Perhaps, in the life of not a single monarch there were so many sensations, only talk about which would have thrilled both contemporaries and descendants. And his very birth is a sensation ...
But it seemed that all the initial data were absolutely clear: Emperor Pavel Petrovich was the heir to the imperial couple of Peter III and Catherine II. Paul's parents are quite legitimate monarchs. Father, Peter III, although he was discharged from a distant Holstein by his aunt Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, had the most direct relation to the Russian throne. He was the son of Prince Holstein-Gottorp and the crown princess Anna Petrovna, which means that he was the grandson of Peter the Great himself. Elizaveta Petrovna, being childless, declared the son of her adored sister Annushka the legal heir, although she realized that her nephew was not strong in mind. But the active aunt took her own measures - she found an intelligent bride - Sophia-Frederica-Augusta, the princess of Anhalt-Zerbst, who took the name Ekaterina Alekseevna in Russia. And whatever the doubts about the bride's nobility, the wedding took place, which means that the first-born of this couple automatically became the legal heir to the throne.
So why was the whole court whispering that the little one Pavel Petrovich, born to Catherine, was an illegitimate person for the throne?
Everyone knows that the personal life of the young spouses Pyotr Fedorovich and Ekaterina Alekseevna did not work out. We can say that she did not exist at all: Peter was interested not in the charms of a young wife, but in military maneuvers. In addition, the beautiful and intelligent little wife frightened the illiterate Peter, he clearly preferred completely stupid ugly girls. In a word, until the beginning of 1752, poor Catherine remained an involuntary virgin. This state of affairs led the Empress Elizabeth at first to bewilderment, then to rage. For the stability of the throne, a dynasty was needed, and the dull-witted Petrusha was not going to give Elizabeth a grandson. And then the wise ruler took her own measures - "the intrigue of creating an heir."
S. Shchukin. Portrait of Paul I. 1797On Easter 1752, the confidante of young Catherine the maid of honor Choglokova introduced her patroness to two young handsome men of the best blood - Sergei Saltykov and Lev Naryshkin. Both began to vigorously court Catherine, but she chose Saltykov. However, she did not dare to do anything except timid smiles - she feared the wrath of Empress Elizabeth. But one evening, young Catherine heard a completely tactless, in her opinion, proposal. The nosy Choglokova told the girl that adultery, of course, is a condemned thing, but there are "situations of a higher order, for the sake of which an exception should be made." In a word, Catherine was asked to immediately start “creating an heir,” albeit not with her legal husband. The poor girl just gasped: "What will Mother Empress say about me?" Choglokova smiled sweetly and whispered: "She will say that you have done her will!"
This is how Catherine's rapprochement with Sergei Saltykov took place - in the interests of "high state considerations." But the child did not come easily. Twice Catherine lost her child - the first time because of the shaking in the carriage, when Elizabeth dragged her daughter-in-law with her on a journey. The second time - after the stormy dances at the ball, in which it was impossible not to participate, because Elizabeth adored dancing until she fell and demanded that everyone follow her example. After these sad events, Saltykov became colder towards Catherine. Maybe he was tired of participating in "fun of the highest order", maybe he wanted to take a walk to his heart's content, but here he had to "be faithful" to Catherine, who was not experienced in lovemaking. But perhaps something unforeseen happened: the lawful spouse Pyotr Fedorovich suddenly woke up and, having slapped his lover in the face, wished to "know" his own spouse.
True, he was always drunk, but Catherine did not drive him. She, of course, understood that Empress Elizabeth dreamed of any grandchild, but she herself, wise beyond her years, longed to have an heir from a legitimate husband.
How events developed further - covered with darkness. Some memoirists believe that the long-awaited baby Pavel, born on September 20, 1754, is the son of Saltykov, while others, including Catherine herself in her own Notes, argue that Pavel is really the son of her husband Peter. The surviving text of the report of the trusted chancellor Bestuzhev-Ryumin to Empress Elizabeth speaks in favor of the first version, where there are also the following lines: “What Your Majesty’s wisely outlined has taken a good and desired beginning, - the presence of the executor of Your Majesty’s highest will is now not only unnecessary here, but even to the attainment of perfect fulfillment and treasure for eternal times of the mystery would be harmful. With respect to these considerations, please, most merciful Empress, to order Chamberlain Saltykov to be Your Majesty's ambassador to Stockholm under the King of Sweden. " In a word, back in those days, those "friends" who had done their job and had become objectionable were sent into honorary exile. However, in favor of the second version (Pavel is the legitimate son of Peter Fedorovich), the thing is absolutely indisputable - the son looked like his father, and over time the similarity only intensified.
On this basis, the Chancellor's lines can be read in a different way. Saltykov was removed from the court not only so that he would not talk too much about his relationship with Catherine, but mainly because the "creation of an heir" took place in the most moral way - the husband and wife themselves solved their problems. That is why, as the chancellor put it, "[Saltykov's] presence ... is now not only unnecessary here, but even ... it would be harmful."
In a word, the heir was born, the intrigue went into the sand. But the riddle was not solved, and therefore new speculations arose. The most surprising version was published by the writer Herzen, during his "London sitting" back in 1861. According to her, the third child, whom Catherine conceived from Saltykov, was born dead. And then Elizabeth, desperate to get a grandson-heir (after all, for young Catherine this is already the third "female inability"!), Ordered to urgently replace the baby. A living child was found nearby - in the village of Kotly near Oranienbaum in a Chukhon family (that was the name of the Finns who lived in large numbers around St. Petersburg). The live boy was brought to Elizabeth, and Catherine, who did not yet know about the dead child, was thrown in the cold corridor without leaving, they did not even give water to drink. Perhaps, as the article says, "the empty and evil Empress Elizabeth" wanted the woman in labor to die. But Catherine's strong body survived, and she began to recover. Then Elizabeth went to a new trick: so that the mother did not understand that this was not her baby, the empress did not even give Catherine even a look at her son for more than a month.
At first glance - a version worthy of an adventure novel. But, oddly enough, she had very worthy witnesses. Karl Tiesenhausen's estate was located near the village of Kotly. At the time of the incident, he was a young man, but he perfectly remembered that in one night the whole village of Kotly was wiped off the face of the earth, and all its inhabitants were loaded onto carts and taken to Kamchatka. Karl Tiesenhausen later told his son, Vasily Karlovich, about this terrible incident. Well, the word was worth it, because Vasily Tizengauzen was a brave colonel in the Russian army, later a member of the Southern Society. In 1826, together with other Decembrists, he was convicted and exiled to Siberia. It was there that the colonel wrote his memoirs, calling the truth about the heirs of the Romanovs "worse than any lie."
In the early 1820s, another event took place, confirming the incredible Chukhon legend. From distant Kamchatka, a certain Athanasius came to St. Petersburg, announcing that he was the brother of Paul I, deceased by that time, and, accordingly, the uncle of the ruling emperor Alexander I. The old man, who was chattering, was imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress. But…
Dmitry Lanskoy, a member of the State Council, told his nephew, Prince Alexander Odoevsky, that at night they secretly bring to Emperor Alexander Pavlovich a certain old man from Petropavlovka, unusually similar to the late Paul I. Alexander talks to him for a long time and often sighs.
Well, if Alexander really was the son of a "Chukhon child", there was something to sigh about. But maybe the wise Alexander sighed because he was convinced again and again: Russia is an extraordinary country. Other states are ready to consider any famous person a "person of royal blood", and in our country they are happy to humiliate even a legitimate king to a "Chukhonts". But Alexander once asked his grandmother, Catherine the Great, who his father was, and she silently put two miniatures in front of her grandson - the husband of Peter III and the son of Paul I. The similarity was complete.
The 18th century in the history of Russia is also called "female". During it, women ascended to the Russian throne four times. There was no such "matriarchy" in Russian history either before or after.
Maria Feodorovna Romanova, wife emperor Paul I, was the direct opposite of its predecessors. Instead of political intrigue and amorous adventures, she devoted all her time to her husband and children.
However, for a woman who was considered by her contemporaries to be an ideal wife and mother, life was very difficult.
Sofia Maria Dorothea Augusta Louise of Württemberg was born on October 14 (25), 1759 in Stettin Castle, in the same place as her future mother-in-law Catherine the Great... Sophia-Dorothea's father, prince Friedrich Eugene of Württemberg, like Catherine's father, was in the service of the Prussian king and was commandant of Stettin.
This is where the similarities between the two Russian empresses end. If the future Catherine in childhood played with boys, showed an extraordinary mind and ambition, then Sophia-Dorothea was much more in line with the classical ideas of that time about the role of a woman.
Sophia Maria Dorothea Augusta Louise of Württemberg. Painting by an unknown artist. Photo: Public Domain
Spare bride
From a young age, Sophia-Dorothea learned that a good woman should devote her life to giving birth and raising children, caring for her husband and thrifty and wise housekeeping.
Raised in such views, Sophia-Dorothea was destined for husbands Prince Ludwig of Hesse, and an engagement had already been made between them. But then unforeseen circumstances intervened.
On April 15, 1776, she died in childbirth in St. Petersburg. the first wife of the heir to the throne Pavel Petrovich Natalya Alekseevna, nee Wilgemina of Hesse... By the way, the sister of the groom Sophia-Dorothea.
Paul was shocked by the death of his wife, but his mother, Empress Catherine the Great, was more worried that her son did not have an heir. She intended to solve this problem by all means and again began looking for a bride.
Sofia-Dorothea had previously been on the lists of applicants, but at the time when the first choice was made, she was only 13 years old and she could not give birth to an heir in the near future, so her candidacy was refused.
After the death of Natalya Alekseevna, Ekaterina again remembered Sophia-Dorothea, who by this time was already 17 years old, and felt that this time the girl was ripe to become Paul's wife.
Maria Fedorovna. Painting by Fyodor Rokotov, 1770s Photo: Public Domain
Paul was smitten on the spot
But the engagement to Ludwig of Hesse interfered with the marriage with the heir to the Russian throne.
And then I got involved in the case King of Prussia Frederick II, to whom this marriage seemed to be beneficial from a political point of view.
Ludwig was politely resigned, and Frederick II personally organized Paul's meeting with his new bride in Berlin.
Paul was smitten on the spot and wrote to his mother: “I found my bride as I could only wish for myself in my mind: good-looking, big, slender, shy, answers intelligently and promptly. As for her heart, she has it very sensitive and tender. Very easy to use, loves to be at home and practice reading or music. "
Perhaps, Paul, who fell in love at first sight, sinned against the truth only once, calling the bride "slender." Contemporaries noted that the stately blonde from a young age was inclined to be overweight. And one more interesting point - Sophia-Dorothea was taller than the heir to the Russian throne.
However, the girl knew how to be in the shadow of her man, which was extremely pleasant to Pavel, who was tired of the dictates of an imperious mother.
Sophia-Dorothea, who learned from childhood that obedience is a benefactor for a woman, endured the change of groom very easily. A few days after the engagement to Pavel, she told her friends that she loved him to madness.
Maria Feodorovna and Pavel I. Painting by Gavrila Skorodumov, 1782. Photo: Public Domain
4 sons, 6 daughters
Following her attitudes, she was able to maintain a conversation on topics that were interesting to her husband, for which she diligently mastered new knowledge. In order to write the first letter to Pavel in Russian, a week of learning a new language for her was enough for the bride.
Soon Sofia-Dorothea moved to Russia, was baptized into Orthodoxy under the name of Maria Feodorovna and married Pavel Petrovich by legal marriage.
The mother-in-law was extremely pleased with her daughter-in-law - submissive, respectful, obedient. And most importantly, in December 1777, Maria Feodorovna, to the great joy of the empress, gave birth to a son Alexandra.
In Russian tsarist families, a large number of children were not uncommon, but none of the Russian empresses was as prolific as Maria Feodorovna.
In April 1779 she gave birth to her second son Constantine, in July 1783 daughter Alexandru, in December 1784 Elena, in February 1786 - Mary, in May 1788 - Ekaterina, in July 1792 - Olga, in January 1795 - Anna, in June 1796 - Nicholas, and in January 1798 - Michael.
Mortality in childhood was the most acute problem of that era, but out of 10 children of Maria Fedorovna, nine survived to adulthood - only her daughter Olga died in infancy.
At the same time, frequent pregnancies did not prevent Maria Fedorovna from running a household and being present at social events.
At court, Maria Fedorovna did not play a noticeable role, the reason for this was Paul's discord with his mother Catherine. And, as the mother-in-law of Catherine herself once took her son for upbringing, so too Catherine took away from her daughter-in-law two older children - Alexander and Konstantin, for whom her grandmother had big political plans.
Maria Fedorovna did not contradict, strictly following the postulates learned in her youth.
Chief curator of Russian orphans
However, neither the qualities of an ideal wife, nor obedience did not save Maria Fedorovna from problems in relations with her husband.
Intimacy became the bone of contention. The fact is that after the birth of the youngest son Mikhail Empress's midwife Joseph Morenheim He categorically stated that a new birth could cost Maria Fedorovna her life. Pavel, for twenty years of marriage, did not lose his passion for his wife and was pretty disappointed with such a prohibition.
And since the impulsive Paul was extremely irritable, this disappointment turned into an actual disgrace for the empress. The emperor himself found solace in a relationship with a favorite Anna Lopukhina.
Maria Fedorovna had to focus on charity work. With her husband's accession to the throne, she was appointed chief superintendent over the orphanages. A mother of many children, the Empress approached her new duties with all seriousness. Thanks to her, the work of institutions for foundlings and homeless children was streamlined. For example, while studying the work of these institutions, Maria Fedorovna discovered that infant mortality is at a monstrously high level. The reason was that there are simply no maximum standards for the number of children who can be in a foster home at the same time. By order of Maria Fedorovna, such restrictions were introduced. It was decided to give the rest of the children to the state sovereigns of the village to the trustworthy and good behavior of the peasants for upbringing in order to accustom the pets to the rules of rural home economics; keep boys with peasants up to 18 years of age, girls up to 15 years. At the same time, the empress ordered those children who were weaker than the others and required constant care to be left in orphanages.
In addition to caring for the education and upbringing of orphans, which she supervised until her death, Maria Fedorovna was involved in women's education in Russia.
Thanks to her patronage and partly assistance in the reign of the eldest son of Alexander I, several women's educational institutions were founded both in St. Petersburg and in Moscow, Kharkov, Simbirsk and other cities.
The scariest night
The most terrible event in the life of the Empress was the murder of her husband, Emperor Paul I, on the night of March 11-12, 1801. Despite the deteriorated personal relationships and her husband's attacks on the eldest sons, Maria Fedorovna did not want her husband to die.
However, on the same night, political ambitions suddenly awakened in this submissive and meek woman. To the surprise of the conspirators, Maria Feodorovna demanded that after her husband's death she be proclaimed the ruling monarch. For at least four hours, she refused to obey her son, putting the already embarrassed Alexander in an extremely awkward position.
The conspirators were rougher - the empress was not allowed to the body of the murdered husband, and one of the brothers Zubovykh and completely threw: "Get this woman out of here!" On Maria Feodorovna's claims to power, one of the conspirators, Bennigsen, said: "Madam, do not play a comedy."
Ultimately, Maria Feodorovna, now the empress dowager, submitted to her fate, as she always submitted to her.
She survived the reign of her eldest son Alexander, who did not leave behind heirs, which stretched for a quarter of a century, survived the uprising of the Decembrists and the accession to the throne of her third son Nicholas.
Maria Feodorovna is in mourning. Painting by George Doe. Photo: Public Domain
"Office of Empress Mary"
She tried to influence both of her sons, emperors, defending the interests of her German relatives in foreign policy and giving advice on important issues of public administration. The sons listened respectfully, but acted in their own way - after all, the mother herself proved to them with her whole life that a woman's place is in the kitchen and in the nursery, and not at meetings where political issues are decided.
For many years Maria Fedorovna lived in the Pavlovsk Palace - this summer palace, founded in 1782, was a gift from Paul I to his beloved wife. The Empress herself took an active part in the creation of both the palace itself and the famous Pavlovsky Park. We can say that the Pavlovsk Palace was in many ways the brainchild of Maria Feodorovna.
Maria Fedorovna died on October 24, 1828, at the age of 69. Her son, Emperor Nicholas I, ordered the establishment of the IV department of the imperial chancellery to run charitable and orphanages in order to continue the activities to which Maria Fedorovna devoted three decades. Over time, the new department received the name "Office of the Empress Maria".
In addition, in memory of his mother, Nicholas I established the Mariinsky insignia of immaculate service, which complained to women for long-term diligent service in the institutions of the Empress Maria, as well as in other charitable and educational institutions, which were directly under the direct supervision of the Sovereign Emperor and members of the Imperial House.
He went down in history as a "Russian Don Quixote", an admirer of chivalry, Prussian order and the politics of his father. The passions that Paul I could not resist brought him step by step to a tragic end.
Parental love was unfamiliar to Paul I. Nevertheless, he idolized his father, who was completely indifferent to him. Only once did Peter express his paternal feelings - he attended Paul's lessons, during which he loudly said to the teachers, "I see this rogue knows things better than you." And he gave him the rank of corporal's guard. When a coup in 1762 broke out in the country, which ended with the death of the emperor, Paul was amazed. His beloved father, whose recognition he so wanted to achieve, was ruined by his mother's lovers. In addition, the young man was explained that in the event of the death of Peter, the throne passed to him legally. Now Catherine II stood at the head of the country, and in fact she was supposed to become an adviser and regent under the young heir. It turns out she stole the throne from him!
Paul was only seven years old. The murder of his father became an example for him, which raised suspicion in him. His biographers note that from now on he felt only unaccountable fear of his power-hungry mother. Later he did not trust his son Alexander either. As it turned out, not in vain.
Chivalry
The life of young Pavel passed without friends and parental love. Against the background of his loneliness, he developed a fantasy, he lived in her images. Historians note that as a child he was fond of novels about noble and brave knights, he read to the holes of Cervantes. The fusion of constant fear for life and chivalry determined the character of Emperor Paul I. He went down in history as “Russian Hamlet” or “Russian Don Quixote”. He had highly developed concepts of honor, duty, dignity and magnanimity, a sense of justice was sharpened to the limit. That's what Napoleon called Paul - "Russian Don Quixote"! The medieval chivalrous consciousness of Paul, which he, like the Servanto hidalgo, formed on chivalrous novels, did not correspond to the time in which he lived. Herzen put it more simply: "Paul I was a disgusting and ridiculous spectacle of the crowned Don Quixote."
Wilgemina of Hesse-Darmstadt
In one of the conversations with his teacher Semyon Poroshin, in a conversation about marriage, young Pavel said: “As I get married, I will love my wife very much and I will be jealous. I really don't want to have a horn. " Pavel really adored his first wife, but the betrayal of a loved one could not be avoided. Pavel's wife was Princess Wilgemina of Hesse-Darmstadt, by baptism - Natalya Alekseevna. Wilhemina and her relatives pulled out a lucky ticket - their family belonged to the impoverished aristocrats, their daughters did not even have a dowry. Paul himself fell in love with Wilgemina at first sight. In his diary, he wrote: "My choice has almost stopped at Princess Wilhemina, who I like the most, and all night I saw her in a dream." Catherine was pleased with her son's decision. If only they knew how it would all end.
Natalya Alekseevna was a beautiful and efficient person. The unsociable and withdrawn Paul came to life next to her. He married for love, which could not be said about Natalia, who simply did not have a choice. Pavel was ugly - a button nose, irregular facial features, short stature. Pavel's contemporary Alexander Turgenev wrote: "It is impossible to describe or depict Paul's ugliness!" In the conditions of her position, Natalya Alekseevna soon found herself a favorite - the ladies' man Count Andrei Razumovsky, who, still unmarried, accompanied her from Darmstadt. Their love correspondence has been preserved. After the unexpected sudden death of Natalia as a result of childbirth, Catherine II showed Paul evidence of his wife's betrayal. After reading the letters, Pavel, who loved his wife so sincerely, learned that Natalya preferred Razumovsky to him “until the last day of her life she never stopped sending her friend gentle notes and flowers.” Pavel did not come to his wife's funeral. Contemporaries noted that it was from this moment that Paul "came to that state of mental disorder that accompanied him all his life." From a gentle and sympathetic young man, he turned into a psychopath with an extremely unbalanced character.
Exercism
Paul's favorite hobby, which he inherited from his father, was military affairs, especially his uncontrollable passion for exercise - the little things of military service, is highlighted. Following the fate of Peter III, Paul determined his sad fate with his passion.
In the war, the young Tsarevich loved the aesthetic side - the beautiful harmony of the form, the impeccable performance of parades and military reviews. He arranged such "male shows" every day. The officers were strictly punished if their soldiers, when passing in front of the sovereign, did not hold the formation well, marched “out of step”. Military training turned into training for the sake of ceremonial. Following his mania, Paul completely changed the uniform of the soldiers, in many ways copied from the Prussian costume: short pantaloons, stockings and shoes, braids, powder. Suvorov, who preferred to live in the village, rather than fit into a Prussian uniform, wrote: “There is no lousy Prussians: in the schilthaus and near the booth you cannot pass without infection, and their headdress will faint you with its stench. We were clean of muck, and she is the first dookka now a soldier. Boots - pus on the legs. "
Prussian order
The Prussian order exactly matched Paul's pedantry. One of the researchers of that time writes: "In Prussia, everything went as if by magic: with mathematical precision, the king from his Sanssouci commanded both the state and the army, and all the minor performers were nothing more than subordinate persons." Like Peter III, Paul became an ardent admirer of Frederick II, and considered the Russian order abnormal, and all "because of the woman on the throne": "We conducted our affairs in a peculiar way, not only not following the general stream of imitation of the Prussians, but even looked at the monkeys of all of Europe. "
Paul's main internal political failure was the desire for complete centralization in command and control of the troops, which violated the long-standing traditions of the Russian army and showed itself negatively during hostilities. The system of centralized subordination in the Gatchina troops did not work for the entire country. The destruction of the shifts, which were the headquarters under the senior chiefs, the chanceries - all these innovations were dictated by the desire of the suspicious Pavel not to give anyone any rights. They disrupted communications between commanding officers of all levels with the troops, interfered with the work of the headquarters, and ultimately led to a complete breakdown in command and control, even in normal peacetime.
The Gatchina Palace, which his mother gave to Pavel, in her attempts to alienate the legitimate thirty-year-old heir from the court, became a real joy to Paul I. Ironically, or according to Catherine's plan, the former palace of Count Orlov, who is prescribed the murder of Peter III and even paternity, became the home of Paul. heir. The Tsarevich created his own state there, based on his fantasies of chivalry, mixed with love for the Prussian order. Today, according to Gatchina, its architecture, decoration, one can reconstruct the character of Paul I - it was completely his brainchild, his Versailles, which he prepared as his future imperial residence. Here he created the Gatchina troops as a tacit protest against the military system during the reign of Catherine. Pavel's "amusing detachments" consisted mainly of Prussians, the Russians went there reluctantly - low salaries, uncomfortable uniforms, long and painful training, heavy guard duty contributed to the fact that in Gatchina, only in case of emergency, immigrants from the impoverished nobility served.
Gatchina was a special closed world, a counterbalance to St. Petersburg, where the heir was despised and considered a holy fool. With the closed Pavlovsk court, new state transformations of the Russian Empire were born, which were started by Paul I, and continued by his son Alexander.
Mikhailovsky castle
In November 1796, Paul's dream finally came true, after the death of his mother, he received the crown, despite all the attempts of Catherine to remove her son from the throne. Pavel decided to bring his old plan to life - to build his own residence in St. Petersburg, on the place where he was once born, in the Summer Palace of Elizabeth Petrovna, which was later destroyed. In a conversation with the chambermaid Protasova, Pavel said: "I was born in this place, and I want to die here."
The Mikhailovsky Castle reflected all Paul's hobby for medieval knighthood. The name itself - a castle, not a palace, as well as the dedication of the new residence to the Archangel Michael, the leader of the heavenly host - all this was a reference to the knightly culture. Modern architects see the symbolism of the Order of Malta in the castle - not surprising, because in 1798 Paul became the Grand Grandmaster, and many of his officers were Maltese knights. The Mikhailovsky Castle is like the famous Neuenschwanstein of Ludwig of Bavaria, who was so fascinated by the medieval fairy tale that he built himself a real palace of legends in the Alps, in which he, like Paul in Mikhailovsky, became a victim of a political coup.
The story of Paul 1 actually began with the fact that Empress Elizaveta Petrovna, the premarital daughter of Catherine the First (who is supposed to be a Baltic peasant by birth), having no children of her own, invited her future father Paul to Russia. He was a native of the German city of Kiel, K.P. Ulrich Holstein-Gottorp, a duke who received the name of Peter at baptism. This fourteen-year-old (at the time of the invitation) young man was Elizabeth's nephew and had rights to both the Swedish and Russian throne.
Who was the father of Paul the First - a mystery
Tsar Paul 1, like all people, could not choose his parents. His mother-to-be arrived in Russia from Prussia at the age of 15, on the recommendation of Frederick II, as a potential bride for Duke Ulrich. Here she received the Orthodox name, married in 1745, and only nine years later gave birth to her son Paul. History has left a double opinion about the possible father of Paul the First. Some believe that Catherine hated her husband, so paternity is attributed to Catherine's lover Sergei Saltykov. Others believe that Ulrich (Peter III) was still the father, since there is also an obvious portrait resemblance, and it is also known about Catherine's strong dislike for her son, which may have arisen from hatred of his father. Paul also disliked his mother throughout his life. Genetic examination of the remains of Paul has not yet been carried out, so it is not possible to accurately establish paternity for this Russian tsar.
Birth was celebrated throughout the year
The future Emperor Paul 1 was deprived of parental love and attention from childhood, since his grandmother Elizabeth, immediately after his birth, took her son from Catherine and handed it over to the care of nannies and teachers. He was a long-awaited child for the whole country, since after Peter the Great, the Russian autocrats had problems with the succession of power due to the lack of heirs. The festivities and fireworks on the occasion of his birth in Russia lasted for a whole year.
The first victim of a palace conspiracy
Elizaveta thanked Catherine for the birth of a child with a very large amount - 100 thousand rubles, but showed her mother's son only six months after his birth. Due to the absence of his mother by his side and the stupidity of too zealous staff serving him, Paul 1, whose domestic and foreign policy in the future did not differ in consistency, grew up very impressionable, painful and nervous. At the age of 8 (in 1862), the young prince lost his father, who, having come to power in 1861 after the death of Elizabeth Petrovna, was killed a year later as a result of a palace conspiracy.
More than thirty years before legal authority
Tsar Paul 1 received a very decent education for his time, which he could not put into practice for many years. From the age of four, even under Elizabeth, he was taught to read and write, then he mastered several foreign languages, knowledge of mathematics, applied sciences and history. Among his teachers were F. Bekhteev, S. Poroshin, N. Panin, and the future Metropolitan of Moscow Platon taught him the laws. By birthright, Paul already in 1862 had the right to the throne, but his mother, instead of being a regency, came to power herself with the help of the guards, declared herself Catherine II and ruled for 34 years.
Emperor Paul 1 was married twice. The first time was at the age of 19 on Augustine-Wilhelmina (Natalya Alekseevna), who died in childbirth with her child. The second time - in the year of the death of his first wife (at the insistence of Catherine) on Sophia-Augusta-Louise, the princess of Württemberg (Maria Feodorovna), who will give birth to ten children to Pavel. His older children will suffer the same fate as himself - they will be taken to her upbringing by the reigning grandmother, and he will rarely see them. In addition to children born in a church marriage, Pavel had a son, Semyon, from his first love - the maid of honor Sophia Ushakova and a daughter from L. Bagart.
Mother wanted to deprive him of the throne
Paul 1 Romanov ascended the throne at the age of 42, after the death of his mother (Catherine died of a stroke) in November 1796. By this time, he had a set of views and habits that determined his future and the future of Russia until 1801. Thirteen years before Catherine's death, in 1783, he reduced his relationship with his mother to a minimum (it was said that she wanted to deprive him of his right to the throne) and in Pavlovsk began to build his own model of state structure. At the age of 30, at the insistence of Catherine, he got acquainted with the works of Voltaire, Hume, Montesquieu, and others. As a result, his point of view became the following: in the state there should be "bliss for everyone and for all," but only under a monarchical
Coalitions with Europe during the reign
At the same time, in Gatchina, removed from affairs at that time, the future emperor was engaged in training military battalions. His love for military affairs and discipline will partly determine what will be the foreign policy of Paul 1. And it will be quite peaceful, in comparison with the time of Catherine II, but inconsistent. First, Pavel fought against revolutionary France (with the participation of A.V. Suvorov) together with Britain, Turkey, Austria, etc., then he broke off the alliance with Austria and withdrew troops from Europe. Attempts to go on an expedition with England to the Netherlands were unsuccessful.
Paul 1 defended the Order of Malta
After in 1799 Bonaparte in France concentrated all power in his hands and the likelihood of the spread of the revolution disappeared, he began to look for allies in other states. And he found them, including in the person of the Russian emperor. At that time, a coalition of the united fleets was discussed with France. The foreign policy of Paul 1 in the period towards the end of his reign was associated with the final formation of a coalition against Britain, which became too aggressive at sea (attacked Malta, while Paul was the Grand Master of the Order of Malta). So, in 1800, an alliance was concluded between Russia and a number of European states, which pursued a policy of armed neutrality against England.
Utopian military projects
Paul 1, whose domestic and foreign policy was not always clear even to his entourage, wanted to harm Britain and her Indian possessions at that time. He equipped an expedition to Central Asia from the Donskoy army (about 22.5 thousand people) and set the task for them to go to the Indus and Ganges region and "disturb" the British there, without touching those who oppose the British. By that time, even maps of the area did not exist, so the campaign to India was stopped in 1801, after Paul's death, and the soldiers were returned from the steppes near Astrakhan, where they had already reached.
The reign of Paul 1 was marked by the fact that during these five years no foreign invasions were carried out on the territory of Russia, but no conquests were made either. In addition, the emperor, caring for the interests of the knights in Malta, almost dragged the country into direct conflict with the most powerful sea power of that time - England. The English were perhaps his greatest enemies, while he had great sympathy for Prussia, considering the organization of the army and life in those lands to be his ideal (which is not surprising given his origin).
Reducing public debt by fire
Paul 1 was aimed at trying to improve life and strengthen order in Russian reality. In particular, he believed that the treasury belonged to the country, and not to him personally, as the sovereign. Therefore, he gave orders to melt into coins some of the silver services from the Winter Palace and to burn part of the paper money worth two million rubles in order to reduce the national debt. He was more open to the people than his predecessors, and his followers, hanging out on the fence of his palace a box for the transmission of petitions in his name, where cartoons of the king himself and libels often fell.
Strange ceremonies with dead bodies
The reign of Paul 1 was also marked by reforms in the army, where he introduced a single form, a charter, a single weapon, believing that in the time of his mother, the army was not an army, but just a crowd. In general, historians believe that much of what Paul did, he did in spite of his deceased mother. There were even more than strange cases. For example, having come to power, he removed from the grave the remains of his murdered father Peter III. Then he co-crowned the ashes of his father and the corpse of his mother, placing the crown on the coffin of his father, while his wife, Maria Feodorovna, put another crown on the deceased Catherine. After that, both coffins were transported to the Peter and Paul Cathedral, while the killer of Peter III, Count Orlov, carried the imperial crown in front of his coffin. The remains were buried with a single burial date.
Paul 1, whose years of reign were short-lived, due to such events, earned misunderstanding among many. And the innovations he introduced in different areas did not attract support from the environment. The emperor demanded that everyone fulfill their duties. The story is known when he gave the rank of officer to his orderly for the fact that the first one did not carry his military ammunition on his own. After such incidents, discipline in the troops began to intensify. Pavel tried to instill rigid orders in the civilian population, introducing bans on wearing some styles of dresses and demanding to wear German-style things of a certain color with a given collar size.
The internal policy of Paul 1 also affected the sphere of education, in which, as expected, he helped to improve the position of the Russian language. After accession to the throne, the emperor banned ornate phrases, ordering to express themselves in writing very clearly and simply. He reduced French influence on Russian society by banning books in this language (revolutionary, as he believed), even forbidden to play cards. In addition, during his reign, it was decided to open many schools and colleges, restore the university in Dorpat, and open the Medical-Surgical Academy in St. Petersburg. Among his associates were both gloomy personalities, like Arakcheev, and G. Derzhavin, A. Suvorov, N. Saltykov, M. Speransky and others.
How the Tsar helped the peasants
However, Paul 1, whose years of reign were 1796-1801, was rather unpopular than popular with his contemporaries. Taking care of the peasants, whom he reasonably considered the breadwinners of all other classes of society, he introduced the release of the peasants from work on Sunday. By this he incurred the discontent of the landowners, for example, in Russia, and the discontent of the peasants in Ukraine, where there was no corvee at that time, but it appeared for three days. The landlords were dissatisfied with the ban on separating peasant families during the sale, the ban on cruel treatment, the removal of the obligations from the peasants to keep horses for the army and the sale of bread and salt from state reserves to them at preferential prices. Paul 1, whose domestic and foreign policy was contradictory, at the same time ordered the peasants to obey the landlords in everything under pain of punishment.
Infringement of the privileges of the nobility
The Russian autocrat tossed between prohibitions and permits, which, perhaps, led to the subsequent assassination of Paul 1. He closed all private printing houses so that it was not possible to spread the ideas of the French revolution, but at the same time he gave shelter to high-ranking French nobles, such as Prince Conde or the future Ludwig the Eighth. ... He banned corporal punishment for nobles, but introduced for them to submit twenty rubles per soul and a tax on the maintenance of local government bodies.
The short-term reign of Paul 1 also included such events as a ban on resignation for nobles who served less than a year, a ban on the filing of collective noble petitions, the abolition of noble meetings in the provinces, and lawsuits against nobles who evaded service. Also, the emperor allowed state peasants to enroll in the bourgeoisie and merchants, which aroused the latter's discontent.
He actually founded dog breeding in Russia
What other deeds did Paul 1 go down in history, whose domestic and foreign policy is a thirst for large-scale transformations? This Russian tsar allowed the construction of churches according to the Old Believer faith (everywhere), forgave the Poles who took part in the Kosciuszko uprising, began to buy new breeds of dogs and sheep abroad, essentially establishing dog breeding. Also important is his law on succession to the throne, which excluded the possibility of women ascending to the throne and established the order of regency.
However, with all the positive aspects, the emperor was unpopular among the people, which created the preconditions for repeated attempts on his life. The assassination of Paul 1 was committed by officers from several regiments in March 1801. It is believed that the conspiracy against the emperor was subsidized by the government of England, which did not want to strengthen Russia in the Maltese region. The involvement of his sons in this action was not proven, however, in the 19th century, some restrictions were introduced on the study of the time of the reign of this emperor in Russia.
The night from 5 to 6 November 1796 in St. Petersburg was hectic. Empress Catherine II had a blow. Everything happened so unexpectedly that she did not have time to make any orders about the heir.According to Peter's law on succession to the throne, the emperor had the right to appoint an heir at will. Catherine's desire in this regard, although unspoken, has long been 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 been on the lips of the courtiers in the morning.
Pavel arrived in the Winter Palace in the middle of the night, accompanied by hundreds of soldiers of the Gatchina regiment and immediately went to his mother's bedroom to make sure that she was really dying. His entry into the palace was like an assault. The sentries in German uniforms posted everywhere shocked the courtiers, who were accustomed to the elegant luxury of the last years of Catherine's court. The Empress was still alive at the time, as the heir and Bezborodko, locked themselves in her office, were burning some papers in the fireplace. There was a noticeable revival in the square under the windows of the palace. The townspeople grieved about the death of the "mother-empress", however, they loudly expressed their joy when they learned that Paul would become king. The same was heard in the soldiers' barracks. Only in the court environment was it completely sad. According to the testimony of Countess Golovina, many, having learned about the death of Catherine and the accession of her son to the throne, tirelessly repeated: "The end of everything has come: her and our well-being." But in order to understand what kind of person was on the Russian throne on that November day in 1796, one must carefully 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 happened in the family of the heir to the Russian throne: the daughter of Peter I, the Russian Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, had a grand-nephew Pavel. The grandmother was much more delighted 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 mother of the newborn, Sophia-Frederick-Augusta, Princess of Anhalt-Zerbst (Grand Duchess Catherine Alexei ).The princess was discharged from Germany as a birthing machine. The car turned out to be 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 were crumbling. All subsequent relationships between mother and son evolved in the same way - as 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, accentuated coldness towards the Grand Duchess, who had not been very much pampered with before. The hint is clear: she produced what you ordered - you can leave the stage. Did Elizaveta Petrovna understand what she was doing? In any case, at the end of the reign, she changed her attitude towards her daughter-in-law, finally waving her hand at her nephew. She saw that the modest Zerbst princess had become an important political figure at the Russian court, appreciated her capacity for work and organizational talent. Too late, Elizabeth realized 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 in 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 pampered her grandson, 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, forever remained in the memory of the Grand Duke. From time to time, his father came to him, almost always drunk. He looked at his son with a touch of some kind of sad tenderness. Their relationship could not be called close, but Paul was offended to see how those around him openly neglect his father and laugh at him. This sympathy and pity for the father increased many times over after his short reign, which ended in a palace coup in favor of Catherine.
The death of Elizabeth, the unexpected disappearance of Peter, vague rumors of his violent death shocked the eight-year-old boy. Later, pity for the murdered father grew into real worship. The grown-up Paul was very fond of reading Shakespeare's tragedies and secretly compared himself with Prince Hamlet, who was called to avenge his father. But real life was complicated by the fact that the "Russian Hamlet" did not have an insidious uncle and a deceived mother. The villain, and 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 that Pavel loved, Poroshin, was soon fired, and the new skillfully selected teachers did not enlighten Paul, but rather overwhelmed 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, who filled up the teenager with court cases and statistical reports. After these classes, Pavel hated all his life 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 the difficult impressions of rare meetings with the mother, who poured "witty remarks" about his mental development, the child developed a capricious and irritable character. Rumors spread at court about the wayward actions of the heir, and many seriously thought about the consequences of his possible reign. Ekaterina won the first fight brilliantly.
But Paul was too small for retaliation. He grew up under the supervision of the Russian diplomat Nikita Panin, who was chosen by Elizabeth as a tutor. Panin spent 13 years with the boy and sincerely became attached to him. Of all the Russian court nobility, he could best understand the reasons for the strange behavior of the heir and ardently supported the idea of transferring the throne to him.
Catherine, trying to quarrel her barely adult son with a mentor, finally stops his studies and in 1773 autocraticly marries her son to Princess Wilhelmina of Hesse-Darmstadt (who received the name Natalia 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. He, unfortunately for the heir, was also a major Freemason, the first Russian constitutionalist. The coup was doomed to failure. Catherine had too many admiring admirers and volunteers 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 public affairs (you cannot be executed: he is too large a political figure), he was forbidden to see the heir. Grand Duchess Natalya died after unsuccessful childbirth (presumably, she was poisoned by order of the empress). Six years later, Pavel also lost Panin. The Grand Duke himself went either into exile or into exile for 20 years - from St. Petersburg to Gatchina. He was no longer dangerous.
These 20 years finally shaped Paul's character. He was married a second time to Princess Sophia of Württemberg (Maria Feodorovna) with the same purpose as his father had once done. Two children born next - Alexander and Konstantin - Catherine took away from their parents and raised the eldest as a future heir. Occasionally, Catherine summoned her son to the capital to participate in the signing of diplomatic documents in order to humiliate him once again in the presence of those around him. Locked in Gatchina, he was completely deprived of access to even the most insignificant state affairs and tirelessly drilled his regiment on the parade ground - the only thing he could really 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 the Middle Ages. The fun is all the more forgivable because completely different games were in vogue at the mother's court. Each new favorite strove to surpass its predecessor in enlightened refined cynicism. The heir had only one thing to do - to wait. Not the desire for power, but the constant fear of death at the hands of the murderers hired by his mother, that tormented Paul. Who knows, maybe in Petersburg the empress was no less afraid of a palace coup? And maybe she wished death for her son ...
Meanwhile, the general position 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 in the ranks of the leading world powers, moving it forward a century technically. However, the same reforms destroyed the ancient foundations of the Russian state - strong social and cultural ties between the estates, in order to strengthen the state apparatus by opposing the interests of landlords and peasants. Serfdom finally transformed from a special "Moscow" form of social organization (service duty) into a standard aristocratic privilege. This position was extremely unfair. After all, after the death of Peter the Russian nobility bore less and less burdens of the service class, continuing to actively oppose the universal equalization of rights. In addition, the nobility, which since the time of Peter the Great has been overwhelmed by the flow of Western European culture, was increasingly torn away from the values traditional for Russia, was less and less able to understand the needs and aspirations of its own people, arbitrarily interpreting them in the spirit of modern 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. The Pugachev uprising showed this very clearly. What could have saved Russia from an internal rift, or at least push it back?
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 policy of state power. Moreover, she did not enjoy authority among the "enlightened class". At the beginning of the 18th century, monasteries were actually removed from the business of education and science, shifting it to new, "secular" structures (before that, the Church successfully fulfilled educational tasks for almost seven centuries!), And in the middle of the century the state took away from them the richest, inhabited by prosperous peasants land. It took it away only in order to get a new resource for continuing the policy of continuous land distributions of the military-noble corporation growing by leaps and bounds. But if the previous, peripheral distribution and redistribution 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 the holidays of the Orthodox monasteries that patronized them), which were at the same time centers of independent small credit, charity and broad social assistance, led only to further undermine local markets and the economic strength of the country as a whole.
The Russian language and national culture, which at one time allowed to save the cultural integrity of Russia from fragmentation into principalities, were also not held in high esteem at the court. There remained a state, the endless strengthening of which was bequeathed by Peter to all his heirs. The machine of the bureaucratic apparatus, launched by Peter, possessed 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 hesitant to use this principle to its fullest. They obediently followed in the wake of the noble estate policy, cleverly using the contradictions between the 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 strong ‚as never before‚ and calm in the consciousness of its strength. But the question remained open: who in the country's interests would risk disturbing this calm?
What did he want?
On November 7, 1796, the "golden age of the Russian nobility" ended. The emperor ascended the throne, having his own ideas about the importance of estates and state interests. In many ways, these ideas were built "by contradiction" - in opposition to the principles of Catherine. However, a lot was thought out on their own, good for thought was set aside 30 years. And most importantly, a large supply of energy has accumulated, which for a long time had no way out. So, redo everything your own way and ASAP! Very naive, but not always pointless.
Although Paul disliked the word "reform" no less than the word "revolution", he never disregarded 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 completely remained a man of modern times, dreaming of an ideal state system. The state should be transformed from an aristocratic freeman into a rigid hierarchical structure, headed by a king who has all possible powers of power. Estates, classes, social strata are gradually losing special inalienable rights, completely submitting only to the autocrat who personifies God's heavenly law and earthly state order. The aristocracy should gradually disappear, as well as the personally dependent peasantry. The estate hierarchy should be replaced by equal subjects.
The French Revolution not only increased Paul's dislike for the philosophy of the Enlightenment of the 18th century, but also convinced him once again that the Russian state machinery needed serious changes. Catherine's enlightened despotism, in his opinion, slowly but surely led the country to death, provoking a social explosion, the terrible harbinger of which was the Pugachev rebellion. And in order to avoid this explosion, it was necessary not only to toughen up the regime, but also to urgently reorganize the system of governing the country. Note: Paul was the only autocratic reformer after Peter 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, the peasants in such changes 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 print media, he more than anyone else in the 18th century tried to make peasants and bourgeois citizens citizens, taking them out of the class system and "attaching" them directly to the state.
The program is quite harmonious ‚corresponding to its time, but completely disregarding the ambitions of the Russian ruling stratum. It was this tragic discrepancy, generated by the Gatchina isolation and the emotional disturbances experienced, that was accepted by contemporaries, and after them, by historians, for "barbaric savagery", even for insanity. The then pillars of Russian social thought (with the exception of the amnestied Radishchev), frightened by the revolution, stood either to carry out further reforms at the expense of the peasants, or not to carry them out at all. If at the end of the 18th century the concept of "totalitarianism" already existed, contemporaries would not have thought of applying it to the Pavlovian regime. But Paul's political agenda was no more utopian than the philosophy of his time. The 18th century is the century of the flourishing of social utopias. Diderot and Voltaire predicted the creation of a unitary state by the enlightened monarchs on the basis of the Social Contract and saw elements of their program in the reforms of the beginning of Catherine's reign. If you look closely, her son, who hated the French "enlighteners", was a real supporter of the idea of a single, equal state. At the same time, his political practice turned out to be no more brutal 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. Already many times scientists and journalists have analyzed the notorious "Gatchina legacy": parades, wigs, sticks, etc. But it is worth remembering the loose recruitment set of 1795, half of which was stolen by officers for their estates; on a general audit of the army supply department, which revealed colossal theft and abuse; 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 summoned to the 1797 review, which put an end to service in the estates and entry into regimental lists of unborn babies, like Pushkin's Grinev.) The same endless parades and maneuvers marked the beginning of the regular exercises of the Russian army the era of the Napoleonic wars), who had previously sat in winter quarters in the absence of war. Under Paul, the soldiers, of course, were driven more to the parade ground, punished more severely, but at the same time they finally began to be regularly fed and warmly dressed in 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 soldiers in general, but specifically for the noble class. It smelled like unhealthy class equality.They also tried to squeeze the landlords. For the first time, serfs began to take a personal oath to the emperor (earlier the landowner did it for them). When selling, it was forbidden to separate families. The famous decree-manifesto "on the three-day corvee" was published, the text of which, in particular, read: "The law of God, taught to us in the Decalogue, teaches us to devote the seventh day to God; why on the 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 to the Creator of all blessings by the Giver to confirm throughout our empire that this law is exactly and indispensable to be fulfilled, commanding everyone to observe so that no one and under any circumstances would dare to force peasants to work on Sundays ... "
Although there was still no talk of abolishing or even seriously limiting serfdom, the enlightened land and soul owners were worried: how can the authorities, even the royal ones, interfere with how they dispose of their hereditary property? Catherine did not allow herself this! These gentlemen did not yet understand that the peasants are the main source of state income, and therefore it is not profitable to ruin them. But it would not be a bad idea to force the landowners to pay the costs of maintaining the elected bodies of local government, because 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 been eased. The abolition of the grain service (according to the testimony of the Russian agronomist A.T. Bolotov, who performed "beneficent actions 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 poured onto coins put into circulation. At the same time, an unsecured mass of paper money was withdrawn from circulation at public expense. Over five million rubles were burned in banknotes on Palace Square.
The bureaucracy was also in awe. Bribes (given openly under Catherine) were ruthlessly rooted out. This was especially true of the capital's apparatus, which was shaken by constant checks. An unheard-of thing: employees should not be late and be in their place all day long! The emperor himself got up at 5 in the morning, listened to current reports and news, and then, together with the heirs, went to inspect the capital's institutions and guards units. The number of provinces and counties was reduced, and therefore the number of bureaucrats required 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 law teacher and spiritual mentor, the future Metropolitan Platon (Levshin), who later crowned Paul to the throne, wrote this about his faith: “The high pupil, fortunately, was always disposed to piety, pleasant. This, according to a note, was introduced to him with the milk by the late Empress Elizaveta Petrovna, who dearly loved him and brought up very pious women assigned by her. "
According to some testimonies, the emperor often showed traits of perspicacity under the guise of foolishness. For example, a case is known from memoir literature when Pavel Petrovich ordered to send to Siberia an officer who performed unsatisfactorily at military maneuvers, but, bowing to the requests of those around him for pardon, he nevertheless exclaimed: “I feel that the person you are asking for is scoundrel! " It was subsequently revealed that this officer had killed his own mother. Another case: a guards officer who had a wife and children decided to take possession of a young girl. But she did not agree to go without a wedding. Then a friend of this officer in the regiment disguised himself as a priest and performed a secret ceremony. After some time, the woman, left with the child nailed down from the seducer, found out that her supposed husband had a legitimate family, and filed a complaint with the sovereign. “The emperor entered the position of an unhappy woman,” recalled H.P. Yankov, - and made a wonderful decision: he ordered her kidnapper to be demoted and exiled, the young woman was recognized as having the right to the name of the seducer and their legitimate daughter, and the officer who was crowned to be tonsured as a monk. The resolution said that "since he has a penchant for spiritual life, then send him to a monastery and tonsure a monk." The officer was taken somewhere far away and had his hair cut. He was beside himself with such an unexpected outcome of his frivolous act and did not live like a monk at all, but then the grace of God touched his heart; he repented, came to his senses and, when he was no longer young, led the most 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 (by the way, never before subordinate to the Pope of Rome), the ancient Byzantine brotherhood of St. John the Baptist, from which the Jerusalem Hospitallers once arose. In addition, it should be noted that the Order of Malta, in order to preserve itself, gave itself under the protection of Russia and Emperor Paul. On October 12, 1799, the relics of the order were solemnly brought to Gatchina: the right hand of St. John the Baptist, a particle of the Lord's Cross and the Filermskaya 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 for the priesthood to have a more "image and condition corresponding to the importance of dignity." So, when the Holy Synod made the idea of delivering priests and deacons from corporal punishment, the emperor approved it (it did not have time to come into legal 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: salaries were increased to those on the staff salary, and where no salary was established, the parishioners were entrusted with the care of the processing of the priestly allotments, which could be replaced by an appropriate grain contribution in kind or a sum of money. In 1797 and 1799, the staff salaries from the treasury to the spiritual department were doubled against the previous one according to annual state estimates. State subsidies to the clergy thus reached almost one million rubles. In addition, in 1797, plots of land for bishops' houses were doubled. Additionally (for the first time since the time of Catherine's secularization!), The bishops and monasteries were assigned mills, fishing grounds and other lands. For the first time in the history of Russia, measures were legalized to provide for the widows and orphans of the clergy.
Under Emperor Paul, the military clergy was allocated to a special department and received its head - the protopresbyter of the army and navy. In general, to encourage more zealous fulfillment of his 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 embarrassment.) On the personal initiative of the sovereign, an award pectoral cross was also instituted. 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.
Suddenly he received a part of civil rights and such a large stratum of Russian society as schismatics. For the first time, the sovereign compromised on this issue and allowed loyal Old Believers to have their houses of prayer and serve in them according to an ancient custom. The Old Believers (of course, not all of them), in turn, were ready to recognize the Synodal Church and accept priests from it. In 1800, the regulation on the churches of the same faith was finally approved.
Petrine traditions of cooperation with the merchants were also revived. The establishment of the College of Commerce in late 1800 looked like the beginning of a global management reform. Indeed, 13 out of 23 of its members (more than half!) Were chosen by merchants from among their midst. And this at a time when the noble elections were limited. Naturally, Alexander, having come to power (by the way, with the slogan of the constitution), canceled this democratic order one of the first.
But none of Paul's heirs even thought of canceling the most important of the state acts he adopted - the law of April 5, 1797 on succession to the throne. This law finally closed the fatal gap made by the Peter's decree of 1722. From now on, the succession to the throne (only through the male line!) Acquired a clear legal character, and no Catherine or Anna could already claim it on their own. The significance of the law is so great that Klyuchevsky, for example, called it "the first positive fundamental law in our legislation", because he, strengthening the autocracy as an institution of power, limited the arbitrariness and ambitions of individuals, served as a kind of prevention of possible coups and conspiracies.
Of course, next to serious innovations, you can see a huge number of detailed details: the prohibition of certain types and styles of clothing, instructions for when citizens should get up and go to bed, how to drive and walk the streets, what color to paint houses ... And for violations of everything this - fines, arrests, dismissals. On the one hand, the fateful lessons of Teplov affected: the emperor did not know how to separate small matters from large ones. On the other hand, what seems to us to be trifles (the style of hats), at the end of the 18th century, had an important symbolic meaning and demonstrated to those around them adherence to one or another ideological party. After all, the "sansculottes" and "Phrygian caps" were not born in Russia at all.
Perhaps the main negative feature of Pavlov's rule is uneven trust in people, the inability to select friends and associates and to place cadres. Everyone around - from the heir to the throne Alexander to the last lieutenant of St. Petersburg - was under suspicion. The emperor changed high dignitaries so quickly that they did not have time to get up to speed. For the slightest offense, disgrace could follow. However, the emperor knew how to be generous: Radishchev was released from prison; the quarrel with Suvorov ended with Paul asking for forgiveness (and then making the commander into 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.
And 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 court scoundrels. In instilling unquestioning obedience, Paul often lost honest people around him. They were replaced by scoundrels, ready to carry out any hasty decree, caricatures of the imperial will. At first they feared Paul, but then, seeing an endless stream of badly executed decrees, they began to chuckle at him quietly. Even 100 years ago, ridicule over such transformations would have cost dear fellows. But Paul did not have such an indisputable authority as his great great-grandfather, but he understood people worse. And Russia was no longer what it was under Peter: then she obediently shaved off her beards, now she 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 outrage were often the opposite. The military officers of the Suvorov school were annoyed by the new military doctrine; generals like Bennigsen worried about cutting their income from the treasury; the youth of the guards was dissatisfied with the new strict regulations of the service; 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 a lower rank did steal, but with great care; urban dwellers were angry at the new decrees about when they should turn off the lights. The enlightened “new people” had the hardest part: they could not reconcile themselves to the revival of autocratic principles, there were calls to end “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 still convinced monarchists, Paul could have found here a support for his transformations, it was only necessary to give more freedom in action, not to tie his hands with constant petty orders. But the king, not accustomed to trusting people, intervened in literally everything. He alone, without proactive assistants, wanted to rule his empire. At the end of the 18th century, this was already decidedly impossible.
Why was he not loved?
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 impending invasion of France, and the campaign to Persia, and the regular raids of the Black Sea Fleet to the Turkish shores, but it was not in his power to cancel the pan-European world fire. An announcement in a Hamburg newspaper, proposing to decide the fate of states by a duel between their monarchs and the first ministers as seconds, caused general bewilderment. Napoleon then openly called Paul "Russian Don Quixote" ‚the other heads of government kept silent.
Nevertheless, it was impossible to stand on the sidelines of the European conflict for a long time. The frightened European monarchies turned to Russia from all sides: the Knights of Malta (whose island was already under the threat of French occupation) brought a request for protection; Austria and England needed an allied Russian army; even Turkey turned to Paul with a plea for the protection of its Mediterranean shores and Egypt from the French landing. The result was a second anti-French coalition of 1798-1799.
The Russian expeditionary corps under the command of Suvorov was already in April 1799 ready to invade France. But this did not fit with the plans of the allied Austrian government, which sought to round off its possessions at the expense of the "liberated" Italian territories. Suvorov was forced to obey, and by early August, northern Italy was completely cleared of the French. The republican armies were defeated, the fortress garrisons surrendered. The combined Russian-Turkish squadron under the command of the now canonized Admiral Fyodor Ushakov, which liberated the Ionian Islands off the coast of Greece from September 1798 to February 1799, proved to be no less serious. (By the way, one of the reasons for the emperor's consent to this campaign was the danger of the French outraging the relics of St. Spyridon of Trimyphus, which had been kept on the island of Corfu (Kerkyra) since the 15th century. Paul greatly venerated St. Spyridon as the patron saint of his eldest son and heir Alexander. 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 (later the archipelago was 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. Further, Ushakov's squadron, with 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 allies in the coalition were intimidated 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 the fresh superior forces of the enemy, and only Suvorov's military leadership saved it from complete destruction. On September 1, Ushakova left the Turkish squadron 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. The enraged Pavel recalled Suvorov and Ushakov from the Mediterranean.
In 1800, Pavel concluded an anti-British alliance with Napoleon, beneficial for Russia. France offered Russia Constantinople and a complete partition of Turkey. The Baltic and Black Sea fleets were brought to full combat readiness. At the same time, with the approval of Napoleon, Orlov's 30,000th Cossack corps moved to India through the Kazakh steppes. England is facing the worst threat since Elizabeth I.
But what if the interests of England and the domestic 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 British Embassy spilled like a golden rain on fertile soil. The disaffected finally found a common language: the army was represented by Bennigsen, the higher nobility - by Zubov, the pro-English-minded bureaucracy - by Nikita Panin (the nephew of Pavel's educator). Panin also attracted the heir to the throne, Grand Duke Alexander, to participate in the conspiracy. Learning about the possible cancellation of the annoying army routine, dozens of young guards officers happily joined the case. But the soul of the conspiracy was the favorite of the emperor, the governor-general of St. Petersburg, Count von der Palen. Until the last day, Paul was confident of his devotion.
The conspiracy very vividly illustrated the paradoxical situation that developed at the Pavlovsky court. The fact is that the emperor was not sure of anyone, but it was precisely because of this that he had to lend his trust in snatches to generally random people. He had no friends ‚there were no like-minded people - only subjects, and even then not of the very first grade. It was not possible to destroy the conspiracy as such also because it always existed. The latent dissatisfaction of various noble groups with certain government measures during the Pavlovian 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 changes from active opposition to them. With all this, one must remember that there were still many "Catherine's men" at court. The emperor's anger was just as terrible ‚as it was fleeting‚ therefore Paul was incapable of any consistent repression. His soft nature was not suitable for the political system that he himself was trying 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 able to defend the emperor. The main concern of the conspirators was to keep the soldiers out of the palace. The guards were removed from their posts by their superiors, and the heads of two footmen were smashed. Pavel's bedroom was finished 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 prepared fireworks and general jubilation. No matter how ridiculous it may seem, everyone rushed to appear on the streets in recently banned outfits. And all the highest dignitaries of Russia gathered in the ceremonial hall of the Winter Palace, the name of the young Emperor Alexander was already on everyone's lips. A 23-year-old boy came out of the chambers and, under the joyful whisper of those present, solemnly said: “Father died with an apoplectic stroke. With me everything will be like 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. What should Russia have to pay with?
The Pavlovian reign available today to the mass reader, the books of Russian historians are evaluated in different ways. For example, N.M. Karamzin, in his "Note on Ancient and New Russia" (1811), written in hot pursuit, said: "Let conspiracies frighten sovereigns for the peace of the peoples!" 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 tyrant's petty tyranny? By the end of the 19th century, this point of view already seemed primitive. IN. Klyuchevsky wrote that "the reign of Paul was the time when a new program of activities was announced." “Although,” he immediately made a reservation, “the points of this program were not only not implemented, but gradually even disappeared from it. This program began to be carried out much more seriously and consistently by the successors of Paul. " 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 Pavlovian legends largely survived." He blamed them for the military settlements ‚and for December 14‚ for the “chivalrous 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. Klochkova, the only one where Paul's legislative policy has been scrupulously studied, objects to these reproaches by the fact that it was under Paul that the military reform began, which prepared the army for the war of 1812, the first steps were taken to curb serfdom, and the foundations of the legislative body of the Russian Empire were laid ... In 1916, in church circles, even a movement began to canonize the innocently murdered emperor. At least his grave in the Peter and Paul Cathedral in 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, where miracles that happened through prayers at this grave were recorded.
The left-liberal, and after them the Soviet historians, were inclined to downplay the significance of the Pavlovian 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 (which consisted of "special cruelty", was usually silent), which did not differ fundamentally from either predecessors or heirs. Only in the mid-1980s N.Ya. Eidelman tried to understand the social meaning of the Pavlovian conservative-reformist utopia. This author also deserves the credit for the rehabilitation of the name of Paul in the eyes of the intelligentsia. The books published over the past 10-15 years basically summarize all the points of view expressed, without making particularly deep and new conclusions. Apparently, the final judgment about who exactly was the Emperor Pavel Petrovich, as well as how real his political program was and what place it occupies in subsequent Russian history, has yet to be made. Such a judgment is to be passed on to the Russian Orthodox Church, again facing the question of the possibility of the glorification of Paul I as a martyr for the faith.
I would like to draw your attention once again to the fact that Paul was not only a farsighted or, on the contrary, an unsuccessful statesman. Like the recently glorified martyr-sovereign Nikolai Alexandrovich, Pavel Petrovich was above 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 is hard for me to see that things are going at random and that the reason for this is negligence and personal views. I would rather be hated for a right 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 most terrible after Ivan the Terrible. Of course, it is easier to explain the actions of a person that are illogical from our point of view, 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 reflections of the poet Vladislav Khodasevich: “When Russian society says that Paul’s death was a payback for his oppression‚ it forgets that he oppressed those who stretched out too wide ‚those strong and versatile‚ who should be constrained and restrained for the sake of the powerless and the weak. Maybe this was his historical mistake. But what a moral height there is! He loved justice - we are unfair to him. He was a knight - killed from around the corner. We swear from around the corner ... ".
