire and led it through the forest to the rear of the enemy. The Prussian army did not expect such a turn of events, and was swept away by Russian soldiers.
Pyotr Alexandrovich was entrusted with command of the cavalry corps. In a war situation, he had to study new sciences, establish order and discipline, and solve economic problems. He coped well with all the difficulties, and he was awarded the rank of lieutenant general.
In the seven-year war he showed his best side. The cavalry detachment under his leadership fearlessly went on the attack and mercilessly pricked the enemy. For his successes at the front, he was awarded the Order of St. Alexander Nevsky, and received a cash gift from the Austrian Archduchess Maria Terezin. And for the capture of the Kolberg fortress in December 1761, he was worthy of the title of general-in-chief.
After the war, by order of Catherine II, he became closely involved in the affairs of the army. He formed new principles of warfare. Made the army more mobile and flexible. On September 25, 1768, the war with the Ottoman Empire began. A year after its start, Rumyantsev takes command of the first army, which will conduct combat operations in Moldova and Wallachia.
The governor won his first victory in this company over the enemy in June 1770 over a united army of Turks and Crimean Tatars twice as numerous. A little later, between the Largo and Bibikul rivers, Russian troops discovered the enemy and defeated him. The Turks fled, leaving 33 cannons on the battlefield. On July 21, the Battle of Cahul took place. The Russian army defeated selected detachments of the Turks, who outnumbered them.
The Battle of Cahul greatly changed the course of the war. The Russians practically occupied Turkish fortresses without firing a single shot.
Catherine II notably rewarded the winner. Pyotr Aleksandrovich Rumyantsev now began to be honorably called Transdunaysky. The military leader received the cross and star of the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called, a village in Belarus, and a monetary award. He lived another 20 years, but after the war with the Turks, he no longer participated in military campaigns.
Alexander Vasilievich Suvorov(1730 - 1800) - great commander, Prince of Italy, Count of Rymniksky, Generalissimo, Field Marshal General. Recipient of all Russian military orders of that time, as well as many foreign awards. 
Early years
The date and place of birth of Alexander Suvorov is not known for certain, but many scientists believe that he was born on November 13 (24), 1730 in Moscow in the family of a general. Got my name in honor Prince Alexander Nevsky. He spent his childhood in the village, on his father's estate.
The military family left its mark on Suvorov’s fate from childhood. Despite the fact that Alexander was a weak and often ill child, he wanted to become a military man. Suvorov began to study military affairs and strengthened his physical fitness. In 1742 he went to serve in the Semenovsky regiment, where he spent 6.5 years. At the same time, he studied in the Land Cadet Corps, learned foreign languages, and was engaged in self-education. General Abram Hannibal, who was a friend of the Suvorov family and great-grandfather, paid great attention to the future fate of Suvorov. Alexandra Pushkina.
A short biography of Suvorov for children and students of different classes is a small but meaningful and interesting story about his exploits and services to his homeland.
Beginning of a military career
During the Seven Years' War (1756-1763) he was in the military rear (major, prime major), then was transferred to the active army. The first military actions in which Suvorov took part occurred in July 1759 (attacked German dragoons). Then Suvorov held the position of duty officer under the commander-in-chief, in 1762 he received the rank of colonel, and commanded the Astrakhan and Suzdal regiments.
Military campaigns
In 1769 - 1772, during the war with the Bar Confederation, Suvorov commanded brigades of several regiments. In January 1770, Suvorov was awarded the rank of major general. He won several battles against the Poles and received his first award - the Order of St. Anne (1770). And in 1772 he was awarded the most honorable military order of St. George, third degree. The Polish campaign ended in Russian victory largely due to the actions of Suvorov.
During the Russian-Turkish War, he decided to capture the garrison, for which he was convicted and later pardoned by Catherine II. Then Suvorov defended Girsovo and took part in the battle of Kozludzha. After this, in the biography of Alexander Suvorov, a hunt for Emelyan Pugachev, whose uprising had already been suppressed by that time.
In September 1786 he received the rank of general-in-chief. During the second Russian-Turkish War (1787-1792), commander Suvorov took part in the Battle of Kinbur, the Battle of Foksha, Izmail, and the Battle of Rymnik. During the Polish uprising of 1794, Suvorov's troops stormed Prague. Under Paul I, the commander took part in the Italian campaign in 1799, then in the Swiss campaign.
In January 1800, Suvorov, by order of Paul I, returned to Russia with his army. On the way home, he fell ill, and on May 6 (18), 1800, Alexander Vasilyevich Suvorov died in St. Petersburg. The great commander was buried in the Annunciation Church of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Fedor Fedorovich Ushakov born into a noble family. The family did not live richly. At the age of 16, Fyodor Ushakov entered the Naval Corps in St. Petersburg. At this time, Catherine II sat on the Russian throne. Russia was preparing for war with Turkey, so the country needed to create a powerful fleet in the Azov and Black Seas. 
The construction of the fleet was entrusted to Vice Admiral Senyavin, who in the early spring of 1769 began to create a naval base in Taganrog. Ushakov arrived at Senyavin’s location among the seconded officers.
In the spring of 1773, the Russian fleet began to dominate the Sea of Azov. After the final defeat of the Turks in the Sea of Azov, the fighting moved to the Black Sea. The fleet inflicted sensitive blows on the Turks, and the position of the Russian army in the war with the Turks improved significantly.
After four years of war, Ushakov began to command the messenger bot “Courier”. He subsequently became the commander of a large 16-gun ship. In the final part of the Russian-Turkish war, he participated in the defense of the Russian military base on the Crimean coast - Balakva.
In the second Russian-Turkish war, during a major battle on the Black Sea in 1788, he showed himself brilliantly as the head of the avant-garde. The Battle of Fidonisia ended with the defeat of the Turkish fleet. Many famous military leaders praised Fyodor Fedorovich.
A year later he became a rear admiral, and in 1790 he became commander of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Empire. The Turks launched large-scale military operations and planned to land a large troop landing in the Crimea. These plans, thanks to the skillful actions of the fleet under the leadership of Fedor Ushakov, were not destined to come true.
On July 8, 1790, the Battle of Kerch took place, where the Russian fleet won and secured Crimea from the Turkish landing. In August 1791, a major naval battle took place off Cape Kaliaria. The Russian fleet was outnumbered, but thanks to the effect of surprise, Ushakov managed to put the Turks to flight.
In 1793, Fyodor Ushakov received another military rank of vice admiral. In 1798, he successfully led the Mediterranean campaign. He was faced with a difficult task: the liberation of the Ionian Islands from the French. The governor brilliantly coped with this task in a short time, capturing the necessary islands. In 1799 he returned to his homeland. A year later he left for Sevastopol, and a little later became commander of the Baltic Rowing Fleet. In 1807 he resigned. Died in 1817.
Fedor Fedorovich was a contemporary of Suvorov. Ushakov is a fearless, courageous, talented Russian naval commander who laid down his life for the glory of Russian weapons. He is the pride and glory of the Russian fleet and army. Fedor Ushakov was directly involved in the construction of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. He is one of the creators of Russia's success in the fight against Turkey. Under his command, the Russian fleet entered the Mediterranean Sea for the first time, where it conducted a number of successful operations with Russia's allies.
Novikov Nikolay Ivanovich(1744 - 1818). Coming from a family of minor nobles, Novikov studies at Moscow University and then joins the Izmailovsky Guards Regiment, which takes part in the coup. 1762
. In 1767, he worked under the Commission for the preparation of a new Code. Having received the rank of lieutenant, he goes to the first Russian-Turkish war, but soon after the outbreak of hostilities he resigns and decides to devote himself entirely to literary and journalistic work. In 1769, he began publishing the magazine Drone, in which he criticized high society, court life with its passion for everything French and castigated serfdom. The magazine is soon banned, but Novikov does not despair and 1772
publishes a new magazine "Painter", which suffers the same fate; two years later the same thing is repeated with the magazine "Wallet". Then Novikov began publishing a series of his works on history and various fields of knowledge. With approval Catherine II
, which gave him access to the archives, he publishes ancient chronicles in his “Ancient Russian Vivliofika”. He is responsible for compiling the “Experience of a Dictionary of Russian Writers”. He joined the first purely Russian Masonic lodge immediately after its founding in 1781. Thanks to his Masonic connections, he first leases the printing house of Moscow University, and then 1784
creates a "Printing Company" in Moscow. In addition, he founded a pedagogical seminary at the university, training teachers and existing at the expense of Masonic lodges. With the beginning of the politics of reaction, he was arrested in 1792
and imprisoned in the Shlisselburg fortress. Released by Paul 1 in 1796, but broken by the dungeons, he withdraws from public life and plunges into mystical meditations of the Rosicrucian type. He dies in 1818. 
Alexander Nikolaevich Radishchev(1749 - 1802) - writer, poet, philosopher. 
At the beginning of his biography, Radishchev lived in Nemtsov, after which he moved to the village of Verkhnee Ablyazovo. Since childhood, the conversations of the serfs revived in him hatred for the landowners and pity for the people. He received his first education at home: he was raised by servants and studied from the psalter.
Then he moved to Moscow, where he settled with Armagakov, who served as director of Moscow University. It was then that the foundations of the philosophy of enlightenment were learned in Radishchev’s life. Alexander studied at the gymnasium and went to the St. Petersburg Page Corps. After 4 years of study there he headed to Leipzig.
In 1771, in the biography of Alexander Radishchev, there was a return to St. Petersburg. Having received the title of adviser, he began to serve in the Senate. In 1789, Radishchev's first work was published. Having opened a printing house, the writer published “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow.” For Radishchev, the creativity of that period was a way to condemn the serfdom system of the state. Undoubtedly, this caused a protest from the empress, so the writer was soon arrested.
Afterwards, the death penalty was replaced by exile to Siberia for 10 years. Radishchev’s stories are even written there. However, Emperor Paul I returned the writer from exile, and Alexander I granted him complete freedom.
Then, in Radishchev’s biography, he received the position of member of the commission for drafting laws. In September 1802 he committed suicide.
The writer has completed several translations of books. Radishchev’s ode “Liberty” was written in 1783, the work “The Life of F.V. Ushakov” - in 1788. The Radishchev Museum is located in Saratov.
Alexander 1 king, ruled Russia from 1801 to 1825, grandson of Catherine 2 and son of Paul 1 and Princess Maria Feodorovna, born on December 23, 1777. Catherine 2 had a serious influence on the personality of Alexander 1. In an effort to raise a good sovereign, she insisted that the boy live with her. However, the future Emperor Alexander 1, after the death of Catherine and the accession to the throne of Paul, entered into a conspiracy against his own father, because he was not happy with the new rule. Paul was killed on March 11, 1801. As they say, despite the son’s protests. Initially, it was planned that the internal policy of Alexander 1 and foreign policy would develop in accordance with the course outlined by Catherine 2. In the summer of June 24, 1801, a secret committee was created under Alexander 1. It included associates of the young emperor. In fact, the council was the highest (unofficial) advisory body of Russia. 
The beginning of the reign of the new emperor was marked by the liberal reforms of Alexander 1. The young ruler tried to give the country a constitution and change the political system of the country. However, he had many opponents. This led to the creation of the Permanent Committee on April 5, 1803, whose members had the right to challenge the royal decrees. But, nevertheless, some of the peasants were freed. The decree “On free cultivators” was issued on February 20, 1803.
Serious importance was also attached to training. The educational reform of Alexander 1 actually led to the creation of a state education system. It was headed by the Ministry of Public Education. Also, the State Council was formed under Alexander 1, which was opened with great solemnity on January 1, 1810.
Further, during the public administration reform of Alexander 1, the collegiums that actually ceased to function (established in the era of Peter 1) were replaced by ministries. A total of 8 ministries were established: internal affairs, finance, military and ground forces, naval forces, commerce, public education, foreign affairs, and justice. The ministers who governed them were subordinate to the Senate. The ministerial reform of Alexander 1 was completed by the summer of 1811.
Speransky M.M. had a serious influence on the course of further reforms. He was entrusted with the development of government reform. According to the project of this outstanding figure, a constitutional monarchy was to be created in the country. The power of the sovereign was planned to be limited by parliament (or a body of a similar type), consisting of 2 chambers. However, due to the fact that the foreign policy of Alexander 1 was quite complex, and tensions in relations with France were constantly increasing, the reform plan proposed by Speransky was perceived as anti-state. Speransky himself received his resignation in March 1812.
1812 became the most difficult year for Russia. But the victory over Bonaparte significantly increased the authority of the emperor. It is worth noting that under Alexander 1 they slowly, but still tried to resolve the peasant issue. It was planned to gradually eliminate serfdom in the country. By the end of 1820, the draft “State Charter of the Russian Empire” had been prepared. The Emperor approved it. But the implementation of the project was impossible due to many factors.
In domestic politics, it is worth noting such features as military settlements under Alexander 1. They are better known under the name “Arakcheevsky”. Arakcheev’s settlements caused discontent among almost the entire population of the country. Also, a ban was introduced on any secret societies. It began operating in 1822. The liberal rule that Alexander 1 dreamed of, whose brief biography simply cannot contain all the facts, turned into harsh police measures of the post-war period.
The death of Alexander 1 occurred on December 1, 1825. Its cause was typhoid fever. Emperor Alexander 1 left his descendants a rich and controversial legacy. This is the beginning of resolving the issue of serfdom, and Arakcheevism, and the greatest victory over Napoleon. These are the results of the reign of Alexander 1.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky(1772-1839) - Russian political and public figure, author of numerous theoretical works on jurisprudence and law, lawmaker and reformer. He worked during the reign of Alexander 1 and Nicholas 1, was a member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences and was the educator of the heir to the throne, Alexander Nikolaevich. The name of Speransky is associated with major transformations in the Russian Empire and the idea of the first constitution. 
According to Peter's law on succession to the throne, the emperor had the right to appoint an heir at his own request. Catherine’s desire in this regard, although unspoken, was long known: she wanted to see her grandson Alexander on the throne. But, firstly, they could not (or did not want) to find an official will drawn up in favor of the Grand Duke. Secondly, 15-year-old Alexander himself did not express an active desire to reign. And thirdly, the empress had a legitimate son, Alexander’s father, Grand Duke Pavel Petrovich, whose name had not left the lips of the courtiers since the morning.
Pavel arrived in Zimny in the middle of the night, accompanied by hundreds of soldiers of the Gatchina regiment and immediately went into his mother’s bedroom to make sure that she was really dying. His entry into the palace was like an assault. The guards in German uniforms placed everywhere caused a shock among the courtiers, accustomed to the elegant luxury of the last years of Catherine’s court. The Empress was still alive while the heir and Bezborodko, locked in her office, burned some papers in the fireplace. There was noticeable excitement in the square under the palace windows. The townspeople were sad about the death of the “mother empress,” but noisily expressed their joy when they learned that Paul would become king. The same thing was heard in the soldiers' barracks. Only in the court environment it was completely sad. According to Countess Golovina, many, having learned about the death of Catherine and the accession of her son to the throne, tirelessly repeated: “The end has come for everything: both her and our well-being.” But in order to understand what kind of person ended up on the Russian throne on that November day in 1796, we must take a close look at the history of his life.
He waited 34 years
This story begins on September 20, 1754, when a long-awaited and even required event took place in the family of the heir to the Russian throne: the daughter of Peter I, Russian Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, had a great-nephew, Pavel. The grandmother was much more pleased with this than the child’s father, the Empress’s nephew, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp Karl-Peter-Ulrich (Grand Duke Peter Fedorovich) and even more so the newborn’s mother, Sophia-Frederica-Augusta, Princess of Anhalt-Zerbst (Grand Duchess Ekaterina Alekseevna ).The princess was discharged from Germany as a birthing machine. The car turned out to have a secret. From the first days of her arrival, the seedy Zerbst princess set herself the task of achieving supreme power in Russia. The ambitious German woman understood that with the birth of her son, her already weak hopes for the Russian throne would collapse. All subsequent relationships between mother and son developed like this - like the relationship of political opponents in the struggle for power. As for Elizabeth, she did everything possible to widen the gap between them: special signs of attention to the newborn, emphasized coldness towards the Grand Duchess, who had not been very pampered with attention before. The hint is clear: if you have produced what you ordered, you can leave the stage. Did Elizaveta Petrovna understand what she was doing? In any case, at the end of her reign, she changed her attitude towards her daughter-in-law, finally giving up on her nephew. She saw that the modest Zerbst princess had turned into an important political figure at the Russian court, and appreciated her efficiency and organizational talent. Elizabeth realized too late what a serious enemy she had created for her beloved grandson, but there was no time left to correct her mistakes.
Elizaveta Petrovna died on December 24, 1761, when Pavel was only 7 years old. These first seven years were probably the happiest of his life. The child grew up surrounded by the attention and care of numerous palace servants, mostly Russian. In early childhood, the Grand Duke rarely heard foreign speech. The Empress spoiled her grandson and spent a lot of time with him, especially in the last two years. The image of a kind Russian grandmother, who sometimes came to visit him even at night, remained forever in the memory of the Grand Duke. His father also visited him occasionally, almost always drunk. He looked at his son with a touch of sad tenderness. Their relationship could not be called close, but Pavel was offended to see how those around him openly neglected his father and laughed at him. This sympathy and pity for his father increased many times after his short reign, which ended with a palace coup in favor of Catherine.
The death of Elizabeth, the unexpected disappearance of Peter, and vague rumors about his violent death shocked the eight-year-old boy. Later, pity for the murdered father grew into real worship. Growing up, Pavel was very fond of reading Shakespearean tragedies and secretly compared himself to Prince Hamlet, called upon to avenge his father. But real life was complicated by the fact that the “Russian Hamlet” did not have a treacherous uncle and a deceived mother. The villain, who did not hide her involvement in the murder, was the mother herself.
 |
First of all, they tried to deprive the heir of any systematic education. The first mentor Pavel loved, Poroshin, was soon fired, and the new, skillfully selected teachers did not enlighten Pavel, but rather overloaded his childish mind with many incomprehensible and scattered details that did not give a clear idea of anything. In addition, many of them guessed about their role and boldly taught according to the principle “the more boring, the better.” Here, the teacher of “state sciences” Grigory Teplov was especially zealous, overwhelming the teenager with court cases and statistical reports. After these classes, all his life Pavel hated the rough, painstaking work with documents, trying to resolve any problem as quickly as possible, without delving into its essence. It is not surprising that after seven years of such “education,” supplemented by difficult impressions from rare meetings with his mother, who poured out “witty remarks” about his mental development, the child developed a capricious and irritable character. Rumors spread at court about the heir's wayward actions, and many seriously thought about the consequences of his possible reign. Ekaterina brilliantly won the first fight.
But Paul was too small to retaliate. He grew up under the supervision of the Russian diplomat Nikita Panin, who was chosen as a teacher by Elizabeth. Panin spent 13 years with the boy and sincerely became attached to him. Of all the Russian court nobility, he was best able to understand the reasons for the heir’s strange behavior and ardently supported the idea of transferring the throne to him.
Catherine, trying to quarrel her son, who had barely reached adulthood, with his mentor, finally stopped his studies and in 1773 autocratically married his son to the Hesse-Darmstadt Princess Wilhelmina (who received the name Natalya Alekseevna in baptism). However, the new Grand Duchess turned out to be a very determined woman and directly pushed Paul to seize power, which he refused. Panin was at the head of the conspiracy. Unfortunately for the heir, he was also a major freemason, the first Russian constitutionalist. The coup was doomed to fail. Catherine had too many admiring fans and volunteer assistants at court. When in 1776 the Empress learned that her son could ascend the throne, and even with a constitution, measures were taken immediately. Panin was removed from government affairs (he cannot be executed: he is too big a political figure), he was forbidden to see the heir. Grand Duchess Natalya died after an unsuccessful birth (presumably she was poisoned on the orders of the Empress). Six years later, Pavel also lost Panin. The Grand Duke himself went into exile or exile for 20 years - from St. Petersburg to Gatchina. He was no longer dangerous.
These 20 years finally shaped Paul's character. He was remarried to Princess Sophia of Württemberg (Maria Feodorovna) for the same purpose as his father had once done. Catherine took the two children born next - Alexander and Konstantin - from their parents and raised the eldest as the future heir. Occasionally, Catherine called her son to the capital to participate in the signing of diplomatic documents in order to once again humiliate him in the presence of others. Locked in Gatchina, he was completely deprived of access to even the most insignificant government affairs and tirelessly drilled his regiment on the parade ground - the only thing he could truly control. All the books that could be obtained were read. He was especially fascinated by historical treatises and novels about the times of European chivalry. The heir himself was sometimes not averse to playing in the Middle Ages. The fun is all the more forgivable because at the mother’s court, completely different games were in fashion. Each new favorite sought to outdo its predecessor in enlightened, refined cynicism. The heir had only one thing to do - wait. It was not the desire for power, but the constant fear of death at the hands of killers hired by his mother that tormented Pavel. Who knows, maybe in St. Petersburg the Empress was no less afraid of a palace coup? And maybe she wanted her son to die...
Meanwhile, the general situation of the empire, despite a number of brilliant foreign policy successes of Catherine II and her associates, remained very difficult. The 18th century in general was in many ways decisive for the fate of Russia. The reforms of Peter I put it among the leading world powers, advancing it a century forward in technical terms. However, the same reforms destroyed the ancient foundations of the Russian state - strong social and cultural ties between classes, in order to strengthen the state apparatus, opposing the interests of landowners and peasants. Serfdom finally turned from a special “Moscow” form of social organization (service) into a standard aristocratic privilege. This situation was extremely unfair. After all, after the death of Peter, the Russian nobility bore less and less of the burdens of the service class, continuing to actively oppose universal equalization of rights. In addition, the nobility, which since the time of Peter was overwhelmed by the flow of Western European culture, was increasingly divorced from traditional Russian values, less and less able to understand the needs and aspirations of its own people, arbitrarily interpreting them in the spirit of newfangled Western philosophical teachings. The culture of the upper and lower strata of the population already under Catherine began to develop separately, threatening to destroy national unity over time. Pugachev's uprising showed this very clearly. What could save Russia from an internal fault or at least push it aside?
The Orthodox Church, which usually united the Russian people in difficult times, since the time of Peter I, was almost deprived of the opportunity to seriously influence the development of events and the policies of state power. Moreover, she did not enjoy authority among the “enlightened class.” At the beginning of the 18th century, the monasteries were actually removed from the work of education and science, transferring it to new, “secular” structures (before that, the Church successfully carried out educational tasks for almost seven centuries!), and in the middle of the century the state took away from them the richest, inhabited by wealthy peasants land. It was taken away only in order to obtain a new resource to continue the policy of continuous land distributions to the military-noble corporation, which was growing by leaps and bounds. But if the previous, outlying distributions and redistributions of land really strengthened the state, then the instant destruction of dozens of the oldest centers of cultural agriculture and trade in non-Black Earth Russia (most of the fairs were timed to coincide with the holidays of the Orthodox monasteries that patronized them), which were simultaneously centers of independent small credit, charity and widespread social assistance, only led to further erosion of local markets and the economic strength of the country as a whole.
The Russian language and national culture, which at one time made it possible to save the cultural integrity of Russia from fragmentation into principalities, were also not held in high esteem at court. What remained was the state, the endless strengthening of which was bequeathed by Peter to all his heirs. The machine of the bureaucratic apparatus launched by Peter had such power that in the future it was capable of crushing any class privileges and barriers. In addition, it relied on the only ancient principle, not violated by Peter and sacredly revered by the majority of the population of Russia - the principle of autocracy (unlimited sovereignty of the supreme power). But most of Peter's successors were too weak or indecisive to use this principle in its entirety. They obediently followed in the wake of noble class politics, cleverly using the contradictions between court groups in order to at least slightly strengthen their power. Catherine brought this maneuvering to perfection. The end of the 18th century is considered the “golden age of the Russian nobility.” It was stronger than ever and calm in the consciousness of its strength. But the question remained open: who, in the interests of the country, would risk disturbing this calm?
What did he want?
On November 7, 1796, the “golden age of the Russian nobility” ended. The emperor, who had his own ideas about the importance of classes and state interests, ascended the throne. In many ways, these ideas were constructed “by contradiction” - in opposition to the principles of Catherine. However, a lot was thought out independently; fortunately, 30 years were allotted for reflection. And most importantly, a large supply of energy had accumulated that had no outlet for a long time. So, redo everything your way and as soon as possible! Very naive, but not always meaningless.
Although Paul disliked the word “reform” no less than the word “revolution,” he never discounted the fact that since the time of Peter the Great, the Russian autocracy has always been at the forefront of change. Trying on the role of a feudal overlord, and later the chain of the Grand Master of the Order of Malta, Paul remained entirely a man of modern times, dreaming of an ideal state structure. The state must be transformed from an aristocratic freemen into a rigid hierarchical structure, headed by a king who has all possible powers of power. Estates, classes, social strata are gradually losing their special inalienable rights, completely submitting only to the autocrat, personifying God’s heavenly law and earthly state order. The aristocracy must gradually disappear, as well as the personally dependent peasantry. The class hierarchy must be replaced by equal subjects.
The French Revolution not only strengthened Paul's hostility to the philosophy of the 18th century Enlightenment, but also once again convinced him that the Russian state mechanism required serious changes. Catherine's enlightened despotism, in his opinion, slowly but surely led the country to destruction, provoking a social explosion, the formidable harbinger of which was the Pugachev rebellion. And in order to avoid this explosion, it was necessary not only to tighten the regime, but also to urgently reorganize the country’s governance system. Note: Paul was the only autocratic reformer after Peter who planned to start it “from above” in the literal sense of the word, that is, to curtail the rights of the aristocracy (in favor of the state). Of course, in such changes, the peasants at first remained silent extras; they were not going to be involved in management for a long time. But although, by order of Paul, it was forbidden to use the word “citizen” in printed publications, he, more than anyone else in the 18th century, tried to make peasants and townspeople citizens, taking them beyond the boundaries of the class system and “attaching” directly to the state.
The program was quite coherent, corresponding to its time, but did not take into account at all the ambitions of the Russian ruling layer. It was this tragic discrepancy, generated by the Gatchina isolation and the emotional unrest experienced, that was accepted by contemporaries, and after them by historians, as “barbaric savagery”, even madness. The then pillars of Russian social thought (with the exception of the amnestied Radishchev), frightened by the revolution, stood either for carrying out further reforms at the expense of the peasants, or not carrying them out at all. If at the end of the 18th century the concept of “totalitarianism” already existed, contemporaries would not have thought to apply it to Pavlov’s regime. But Paul's political program was no more utopian than the philosophy of his time. The 18th century is the century of the heyday of social utopias. Diderot and Voltaire predicted the creation by enlightened monarchs of a unitary state based on the Social Contract and saw elements of their program in the reforms of the beginning of Catherine's reign. If you look closely, the real supporter of the idea of a single equal state was her son, who hated the French “enlightenment”. At the same time, his political practice turned out to be no more cruel than the democratic terror of the French Convention or the counter-revolutionary repressions of the Directory and Napoleon that followed.
The first “victim” of the transformations already in 1796 was the army. Many times already, scientists and journalists have examined the notorious “Gatchina legacy”: parades, wigs, sticks, etc. But it is worth remembering the disbanded recruitment of 1795, half of which was stolen by officers for their estates; about a complete audit of the army supply department, which revealed colossal theft and abuse; about the subsequent reduction in the military budget; on the transformation of the guard from a court guard into a combat unit. (The entire personal officer corps was called to the review in 1797, which put an end to service on estates and the entry into regimental lists of unborn babies, like Pushkin’s Grinev.) The same endless parades and maneuvers marked the beginning of regular exercises of the Russian army (which was very useful later, in era of the Napoleonic wars), which had previously been in winter quarters in the absence of war. Under Paul, the soldiers, of course, were driven more to the parade ground and punished more severely, but at the same time they finally began to be fed regularly and dressed warmly in the winter, which brought the emperor unprecedented popularity among the troops. But most of all the officers were outraged by the introduction of corporal punishment. Not for soldiers in general, but specifically for the noble class. It smelt of unhealthy class equality.They also tried to squeeze the landowners. For the first time, serfs began to take a personal oath to the emperor (previously, the landowner did this for them). When selling, it was forbidden to separate families. The famous decree-manifesto “on the three-day corvee” was issued, the text of which, in particular, read: “The Law of God, taught to us in the Decalogue, teaches us to dedicate the seventh day to God; why on this present day, glorified by the triumph of faith and on which we were honored to receive the sacred anointing and the royal wedding on our ancestral throne, we consider it our duty before the Creator of all good things, the Giver, to confirm throughout our entire empire about the exact and indispensable fulfillment of this law, commanding everyone to observe so that no one, under any circumstances, dares to force peasants to work on Sundays..."
Although there was no talk yet about the abolition or even serious limitation of serfdom, enlightened land and soul owners became worried: how could the government, even the royal one, interfere with how they dispose of their hereditary property? Catherine did not allow herself to do this! These gentlemen did not yet understand that the peasants were the main source of state income, and therefore it was unprofitable to ruin them. But it wouldn’t be a bad idea to force landowners to pay the costs of maintaining elected local government bodies, since they consist exclusively of the nobility. There was another attempt on the “sacred right of the noble class” - freedom from taxation.
Meanwhile, the overall tax burden has eased. The abolition of the grain tax (according to the Russian agronomist A.T. Bolotov, which produced “beneficial effects throughout the state”) was accompanied by the addition of arrears for 1797 and the preferential sale of salt (until the middle of the 19th century, salt was actually the national currency). As part of the fight against inflation, palace expenses were reduced by 10 (!) times, a significant part of the silver palace services was transferred to coins, which were put into circulation. At the same time, the unsecured mass of paper money was withdrawn from circulation at state expense. Over five million rubles in banknotes were burned on Palace Square.
The officials were also in fear. Bribes (given openly under Catherine) were mercilessly eradicated. This was especially true of the capital’s apparatus, which was shaken by constant inspections. An unheard of thing: employees must not be late and be in their place the entire working day! The emperor himself got up at 5 am, listened to current reports and news, and then, together with his heirs, went to inspect the capital's institutions and guards units. The number of provinces and districts was reduced, and therefore the number of bureaucrats needed to fill the corresponding places.
The Orthodox Church also received certain hopes for a religious revival. The new emperor, unlike his mother, was not indifferent to Orthodoxy. His teacher and spiritual mentor, the future Metropolitan Platon (Levshin), who later crowned Paul to the throne, wrote about his faith this way: “The high pupil, fortunately, was always disposed towards piety, and reasoning and conversation regarding God and faith were always with him pleasant. This, according to the note, was introduced to him with milk by the late Empress Elizaveta Petrovna, who loved him dearly and raised him with very pious women assigned to her.”
According to some evidence, the emperor often showed traits of clairvoyance under the guise of foolishness. Thus, there is a case known from memoirs when Pavel Petrovich ordered an officer who had performed unsatisfactorily in military maneuvers to be sent to Siberia, but, bowing to the requests of those around him for clemency, he nevertheless exclaimed: “I feel that the man for whom you are asking - scoundrel! It was subsequently discovered that this officer killed his own mother. Another case: a guards officer who had a wife and children decided to take away a young girl. But she did not agree to go without a wedding. Then this officer’s comrade in the regiment disguised himself as a priest and enacted a secret ritual. After some time, the woman, left with a child adopted by the seducer, having found out that her imaginary husband had a legitimate family, filed a complaint with the sovereign. “The Emperor found himself in an unhappy position,” recalled E.P. Yankova, - and made a wonderful decision: he ordered her kidnapper to be demoted and exiled, the young woman to be recognized as having the right to the surname of the seducer and their legitimate daughter, and the officer who married her to be tonsured a monk. The resolution said that “since he has an inclination towards spiritual life, he should be sent to a monastery and tonsured a monk.” The officer was taken somewhere far away and given a haircut. He was beside himself at such an unexpected outcome of his frivolous act and did not live at all like a monk, but then the grace of God touched his heart; he repented, came to his senses and, when he was no longer young, led a very strict life and was considered an experienced and very good old man.”
All this, however, did not prevent Paul from accepting the title of head of the Catholic Order of Malta. However, this was done not only for political reasons. This was an attempt to resurrect within the framework of the order (which, by the way, had never previously submitted to the Pope of Rome) the ancient Byzantine brotherhood of St. John the Baptist, from which the Jerusalem “Hospitaliers” once arose. In addition, it is worth noting that the Order of Malta, for the purpose of self-preservation, put itself under the protection of Russia and Emperor Paul. On October 12, 1799, the shrines of the order were solemnly brought to Gatchina: the right hand of St. John the Baptist, a particle of the Cross of the Lord and the Philermos Icon of the Mother of God. Russia possessed all these treasures until 1917.In general, Paul is the first emperor to soften in his policy the line of Peter I to infringe on the rights of the Church in the name of state interests. First of all, he strove to ensure that the priesthood had a more “important image and condition corresponding to the importance of its rank.” Thus, when the Holy Synod made a proposal to rid priests and deacons of corporal punishment, the emperor approved it (it did not come into force until 1801), continuing to adhere to the practice of restoring such punishments for noble officers.
Measures were taken to improve the life of the white clergy: for those on regular salaries, their salaries were increased, and where salaries were not established, parishioners were entrusted with the responsibility of processing the priestly allotments, which could be replaced by a corresponding grain contribution in kind or in cash. In 1797 and 1799, regular salaries from the treasury for the ecclesiastical department, according to annual state estimates, were doubled compared to the previous one. State subsidies to the clergy thus reached almost one million rubles. In addition, in 1797 the plots of land for bishops' houses were doubled. Additionally (for the first time since Catherine’s secularization!), mills, fishing grounds and other lands were allocated to bishops and monasteries. For the first time in the history of Russia, measures were legalized to provide for widows and orphans of the clergy.
Under Emperor Paul, the military clergy was allocated to a special department and received its own head - the protopresbyter of the army and navy. In general, to encourage more zealous performance of their service, the emperor introduced a procedure for awarding clergy with orders and signs of external distinction. (Now this order is deeply rooted in the Church, but then it caused some confusion.) At the personal initiative of the sovereign, an award pectoral cross was established. Before the revolution, on the reverse side of all synodal crosses there was the letter “P” - the initial of Pavel Petrovich. Under him, theological academies were also established in St. Petersburg and Kazan and several new seminaries.
Unexpectedly, such a large segment of Russian society as schismatics received some civil rights. For the first time, the Emperor compromised on this issue and allowed loyal Old Believers to have their own houses of worship and serve in them according to ancient custom. The Old Believers (of course, not all), in turn, were ready to recognize the Synodal Church and accept priests from it. In 1800, the regulations on churches of the same faith were finally approved.
Peter's traditions of cooperation with the merchants were also revived. The establishment of the College of Commerce at the end of 1800 looked like the beginning of a global reform of management. Of course, 13 of its 23 members (more than half!) were chosen by merchants from among themselves. And this was at a time when noble elections were limited. Naturally, Alexander, having come to power (by the way, with the slogan of a constitution), was one of the first to cancel this democratic order.
But none of Paul’s heirs even thought of canceling the most important state act he adopted - the law of April 5, 1797 on succession to the throne. This law finally closed the fatal gap made by Peter's decree of 1722. From now on, the inheritance of the throne (only through the male line!) acquired a clear legal character, and no Catherine or Anna could any longer lay claim to it on their own. The importance of the law is so great that Klyuchevsky, for example, called it “the first positive fundamental law in our legislation”, because it, strengthening the autocracy as an institution of power, limited the arbitrariness and ambitions of individuals, and served as a kind of prevention of possible coups and conspiracies.
Of course, next to the serious innovations, you can also notice a huge number of detailed details: the prohibition of certain types and styles of clothing, instructions on when citizens should get up and go to bed, how to drive and walk along the streets, what color to paint houses... And for violations of everything This means fines, arrests, dismissals. On the one hand, Teplov’s fatal lessons affected him: the emperor did not know how to separate small matters from large ones. On the other hand, what seems like small things to us (the style of hats) at the end of the 18th century had an important symbolic meaning and demonstrated to others a commitment to one or another ideological party. In the end, “sans-culottes” and “Phrygian caps” were by no means born in Russia.
Perhaps the main negative feature of Pavlovsk’s rule was the uneven trust in people, the inability to select friends and associates and arrange personnel. Everyone around him - from the heir to the throne Alexander to the last St. Petersburg lieutenant - was under suspicion. The emperor changed senior dignitaries so quickly that they did not have time to get up to speed. The slightest offense could result in disgrace. However, the emperor also knew how to be magnanimous: Radishchev was released from prison; the quarrel with Suvorov ended with Pavel asking for forgiveness (and then promoting the commander to generalissimo); Father's killer Alexei Orlov was given a “severe” punishment - to walk several blocks behind the coffin of his victim, taking off his hat.
Yet the emperor's personnel policy was highly unpredictable. The people most devoted to him lived in the same constant anxiety for their future as the notorious court scoundrels. By instilling unquestioning obedience, Paul often lost honest people in his circle. They were replaced by scoundrels, ready to carry out any hasty decree, caricaturing the imperial will. At first they were afraid of Paul, but then, seeing the endless stream of poorly executed decrees, they began to quietly laugh at him. Just 100 years ago, ridicule of such transformations would have cost the merrymakers dearly. But Paul did not have such indisputable authority as his great-grandfather, and he understood people worse. And Russia was no longer the same as under Peter: then it obediently shaved off its beards, now it was indignant at the ban on wearing round hats.
In general, the whole society was outraged. Memoirists later presented this mood as a single impulse, but the reasons for the indignation were often opposite. The combat officers of Suvorov's school were irritated by the new military doctrine; generals such as Bennigsen were worried about their income being cut from the treasury; the guards youth were dissatisfied with the new strict service regulations; the highest nobility of the empire - “Catherine’s eagles” - are deprived of the opportunity to mix state interests and personal gain, as in the old days; officials of lower rank still stole, but with great caution; City dwellers were angry at new decrees about when they must turn off the lights. The enlightened “new people” had the hardest time: they could not come to terms with the revival of autocratic principles, calls were heard to put an end to “Asian despotism” (who would have tried to say this under Peter!), but many clearly saw the injustices of the previous reign. Most of them were, after all, convinced monarchists; Paul could have found support for his reforms here, he just needed to be given more freedom in action, and not have his hands tied by constant petty orders. But the king, not used to trusting people, interfered in literally everything. He alone, without initiative assistants, wanted to manage his empire. At the end of the 18th century this was absolutely impossible.
Why didn't they love him?
Moreover, it was impossible to play the European diplomatic game on a knightly basis. Pavel began his foreign policy as a peacemaker: he canceled the upcoming invasion of France, the campaign in Persia, and the next raids of the Black Sea Fleet to the Turkish shores, but he was not in his power to cancel the all-European world fire. An advertisement in a Hamburg newspaper proposing to decide the fate of states by a duel between their monarchs and their first ministers as seconds caused general bewilderment. Napoleon then openly called Paul “the Russian Don Quixote”; the other heads of government remained silent.
Nevertheless, it was impossible to stand aside from the European conflict for long. Frightened European monarchies turned to Russia from all sides: requests for protection were brought by the Knights of Malta (whose island was already under the threat of French occupation); Austria and England needed an allied Russian army; even Türkiye turned to Paul with a plea to protect its Mediterranean shores and Egypt from the French landing. The result was the second anti-French coalition of 1798–1799.
The Russian expeditionary force under the command of Suvorov was already ready to invade France in April 1799. But this did not fit with the plans of the allied Austrian government, which sought to round out its possessions at the expense of the “liberated” Italian territories. Suvorov was forced to submit, and by the beginning of August northern Italy was completely cleared of the French. The Republican armies were defeated and the fortress garrisons surrendered. The joint Russian-Turkish squadron under the command of the now canonized Admiral Fyodor Ushakov showed itself no less seriously, liberating the Ionian Islands off the coast of Greece from September 1798 to February 1799. (By the way, one of the reasons for the emperor’s consent to this campaign was the danger of the French desecrating the relics of St. Spyridon of Trimythous, which had been kept on the island of Corfu (Kerkyra) since the 15th century. Paul greatly revered St. Spyridon as the patron of his eldest son and heir Alexander. Almost impregnable the fortress of Corfu was taken by storm from the sea on February 18, 1799.) It is noteworthy that Ushakov established an independent republic on the islands he liberated (the archipelago was later occupied and held by the British for more than half a century) and organized elections of local authorities with the full approval of Paul, who showed amazing political tolerance here. Next, Ushakov’s squadron, having a minimum number of marines, carried out operations to liberate Palermo, Naples and all of southern Italy, which ended on September 30 with the rush of Russian sailors to Rome.Russia's coalition allies were frightened by such impressive military successes. They did not at all want to strengthen the authority of the Russian Empire at the expense of the French Republic. In September 1798, the Austrians left the Russian army in Switzerland alone with fresh, superior enemy forces, and only Suvorov’s military leadership saved it from complete destruction. On September 1, the Turkish squadron left Ushakov without warning. As for the British, their fleet, led by Nelson, blocked Malta and did not allow Russian ships to approach it. The “allies” showed their true colors. An angry Pavel recalled Suvorov and Ushakov from the Mediterranean.
In 1800, Paul concluded an anti-English alliance with Napoleon that was beneficial for Russia. France offered Russia Constantinople and the complete division of Turkey. The Baltic and Black Sea fleets were put on full combat readiness. At the same time, with the approval of Napoleon, Orlov's 30,000-strong Cossack corps was moving towards India through the Kazakh steppes. England was faced with the most terrible threat since the days of Elizabeth I.
What if the interests of England and the internal Russian opposition coincided?.. British diplomacy in St. Petersburg used all its means and connections to stir up the smoldering internal conspiracy. The secret sums of the English embassy rained down on favorable soil. The dissatisfied finally found a common language: the army was represented by Bennigsen, the higher nobility by Zubov, and the pro-English bureaucracy by Nikita Panin (nephew of Pavel’s teacher). Panin brought the heir to the throne, Grand Duke Alexander, to participate in the conspiracy. Having learned about the possible abolition of the boring army regulations, dozens of young guards officers happily joined in. But the soul of the conspiracy was the favorite of the emperor, the Governor-General of St. Petersburg, Count von der Palen. Paul was confident in his devotion until the last day.
The conspiracy very clearly illustrated the paradoxical situation that developed at the Pavlovsk court. The fact is that the emperor was not confident in anyone, but precisely because of this, he had to show his trust in fits and starts to generally random people. He had no friends, no like-minded people - only subjects, and not of the very first class. It was not possible to destroy the conspiracy as such also because it had always existed. The latent dissatisfaction of various noble groups with one or another government measures during Pavlov's reign reached dangerous heights. When anyone who disagrees is considered a conspirator in advance, it is psychologically easier for him to cross the line that separates passive rejection of change from active opposition to it. With all this, one must remember that there were still many “Catherine’s men” at court. The emperor’s anger was as terrible as it was fleeting, so Paul turned out to be incapable of any consistent repression. His gentle character was not suitable for the political system that he himself tried to introduce.
As a result, when after midnight on March 11, 1801, the conspirators broke into the Mikhailovsky Palace, there was not a single officer there who could defend the emperor. The main concern of the conspirators was to prevent soldiers from entering the palace. The sentries were removed from their posts by their superiors, and two lackeys had their heads smashed. In the bedroom they finished off Pavel in a few minutes. Like Peter III once, he was strangled with a long officer's scarf. Petersburg greeted the news of his death with pre-prepared fireworks and general rejoicing. As funny as it may seem, everyone rushed to show up on the streets in recently banned outfits. And in the main hall of the Winter Palace all the highest dignitaries of Russia gathered, the name of the young Emperor Alexander was already on everyone’s lips. A 23-year-old young man came out of the chamber and, to the joyful whisper of those present, solemnly said: “Father died of an apoplexy. With me everything will be the same as with my grandmother.”
These words seemed to be the posthumous and final victory of Catherine II over her son. The loser paid with his life. How should Russia pay?
The books of Russian historians available to the mass reader today evaluate Pavlovsk’s reign differently. For example, N.M. Karamzin, in his “Note on Ancient and New Russia” (1811), written in hot pursuit, said: “Let conspiracies intimidate sovereigns for the peace of the people!” In his opinion, no useful lessons can be learned from despotism; it can only be overthrown or endured with dignity. It turns out that the inconsistency of Pavlov’s decrees is nothing more than the tyranny of a tyrant? By the end of the 19th century, this point of view already seemed primitive. IN. Klyuchevsky wrote that “Paul’s reign was the time when a new program of activity was announced.” “Although,” he immediately made a reservation, “the points of this program were not only not implemented, but gradually even disappeared from it. Paul’s successors began to implement this program much more seriously and consistently.” N.K. Schilder, the first historian of Paul’s reign, also agreed that the anti-Catherine state-political orientation “continued to exist” throughout the first half of the 19th century, and “the continuity of Paul’s legends largely survived.” He blamed them for the military settlements, and for December 14, for the “knightly foreign policy”, and for the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War. The historical publicist Kazimir Valishevsky and the famous Russian writer Dmitry Merezhkovsky apparently held the same point of view. Only the work of M.V., published in a scanty edition during the First World War. Klochkova - the only one who has scrupulously studied Paul's legislative policy - counters these reproaches with the fact that it was under Paul that military reform began, preparing the army for the War of 1812, the first steps were taken in limiting serfdom, and the foundations of the legislative body of the Russian Empire were laid . In 1916, a movement even began in church circles to canonize the innocently murdered emperor. At least, his grave in the Peter and Paul Cathedral of St. Petersburg was considered miraculous among the common people and was constantly strewn with fresh flowers. There was even a special book in the cathedral in which miracles that occurred through prayers at this grave were recorded.
Left-liberal historians, and after them Soviet historians, tended to downplay the significance of Pavlov’s reign in the history of Russia. They, of course, did not feel any reverence for Catherine II, however, they viewed Paul only as a special case of a particularly cruel manifestation of absolutism (what “special cruelty” consisted of was usually kept silent), fundamentally not different from either his predecessors or his heirs. Only in the mid-1980s did N.Ya. Eidelman tried to understand the social meaning of Pavlov's conservative-reformist utopia. This author is also credited with rehabilitating the name of Paul in the eyes of the intelligentsia. Books published over the past 10–15 years basically summarize all the points of view expressed, without drawing particularly deep and new conclusions. Apparently, the final judgment about who exactly Emperor Pavel Petrovich was, as well as how realistic his political program was and what place it occupied in subsequent Russian history, has yet to be made. The Russian Orthodox Church, once again faced with the question of the possibility of glorifying Paul I as a martyr for the faith, has to make such a judgment.
I would like to once again draw attention to the fact that Paul was not only a far-sighted or, on the contrary, an unsuccessful statesman. Like the recently glorified martyr Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich, Pavel Petrovich was, first of all, a man of a very tragic fate. Back in 1776, he wrote in a private letter: “For me there are no parties or interests other than the interests of the state, and with my character it’s hard for me to see that things are going wrong and that the reason for this is negligence and personal views. I would rather be hated for a just cause than loved for a wrong cause.” But the people around him, as a rule, did not even want to understand the reasons for his behavior. As for the posthumous reputation, until recently it was the worst after Ivan the Terrible. Of course, it is easier to explain a person’s actions that are illogical from our point of view by calling him an idiot or a villain. However, this is unlikely to be true. Therefore, I would like to end this article with a quote from the thoughts of the poet Vladislav Khodasevich: “When Russian society says that Paul’s death was retribution for his oppression, it forgets that he oppressed those who spread too widely, those strong and many-righted who should be constrained and curbed for the sake of the powerless and weak. Maybe this was his historical mistake. But what moral height does she have! He loved justice - we are unfair to him. He was a knight - killed from around the corner. We scold from around the corner...”
Waiting to reign
On the very first pages of his book about Paul I, Walishevsky talks about his tragic fate and the origins of this tragedy. Paul I is one of the most controversial and mysterious figures in Russian history. To understand Emperor Paul, you need to familiarize yourself with the period when he was still a contender for the throne, and, therefore, a rebel. This is the main part of the biography of the unfortunate sovereign. It was predominant during the first half of his life, but in the second half it was partly the reason for its brief but dramatic events. In the eyes of many historians, Waliszewski says, Paul was mentally ill, and they recognize the widespread opinion about the disastrous and tyranny of his rule. The author also gives examples of madness on the throne in the 18th century: George III in England, Christian VII in Denmark. All of them were contemporaries of Paul. At the same time, the historian questions the madness of Paul I, and therefore turns to his childhood and youth. He writes about his first tutors, about his ambition and his delicate nervous system. Gives interesting facts from the early childhood of Paul I.
Paul's upbringing evokes sharp condemnation among many, including K. Waliszewski. Catherine II herself, Paul's mother, played a negative role in this, not paying due attention as a child, and even encouraging his courtship of the most dissolute of the ladies-in-waiting at court. What the author writes about the teachers is that they overloaded Pavel with his studies. Therefore, for the rest of his life, Pavel was fascinated by ideas that he was unable to realize, but dreamed of them in reality. He did not know how to think and analyze; his every idea immediately turned into a desperate impulse. According to Valishevsky, the teachers, together with Catherine II, missed the identity of the pupil.
The author of the monograph believes that Paul’s personality problems were caused by a double drama. His father, Peter III, was killed by supporters of Catherine II. This tragedy determined his entire future fate, and from his earliest years Pavel lived among fear and gloomy visions, so that later, according to A.V. Suvorov, Pavel became “a charming sovereign and a despotic dictator” (p. 13). At the age of 15, Catherine chose his wife, Princess Wilhelmina of Hesse-Darmstadt, who later converted to Orthodoxy and became Natalya Alekseevna. But, according to K. Valishevsky, the marriage was tragic for Pavel; the betrayal of his beloved wife with his friend Razumovsky further aggravated his gloomy and suspicious character. As for Natalya Alekseevna herself, in 1776 she died during childbirth, allegedly from A.K. Razumovsky. Rumors spread that Natalya was poisoned on the orders of Catherine II. Catherine appointed a group of 13 doctors to refute the rumors. Natalya was buried in the Church of Alexander - Nevsky Lavra, since Catherine did not want her to rest, for her actions, with the Romanovs in the Peter and Paul Fortress.
K. Valishevsky believes that Pavel owes everything good in his character to his two teachers: N. I. Panin and S. A. Poroshin. Thanks to the latter, Pavel learned about the knightly Order of Malta, which later became his obsession, and then he became the master of this order. Paul felt the love of his teacher for himself and, in turn, loved and appreciated him. Unfortunately, this relationship did not last long, and at the same time the unsympathetic traits of the Grand Duke were revealed: the instability of his impressions, the instability of his attachments. Walishevsky, presenting to us Pavel's youth, describes his impulses with unusual touching and love. He, having analyzed his childhood and youth, gives an explanation for many of Paul’s actions in the future. The happiness and consolation of Paul I were the first years of his second marriage with Princess Maria Fedorovna of Württenberg. Walishevsky writes that he was absorbed in a happy family life, and was preparing to devote himself entirely to raising his first-born. But Catherine II prevented him from this noble intention. Pavel and his mother had different views on raising children. While in power, Catherine II did not want to share power with her son, which created a chasm in their relationship. Waliszewski found evidence in the archives that Paul was theoretically preparing all the time to become emperor, even drawing up a budget and plans for military reform. But Catherine II did not want to see Paul in the capital, and in order to move him away from the court, she gave him an estate in Gatchina, where Paul creates his own special Gatchina world, where his amusing army, dressed in Prussian uniforms, from the time of the great King Frederick II, played a big role. His father Peter III also adored him, and this love of his for Frederick was passed on to his son.
In the monograph, K. Valishevsky provides information that in Gatchina Paul felt freer from Catherine’s noisy court and that the events of the great French bourgeois revolution played a large role in the formation of Paul’s political views: the execution of the French king Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette terribly frightened Catherine II and Paul and all the nobility of Europe. And the massacres of nobles in France aroused in Paul hatred of the revolutionaries. And in the presence of Catherine II, Paul noted that it was necessary to simply shoot all the rebels in Europe. To which Catherine replied that ideas cannot be fought with guns, and her son is a beast, and it is impossible for the state to fall into such hands. From that time on, Catherine had a plan to finally remove Paul from inheriting the throne and transfer it to her grandson, Alexander II. Meanwhile, Pavel lived in Gatchina and, as Valishevsky notes, in constant fear for his life, fearing that at any moment his mother would order his arrest or someone would poison or kill him. The historian emphasizes that Paul's stay in Gatchina played a huge role in shaping him as a future emperor. Considering the period of Paul's life with his passion for the Prussian order, the author writes about the contradictory nature of his nature: on the one hand, the heir imagined himself as a philosopher and philanthropist, he cared about the peasants, because he considered them the breadwinners of all classes and wanted to improve their situation. But at the same time, he was a cruel and despotic person who believed that people should be treated like dogs. All his plans are in the nature of a general vague theory; they do not contain a single practical indication. Paul wanted to transform the entire life of his state, but did not know where to start.
Walishevsky tells with bitterness about the misunderstanding between father and son, without blaming either Paul or Alexander, since Catherine II played a significant role in these disagreements, who from the very beginning took up the upbringing of Alexander. And from a very early age he was morally confused by his improper upbringing. Catherine, shortly before her death, tried to attract Alexander II to ascend the throne, bypassing her unfortunate father. But all these desires of the great empress were unexpectedly interrupted by her death on November 6, 1796.
Speaking about the first period of Paul’s life as the heir to the throne, K. Walishevsky writes that the further fate and death of Paul are the consequences of the tragic events of childhood, when Catherine’s supporters killed his father Peter III, which gave birth to fear in Paul until the end of all his days. Despite all the efforts of his educators, they could not contain or suppress his fears, his sometimes sick fantasies, inability to control his own emotions, ardor, impatience, and the constant expectation of an attempt on his life from unknown or invented enemies. The betrayal of his first beloved wife gives rise to insecurity and distrust of people. The bloody events of the French Revolution give rise to fear of revolution in Russia and Europe, and he tries to defend himself with the system of the Prussian model of government, taking as a model the Prussian king, the “philosopher on the throne” (P.40), Frederick II. Acquaintance with the Order of Malta develops a romantic personality in Paul I. Mutual distrust between son and mother gives rise to constant suspicion and a long wait for the throne, and the fear of losing it in the future.
The new Emperor of Russia, Paul I, who was unpredictable and uncontrollable by his emotions, was supposed to take the throne.
Reign of Paul IK. Valishevsky presents to the reader in detail the events that occurred during the beginning of the reign of Paul I. Here are just the key moments of this time: being in Gatchina and learning about the death of his mother, Paul at first did not believe it, thinking that it was a provocation. But when representatives of various strata of society informed him about this, he, who had been waiting for so many years for the throne, even became confused for a while. But soon, already intoxicated by the unexpectedly fallen power, Pavel was true to his fantasies. And he brought one of them to life. As soon as he ascended the throne, Paul ordered the body of his father Peter III to be removed from the grave in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra and put a crown on his head, thereby returning his imperial title to him, since when Peter III was killed, he was abdicated from power. Then Paul gave this crown to the murderer of Peter A. Orlov, who carried it along the troops lined up along the Nevsky behind the coffin of the emperor he killed.
On April 5, 1797, the coronation of Paul himself took place, and on the same day several important laws were promulgated.
The decree on succession to the throne established a certain order in the succession to the throne and put an end to the arbitrariness of the sovereign proclaimed by Peter I in the matter of appointing a successor. The “Institution of the Imperial Family” determined the order of maintenance of persons of the reigning house, allocating special, so-called appanage estates for this purpose, and organizing their management. According to this act, the throne passes to the eldest in the family in the male line. As for women, they have the right to inherit the throne only after the suppression of all male representatives of the dynasty.
Another decree, published under the same date, concerned the serf peasantry and, prohibiting the performance of corvee on Sundays, contained advice to landowners to limit themselves to three-day corvee for peasants. The majority understood this law in the sense of prohibiting a higher corvee than three days a week, but in this understanding it did not find practical application either under Paul himself or under his successors. A decree that followed some time prohibited the sale of peasants without land in Little Russia. These decrees, in any case, indicating that the government had once again taken into its own hands the protection of the interests of the serf peasantry, were poorly harmonized with Paul’s other actions aimed at increasing the number of serfs. Convinced, due to his unfamiliarity with the actual state of affairs, that the fate of the landowner peasants was better than the fate of the state-owned ones, Paul during his short reign distributed up to 600,000 souls of state-owned peasants into private ownership. On the other hand, the rights of the upper classes underwent serious reductions under Paul, compared with how they were established in the previous reign: the most important articles of letters of grant to the nobility and cities were abolished, the self-government of these classes and some personal rights of their members, such as , for example, freedom from corporal punishment.
The historian considers it necessary to note the peculiarity of Paul’s activities: within 100 years from the beginning of Peter’s reign, 12 noble courts received princely and count dignity; Paul also differs in this direction - during the four years of his reign, he created five new princely families and 22 counts.
In his government activities, Pavel, according to K. Valishevsky, allowed absurdities and sometimes excesses. Pavel ordered Major K.F. Tol to make a model of St. Petersburg so that not only all the streets, squares, but also the facades of all houses and even their view from the courtyard were represented with literal geometric accuracy. He banned the words “club”, “council”, “representatives”, “citizen”, “fatherland”. He issued a decree that determined at what hours city residents should turn off the lights in their homes. Through the chief of police, Pavel forbade dancing the waltz, wearing wide and large curls, and sideburns. Set the colors of collars, cuffs, women's frock coats, etc.
The author of the monograph more than once mentions the role of Prussia in the formation of the political views of Paul I. He, frightened by the events of the French Revolution, sought to create a state of absolute order in Russia. And it was Prussia that served as a model for him. Hence the Prussian drill in the guard and army, the Prussian uniform, the Prussian iron discipline. Pavel wanted the guard, which had long ago become just a toy, to now take up serious work. But the consequence of too radical military reform was the creation of a center of opposition to the new regime. The harsh actions, whims and oddities of the new sovereign threw everyone into confusion. The end result of this course of affairs was the complete breakdown of the entire administrative mechanism and the growth of increasingly serious discontent in society. Convinced of the need to protect Russian society from the perverse ideas of the revolution, Paul undertook a whole persecution of liberal thoughts and overseas tastes, which, despite all the severity with which it was carried out, had a rather curious character. In 1799, travel of young people abroad for study was prohibited, and the University of Dorpat was founded to avoid the need for such trips. In 1800, the import of all books and even music from abroad was prohibited; even earlier, in 1797, private printing houses were closed and strict censorship was established for Russian books. At the same time, a ban was imposed on French fashions and Russian harnesses, police orders determined the hour when residents of the capital had to put out the lights in their houses, the words “citizen” and “fatherland” were expelled from the Russian language, etc. The government system, thus , came down to the establishment of barracks discipline in the life of society.
As for foreign policy, Walishevsky also shows in it the influence of the sovereign’s ambiguous nature. Paul at first adhered to anti-French sentiments and, at the request of the Austrian Emperor Francis II to save Europe from the French, and, above all, Italy, he sent the great Suvorov, and Admiral Ushakov to the sea. Paul's contradictory nature was reflected in his creation of an alliance between Russia and Turkey, directed against France. But, disappointed in the actions of Austria, which actually betrayed Suvorov’s army to death, because it was afraid of increasing Russian influence in the Balkans and Italy, and unexpectedly for all of Europe, Pavel breaks off relations with England and Austria and creates an alliance with Napoleon. Pavel, with his great intelligence, understood that the time of the romantic French revolution was over, the time of seizures of colonies and lands was beginning, and the creation of the French Empire was beginning. He wrote a letter to Napoleon, in which he indicated that there was no need for them to argue, it was important to talk about creating peace in Europe, which it so desperately needed. At that time, Admiral Nelson captured Malta, the capital of the Order of Malta. The Knights of Malta fled and offered the title of Grand Master of the Order to Paul, as the protector of thrones and altars. So, Paul became the head of the Order of Malta. Considering himself a knight, a defender of faith and power from the encroachments of the French Revolution, his romantic nature also manifested itself in him. In the guise of Paul, three people were united: a knight of the Order of Malta - an admirer of the Prussian king Frederick II - an admirer of French absolutism of the era of Louis XIV. It was in these three concepts that Paul’s contradictory nature took shape, which to a great extent reflected the contradictory nature of the era in which he lived. Waliszewski writes that Paul I is “Jerusalem-Versailles-Potsdam” (P.417).
The historiography of Pavlovsk's reign is replete with general assessments of the nature of the internal political activity of that time. Meanwhile, the state transformations of the era of Paul I have not been sufficiently studied. Among them, not the least important and original place is occupied by urban reform. Valishevsky devotes a lot of space in his monograph to elucidating the reasons, goals, progress and results of its implementation in Moscow, as well as understanding the circumstances that accompanied its abolition. At the end of the 18th century, the urban improvement of Moscow was provided mainly by the in-kind contributions of the tax-paying population of the capital. Monetary contributions for citywide needs were small, and most of these funds were spent on the maintenance of the judiciary and the Duma. All financial orders of the latter were placed under the strict control of the provincial authorities. Two important Pavlovian innovations - the transfer of the police to the maintenance of the city treasury and the construction of barracks for troops and apartments for visiting officials - significantly changed the nature and scope of economic and financial care of the capital's governing bodies.
These events were a response to problems that worried Catherine’s administration. The reform of city government in Moscow was an attempt to adapt the capital's administrative mechanism to the new conditions that emerged as a result of these transformations. The priority for the legislator was the creation of an effective system of city institutions capable of carrying out instructions and bearing real responsibility to higher authorities. The Moscow Charter, which changed the composition, structure and functions of the capital's governing bodies, was created on the basis of the new St. Petersburg regulation. When compiling the latter, the Prussian experience was traditionally used. Features of the new administrative structure in Moscow were the creation of a rigid executive vertical, strengthening reporting and control over the activities of the bodies responsible for the state of city finances, the deployment of troops and the supply of food to the population. The administrative status of the capital's institutions and positions increased, and the city government was separated from the provincial government. Management costs have increased. Administrative and economic transformations led to the approval of the first city budget, were the immediate reason for the publication of regulations that legalized peasant trade in the city, and led to the drawing up of a guild charter. The increase in taxation raised the problem of equal distribution of duties and fees. The Moscow nobility was also attracted to the latter.
Subsequently, having abolished Pavlovian administrative regulations in the capitals and restored in general terms the city legislation of Catherine II, Alexander I nevertheless confirmed the financial and economic changes that had occurred. It soon became clear, however, that a simple return to the previous system of institutions was impossible, since it did not guarantee successful and reliable management. The search began for a form of administrative structure in the capital that would be acceptable under the new conditions. In this context, the reform of Moscow governance under Paul I seems to be the beginning of this process.
Having examined the reign of Paul I, Walishevsky wonders whether Catherine’s son was really mentally ill. Previously, the generally accepted opinion was that the reign of Paul I was disastrous and tyranny. But the last years of his reign still refute this opinion. And the first place in the refutation is occupied by the progress of science during the reign of Paul, his patronage in the field of art and literature. For twenty years Paul was an opponent of the policies and reign of Catherine II, whose merits, however, are recognized by everyone, despite some mistakes. He conceived, prepared and wanted to carry out a complete revolution of government, which gave Russia power and brilliance, which it has not had since then. Having achieved power, if he did not carry out this plan, then, in any case, he tried to do it. K. Waliszewski calls Paul “the true son of the revolution, which he so ardently hated and fought against” (p. XX). Therefore, he cannot be called either crazy in the pathological sense of the word, or even weak-minded, although he was capable of some recklessness. The historian explains this by saying that the emperor, as a man of mediocre intelligence, could not resist the general mental crisis, which made even the most powerful of that time delirious. Thus, Walishevsky justifies all of Pavel’s actions, joining rather the opinion of people who mistake wildness and rashness for the power of brilliant inspiration, rather than those who, speaking about Pavel’s character, consider him mentally abnormal.
The tragedy of Paul IAccording to K. Waliszewski, the death of Paul I gave rise to many mysteries, and in order to understand them more thoroughly, the author, in as much detail as possible, presents the events preceding the death of the sovereign. So, gradually, Paul’s entourage: the court nobility, the guard, especially its elite, the bureaucracy, the nobility, Paul’s relatives begin to experience the enormous burden of his demands, his often impossible orders, contradictory to each other, sometimes very cruel. From his youth, afraid of assassinations, conspiracies, coups, Pavel always feared for his life, not trusting anyone. There were very few people he loved. Since his first wife Natalya Alekseevna cheated on him, he stopped trusting people. And he trusted only his former hairdresser, Count Kutaisov, a baptized Turk. He demanded strict adherence to the rules of etiquette in his luxurious palaces, and saw in everything a desire to belittle his importance as the supreme monarch. St. Petersburg society was terrified of the Tsar every day. At parades and reviews, generals and officers were afraid of the tsar's antics. Sometimes Paul, depriving an officer of nobility for the slightest offense, could also subject him to corporal punishment, which was impossible in the time of Catherine II. Tension grew in society, accompanied by fear of Paul. As for the opinion of Walishevsky himself, he emphasizes that the tragic death of the sovereign was neither exclusively, nor even mainly, due to his mistakes and insults to those around him. On the contrary, it was his best aspirations that led Paul to death. The emperor’s entourage could not forgive the insult to their vanity, the reduction of the thefts they committed.
The rapprochement with Napoleon and the break with England gives rise to a desire among the courtiers and guards to get rid of Paul. The society was looking for a way out, which resulted in the organization of several conspiracies against Paul. And the most important character in the last conspiracy was the Governor-General of St. Petersburg, and confidant of Paul I, Count P. A. von der Palen. He decided to make the banner of the conspiracy the son of Paul Alexander, the beloved grandson of Catherine II, whom she wanted to elevate to the throne, bypassing Paul. Alexander, raised between two fires, forced to please his great grandmother and his stern father, became two-faced and evasive of specific answers and opinions. The conspirators took advantage of this duplicity of the heir. For the purpose of secrecy, von der Palen met with Alexander in the bathhouse and explained to him the situation of the country, ruled by a mad king. As a compelling argument, he cited the fact that if they do not act, then other conspirators may act and kill Paul. Because he himself will not kill, he will only abdicate the throne. Palen gathered all the conspirators on the night of March 11-12, 1801 in the apartment of the commander of the Preobrazhensky regiment, General Talyzin, and divided the conspirators into two groups. One was headed by the former favorite of Catherine II P. A. Zubov with his brother Nikolai, the second group was headed by Palen himself. The actions of the English Ambassador Whitworth to Russia played a large role in the death of Paul. He becomes the center of a conspiracy against Emperor Paul, whose policies do not suit England, which was interested in destroying the planned military-political alliance between Paul and Napoleon.
At the time when Palen sent his first group to Pavel, he had already been living in the Mikhailovsky Castle for 40 days. On the site where the Mikhailovsky Castle was built, there was once a wooden palace of Elizabeth Petrovna, where Pavel was born on October 20, 1 7 54. Starting the construction of the castle, Paul said: “Where I was born, there I will die.” Valishevsky makes an interesting observation that on the main facade of the Mikhailovsky Castle, in bronze and gold letters, there was an inscription from the Gospel: “To your house befits the holiness of the Lord for the length of days.” The number of letters in the inscription is equal to the number of years Paul lived.
When sending the first group, Palen hoped that if the conspirators killed Paul, he would keep his word given to Alexander, since he would not kill Paul. If they don’t kill him, then Palen will come as Paul’s liberator from the conspirators. Therefore, he deliberately walked quite slowly towards the castle. Valishevsky's book even gives a plan of the mezzanine of the Mikhailovsky Castle with the location of the rooms of Paul and his wife Maria Fedorovna. Lately, mistrusting his son and wife, Pavel ordered the doors to his wife’s room to be tightly locked. And from Pavel’s bedroom-office a secret staircase led to the lower floor, where Pavel’s favorite Anna Lopukhina lived. All the conspirators were drunk, when von der Palen ordered action, no one even moved at first. The cold-blooded German General Bennigsen went with the first group of conspirators. There were a huge number of guards both inside and outside the castle. Among them was the Semenovsky Guards battalion, whose chief was Alexander II. Literally 2 hours before his death, Pavel personally removed a squadron of horse guards under the command of commander Sablukov from his bedroom under the pretext that they were Jacobin revolutionaries. And therefore, instead of a guard, he placed two valets. The conspirators easily dealt with such security and burst into the bedroom, breaking down the door. But Pavel was not there. In fright, some of the conspirators tried to jump out of the bedroom, others went to look for Pavel in other rooms. Only Bennigsen remained; he calmly walked around all the corners of the bedroom and saw Paul’s legs sticking out of the cain. Returning, one of the conspirators ordered Paul to sign an abdication of the throne. Pavel refused, started an argument with N. Zubov, hit him on the hand, and Nikolai then hit Pavel in the temple with a gold snuffbox. The conspirators attacked Pavel and brutally killed him. Paul died in terrible agony. Waliszewski describes what happened as an attack by a disorderly drunken crowd on a defenseless creature, undoubtedly sympathizing with the emperor. When Palen reported to Alexander about the death of his father, he cried out in tears that Palen had promised to prevent the murder. To which Palen reasonably replied that he himself did not kill and added that, stop being childish, go reign. Alexander never forgot this terrible death of his father and could not find peace.
He could not have children due to chronic alcoholism and, interested in the birth of an heir, turned a blind eye to the closeness of her daughter-in-law, first with Choglokov, and then with the chamberlain of the Grand Duke’s court, Saltykov. A number of historians consider Saltykov’s paternity to be an undoubted fact. Later they even claimed that Paul was not Catherine’s son. In "Materials for the biography of Emperor Paul I" (Leipzig, 1874) it is reported that Saltykov allegedly gave birth to a dead child, who was replaced by a Chukhon boy, that is, Paul I is not only not the son of his parents, but not even Russian.
In 1773, not even 20 years old, he married Princess Wilhelmina of Hesse-Darmstadt (in Orthodoxy - Natalya Alekseevna), but three years later she died in childbirth, and in the same 1776 Pavel married a second time, to Princess Sophia of Württemberg. Dorothea (in Orthodoxy - Maria Feodorovna). Catherine II tried to prevent the Grand Duke from participating in discussions of state affairs, and he, in turn, began to evaluate his mother’s policies more and more critically. Pavel believed that this policy was based on love of fame and pretense; he dreamed of introducing strictly legal governance in Russia under the auspices of the autocracy, limiting the rights of the nobility, and introducing the strictest, Prussian-style, discipline in the army.
Biography of Empress Catherine II the GreatThe reign of Catherine II lasted more than three and a half decades, from 1762 to 1796. It was filled with many events in internal and external affairs, the implementation of plans that continued what was done under Peter the Great.In 1794, the Empress decided to remove her son from the throne and hand him over to her eldest grandson Alexander Pavlovich, but did not meet with sympathy from the highest state dignitaries. The death of Catherine II on November 6, 1796 opened the way for Paul to the throne.
The new emperor immediately tried to undo what had been done during the thirty-four years of Catherine II’s reign, and this became one of the most important motives of his policy.
The emperor sought to replace the collegial principle of organizing management with an individual one. An important legislative act of Paul was the law on the order of succession to the throne, published in 1797, which was in force in Russia until 1917.
In the army, Paul sought to introduce Prussian military order. He believed that the army is a machine and the main thing in it is the mechanical coherence of the troops and efficiency. In the field of class politics, the main goal was to transform the Russian nobility into a disciplined, fully serving class. Paul's policy towards the peasantry was contradictory. During the four years of his reign, he gave away gifts to about 600 thousand serfs, sincerely believing that they would live better under the landowner.
In everyday life, certain styles of clothing, hairstyles, and dances, in which the emperor saw manifestations of freethinking, were banned. Strict censorship was introduced and the import of books from abroad was prohibited.
The foreign policy of Paul I was unsystematic. Russia constantly changed allies in Europe. In 1798, Paul joined the second coalition against France; At the insistence of the allies, he placed Alexander Suvorov at the head of the Russian army, under whose command the heroic Italian and Swiss campaigns were carried out.
The capture by the British of Malta, which Paul took under his protection, accepting the title of Grand Master of the Order of St. in 1798. John of Jerusalem (Order of Malta), quarreled him with England. Russian troops were withdrawn, and in 1800 the coalition finally collapsed. Not content with this, Paul began to draw closer to France and conceived a joint struggle against England.
On January 12, 1801, Pavel sent the ataman of the Don Army, General Orlov, an order to march with his entire army on a campaign against India. A little over a month later, the Cossacks began their campaign, numbering 22,507 people. This event, accompanied by terrible hardships, was, however, not completed.
Paul's policies, combined with his despotic character, unpredictability and eccentricity, caused discontent in various social strata. Soon after his accession, a conspiracy began to mature against him. On the night of March 11 (23), 1801, Paul I was strangled in his own bedroom in the Mikhailovsky Castle. The conspirators burst into the emperor's chambers demanding that he abdicate the throne. As a result of the skirmish, Paul I was killed. It was announced to the people that the emperor had died of apoplexy.
The body of Paul I was buried in the Peter and Paul Cathedral in St. Petersburg.
The material was prepared based on information from open sources
- In contact with 0
- Google+ 0
- OK 0
- Facebook 0
