Alexey Peskov: Pavel I. Life of remarkable people - Pavel I pm

The most unpredictable Russian emperor, Paul I, reigned from November 7, 1796 to March 11, 1801. He believed that the previous government had destroyed the state and that it was his duty to restore order in the country. He took decisive measures to combat corruption, inflation, and the impoverishment of the people, but with his actions he alienated the government elite and a significant part of the guards generals...

This book, along with the story of the life of the fatal emperor, presents many plots from the political history of the 18th century. Among the main characters are Paul's parents Catherine II and Peter III, his wives Natalya Alekseevna and Maria Feodorovna, empresses Anna Ioannovna and Elisaveta Petrovna, court ladies E.I. Nelidova and A.P. Lopukhina, famous government officials: A.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, N.I. Panin, G.G. Orlov, G.A. Potemkin, F.V. Rostopchin.

On our website you can download the book "Paul I" by Alexey Peskov for free and without registration in epub, fb2 format, read the book online or buy the book in the online store.

Alexey Mikhailovich Peskov

Preface

History is a property of our psyche, a function of thinking, a game of the mind: it is a collective memory expressed by anecdotes of eyewitnesses and myths of generations.

The events of life disappear without a trace in the minute they happen. But if an eyewitness informs others about the most insignificant of them, others tell others, thirds tell fourths, etc. - in a word, if an anecdote is preserved not in private, but in general memory, it will become a fact of history, so that, united with other anecdotes about other events, to form a myth about their era.

The more anecdotes, the more versions of what happened. Each eyewitness speaks about his own story. Not all narrators are truthful: some lie for their own pleasure, vanity or justification; others imagined, the third dreamed, the fourth convey to the fifth what the first lie about, what the second imagined and dreamed of the third. But even if someone conscientiously wants to tell the whole truth, he still will not be able to tell how things really happened, because any truth and any truth is relative to the conditions of their observation and the observer’s horizons.

Of course, not only anecdotes and myths remain from a past life, but also things and documents. However, by themselves they cannot preserve their meaning. Things and documents, no matter how real, are only transformed into facts of history when they become significant details of anecdotes and myths.

Life is going. Time passes. New generations are coming. – With these metaphors of walking we mean the meaning of life: all living things move. From where and where? – they don’t know metaphors. Each new generation answers this question anew. Meanwhile, the facts of history remain immovably attached to their long-past minutes. New generations begin to revive them according to their concepts about the meaning of the movement of life.

New generations do not select everything from the historical facts that have reached them - they cannot remember everything, and they are not needed. We only need those that define the meaning of the movement. Old jokes are summarized, compressed into an abbreviated retelling, the meaning of the past is called in new words.

Meanwhile, life goes on. More time passes. Other generations are coming. Political regimes are changing. Previously unknown concepts are learned. Fresh retellings of old jokes are being written. The meaning of the movement of life is redefined by the newest words. The memory of the coming generations forgets what the memory of previous generations fed on.

This is how life is endlessly re-remembered, retold and rewritten. This is called history.

History is the myths of different generations: narrative duplicates of a past life.

The myths of history are apparently based on chronology. But this is only a pro forma - a narrative device that allows you to organize the placement of plot materials. In its essence, historical myth knows only the feeling of the present, now passing minute - the moment of the narrative, experienced as an instant of eternal truth. Myth matches in one - everything multi-temporal past: the wisdom of different centuries, significant for the current generation, is layered on a combination of anecdotes about a particular century or about a particular event, and it turns out that when talking about what happened Then, we're talking about what happened Always, and this Always is only true Now.

History begins with tomorrow's newspaper - our life today will be rewritten there according to the laws of anecdote and myth, presenting a string of identical causes and effects, symptoms and outcomes:

War. - Victory. - General rejoicing. – The boundaries have been expanded. – New territories are being populated. – Despotism is intensifying. - Jokes. - Arrests. - Executions. - The people are silent. – Measures to strengthen discipline and order. - The party is prohibited. - CONSPIRACY. - Gossip. - The collapse of tyranny. - Euphoria. - The monument was demolished. - Riotousness of the people. - General theft. - Emission. – Inflation. - Destruction. - Manifesto. - Party allowed. - Executions. - Arrests. - Jokes. - War. - Defeat. – Revision of boundaries. – Evacuation from occupied territories. - Gossip. - Coup. - A monument has been erected. – Reforms. – Inflation. - Emission. - Epidemic. - Waiting for the end of the world. – Measures to strengthen order and discipline. - Gossip. - Crop failure. - Universal theft. - Mutiny. - Hunger. – Reforms. - General rejoicing. - Victory. - War. - And so on, and so on, and so on. Read newspapers, replace names and things with past or future names and things - get a model of history: what happened Then, - will Always.

However, the invisible stream of life, contrary to the newspapers, flows (another metaphor for movement) - flows quietly and imperceptibly, undermining the cornerstones of history. Therefore, no matter the era, no generation, no matter the people, every time it turns out not quite the same as it was. Each time, causes and consequences, symptoms and outcomes are arranged in a different plot sequence than before. And the model of history is irreversibly overturned: what was Then, looks Now differently than Always.

Historical myth is a game of our memory, rearranging causes and effects in accordance with the mythological rule of conjugation everything - in one. Here is the classic definition of universal history: “It must gather all the peoples of the world, separated by time, chance, mountains, seas, and unite them into one harmonious whole; from them compose one majestic complete poem" ( Gogol. P. 42; for a list of abbreviations, see the end of the book). Private history - the history of one era and a single life - does approximately the same thing: collects, connects and composes everything disparate into one whole - only in smaller formats.

Here is an example of one of these private stories, directly related to the upcoming presentation of the life and reign of Emperor Paul the First:

“The government policy pursued during these years was fully consistent with the personality of the emperor - a capricious, despotic man, changeable in his decisions and affections, easily subject to unbridled anger and just as easily changing anger to mercy; his sentimentality coexisted with cruelty. – These character traits of Paul were evident even in the years when he was heir to the throne. Two hobbies completely absorbed his energy: a passion for wine and a passion for drill.<…>The mania for persecution is no less clearly visible. Paul's suspicion extended not only to courtiers and nobles, but also to members of his own family.<…>His claims regarding the concentration of all power in his own hands were limitless, but they far exceeded his abilities" ( Russian history. Textbook 1996. pp. 368, 370).

This example clearly shows how important a syllable is in a myth, inspiring the reader and listener with the desired impression of what is said: capricious, despotic, turn the country into a barracks, mania of persecution, pretensions...

Let's try to say the same thing in a different syllable - there will be another myth:

“The government policy pursued during these years was fully consistent with the personality of the emperor - an unpredictable, powerful man, unexpected in his decisions and affections, easily carried away by impulses of indignation and just as easily yielding to the movements of a kind heart; His sentimentality coexisted with firmness. – These character traits were evident in his youth, when he was heir to the throne. Two hobbies completely absorbed his energy: a passion for feasts and a passion for military affairs.<…>No less clearly visible is the feeling of disappointment not only with the courtiers, but also with members of his own family.<…>His aspirations regarding the concentration of all power in his own hands were unshakable, but they far exceeded the possibilities of their implementation.”

The literary device used in the second myth is called tautology– that is, repeating in other words previously reported information. However, although what is said is similar, in general a completely different meaning emerges: by replacing condemnatory words with benevolent words, we modified the general meaning of what was said and from the indignant and contemptuous myth a sympathetic and condescending myth was formed.

Of course, not everything in myth belongs to the syllable. Predetermining the impression of what is said, the syllable is indifferent to the essence of the information being communicated. Meanwhile, both myths, although in different syllables, convey, along with plausible information, doubtful and false information.

Thus, the news that some traits of the adult character of Emperor Paul the First appeared in his youth cannot be disputed, firstly, because this usually happens with all people, and secondly, because Paul’s character is in its initial stages. age is described in great detail by one of his teachers, Semyon Poroshin: for more than a year, he daily wrote down everything that happened during his communication with his pupil, and since Poroshin was an observant and intelligent person, he was able to capture Pavel’s nature in great detail and analytically. Indeed, some character traits, which were subsequently remembered by all the emperor’s contemporaries, were determined long before his accession to the throne, and to be convinced of the plausibility of this opinion, it is enough to leaf through Poroshin’s diary.

But both myths provide information that government policy during the reign of Paul was quite consistent with the personality of the emperor - it was sometimes unpredictable and capricious, sometimes despotic and imperious, sometimes changeable and unexpected, sometimes angry and indignant, sometimes mercifully and kind-hearted. Of course, if we judge politics by the number of resignations, we must admit that Emperor Paul the First very often made personnel changes, and the government apparatus was completely renewed at least three times during the little over four years of his reign. However, politics includes not only the problem of an official’s suitability for the position he holds. Politics is also some measures to regulate social and economic life within the country, as well as some actions on the international stage. So, even if you do not delve into the archives of Paul’s era, but limit yourself only to reading the imperial manifestos and decrees, you will discover quite logical, fairly orderly lines that Paul drew throughout his entire reign. Consistent measures will be revealed to strengthen unity of command, and systematic entrenchment of the principle of personal responsibility of government officials and, accordingly, a tendency to transform boards into ministries, and many other logical and consistent things. Of course, there is material for debate here. Let's say, having fought with France in 1799, the next year, 1800, we abruptly moved towards rapprochement with her, but, on the contrary, we broke off relations with England. Unpredictability? Caprice? The will of a despot? Anger at the British? Mercy for the French? – But, having reflected on the international situation of those years, we will find a thousand and one reasons to interpret such a turn in foreign policy as an inevitable consequence of the balance of power that was determined in Europe on the eve of the 19th century.

However, here is another message from our myths: “passion for wine” and “passion for feasts.” – Here, in fact, there is nothing to argue with: the information is certainly implausible - all sorts of lies were weighed against Emperor Paul the First, but no one noticed this passion in him. They simply combined the myths into one figure - two, confusing Paul with his father Peter the Third, who, judging by the anecdotes of eyewitnesses, really often grabbed too much at the table.

Thus, the myth of history is a syllable plus information of varying degrees of controversy and reliability.

The device, thanks to which Paul the First and Peter the Third were turned into one person, along with tautology, is a cornerstone mythological device. It is called anachronism and serves for historical connections: that is, for rearranging or combining events that occurred at different times, and for identifying or likening to each other persons who lived in different eras.

Anachronism is generally a property of human memory: every memory is like a dream, mixing into a single multi-layered plot the impressions of the past day with the experiences of distant youth. Therefore, it is inevitable that conjugations are a general device of collective memory. We think of historical persons or historical events in the image of persons and events that happened and happened in other times.

When the first chroniclers of Peter the Great began to sing of his reforms, they could not come up with anything other than looking for appropriate prototypes for their reformer: Peter was called Noah, Moses, Samson, David, Solomon, Alexander the Great, Vladimir of Kyiv, the Apostle Peter, the Russian God. Reasoning mathematically, one can, on the basis of such analogies, decide that in fact there was no Peter the Great at all, that rumors about his life and reign are greatly exaggerated and that these rumors are nothing more than variants of legends about the life and reign, for example, of one Russian God, who appeared in the chronicles of different times under the names of Vladimir of Kiev, Alexander the Great, Solomon, David, Moses... Or vice versa - one could conclude that Vladimir of Kiev, Alexander the Great, David, Solomon, Moses, the Apostle Peter and the Russian God are all are just different names for the first reliable person of world history - Peter the Great, before whose birth we lived like animals and in unconsciousness.

The absurdity of such summaries does not negate their primitive logic: it all depends on the degree of faith and the amount of knowledge. The less we know, the more we believe in the logic of myth and the more easily we fall under the spell of anachronisms and tautologies. And since at all times people remain people and it is easier for them to believe than to know, history from generation to generation remains fertile ground for the play of collective memory - be it ideological or mathematical.

History, like the mother of damp earth, with regular constancy produces an infinite number of mutually similar forms - images of our thinking, and impressions from this mutuality - that is, impressions of our own ability to think - naturally influence the experience of current everyday life, likening its quiet flow to a stormy one. the flow of history. And the more often you think about the role of your life in history, the easier it is to find yourself at the mercy of tautologies and anachronisms and begin to live by analogy with the prototypes given by our own historical imagination.

Emperor Paul the First built his life, having in his memory the great examples of history - Peter the Great and Frederick the Second. He spoke about it himself, demonstrated it himself. He himself gave reason for the flow of likenings to multiply in the anecdotes and chronicles of his life and reign, and they began to look for new and new prototypes for him: Peter the Third, Hamlet of Denmark, Don Quixote of La Mancha, Caligula, Nero, Ivan the Terrible, Michael the Archangel... As a result, myths were formed in which there was almost no place left for the emperor’s own person: his appearance disappeared into his prototypes.

The life and reign of Paul the First is the life and reign experienced by the main character and his contemporaries as a myth composed in reality - a myth in which one has to live - a difficult test for a healthy human body.

In the memory of eyewitnesses who left their memories of the Pavlovian era, this entire era is usually presented as a single nightmare that began immediately after Paul’s accession to the throne - on the morning of November 7, 1796. Here is what, for example, one of the most conscientious memoirists reports: “Early in the morning of November 7, our commander<…>gave the order that<…>all officers appeared at the parade in front of the Winter Palace<…>. As soon as we reached Palace Square, we were already informed of many new orders. To begin with, from now on, not a single officer, under any pretext, had the right to appear anywhere except in uniform<…>. In addition, a number of police orders were issued<…>prohibited the wearing of round hats, boots with cuffs, trousers<…>. Hair should have been combed back, and not on the forehead<…>. On the morning of November 8, 1796, well before 9 a.m., the zealous metropolitan police had already managed to promulgate all these rules" ( Sablukov. pp. 21–22).

The chronicler follows the memoirist: “First of all, war was declared on round hats, turn-down collars, tailcoats, vests, boots with cuffs, and trousers;<…>hair should have been combed back, and not on the forehead<…>. On the morning of November 8th, the zealous police had already published all these rules" ( Schilder. Ed. 1996. P. 279).

Meanwhile, if you check the chronology of the documents, you will notice that the corresponding rules were not prescribed immediately, but suddenly, on the morning of November 7 or 8, but later and, moreover, in different years. Thus, round hats were prohibited from wearing on January 13, 1797, tailcoats and vests - a year later, on January 20, 1798, and the prohibition of having a toupee, lowered over the forehead, followed more than a year later - on April 2, 1799 .

Here is another example - the words of Emperor Paul the First, serving as a convenient illustration of his autocracy: “I do not demand any other service from anyone other than the unfailing fulfillment of my commands” ( Klochkov. P. 147). These words, suitable for explaining any extraordinary decree - even for banning round hats, even for declaring a trade blockade of England, acquire in the eyes of descendants the meaning of an aphorism that generalizes the general meaning of what happened in Pavlov's era. But here we look into a scholarly book, the author of which worked hard in the Senate archives and, among government papers for May 1797, discovered the context of this aphorism: it is contained in “a decree of the emperor to the Belarusian governor, in whose province, on the occasion of the sovereign’s passage, roads, while Paul forbade all outfits and preparations in advance, in view of the working season" ( Klochkov. P. 117). In the context of such a decree, the emperor’s autocratic words lose the overall effect of an aphorism and begin to mean something concretely defined, not at all intended for global generalization: simply the emperor, in his characteristic ironic and indignant manner, reminds one of the local commanders of his order not to create a rush situation for his arrival. And the fact that he uses the word “commands” here means only the normal formula for the 18th century for the name of royal orders and does not at all mean any special autocracy.

Probably, if you comment with documents on the contexts of other specific orders of Emperor Paul the First, you will find clear reasons that caused them, and it will become obvious that every gesture of his, which seems to be a consequence of autocratic madness, bears clear imprints, if not of common sense, then at least categories of Russian culture (the same decrees on round hats, vests and tailcoats imitate the regulations of Peter I on shaving beards and prohibiting long-skirted clothing).

However, individually logical and fair decrees of Paul I give in total a very strong impression of the illogicality and injustice of his entire reign as a whole, and comments can only weaken or increase the strength of this impression, but cannot change it.

This is the poetics of myth: no matter how critically you test it, it remains invulnerable to examination. – It is this conviction that determines the rules of the genre offered to the lower enlightened public. The meaning of this genre is not to present new materials, not to clarify the chronology of the days of the life of Emperor Paul the First, not to refute existing views on his personality and reign, not to compile a biography, not to draw a portrait. Biographies have already been written: read Kobeko da Schilder - see the list at the end of the book. There are also portraits - see illustrations. The meaning of this genre is the genre itself: a play with anachronisms of one’s own and others’ style, plus old documents and new comments on the anecdotes of eyewitnesses and the myths of chroniclers of varying degrees of tautology and reliability.

The text is printed according to modern spelling and punctuation standards.

Omissions in quotations are indicated by ellipses in broken brackets; in broken brackets inside the quotes, explanations are given for some names and events. Paragraphs in quotations are not always observed: a dash is used to mark the beginning of a new paragraph. In some quotes, lowercase letters are replaced by uppercase letters for ease of reading and vice versa; Some dates in quotations are italicized or bold. All quotes, except for the spiritual verse placed at the beginning of the book, fragments from the works of P. P. Kizh and partly the odic stanza placed at the beginning of the chapter “1797”, are borrowed from memoirs, letters, anecdotes and other works of eyewitnesses and chroniclers.

Fragments from memoirs and letters written in foreign languages ​​are quoted, as a rule, in translations, without indicating the translated nature of the corresponding fragment.

Some fragments have been re-translated with the assistance of Yu. A. Peskova.

Text typed V. I. Lashkova starring V. M. Dzyadko.

This essay is a free adaptation of a cycle of anecdotes and facts published at one time under the titles “November 7” (Friendship of Peoples. 1993. No. 11–12) and “Paul Ier, empereur de Russie, ou le 7 novembre” (Paris, Fayard, 1996; translation into French E. G. Balsamo). The compiler of this book is grateful to all the readers who expressed their opinions about “November 7th” to him, namely: A. N. Arkhangelsky, V. V. Varganova, A. L. Zorin, V. A. Milchina, A. S. Nemzer, Zh. Niva, A. F. Stroev, A. M. Turkov.

Pavel the First

Jokes

Documentation

Comments

As the Archangel Michael blows his trumpet,

Commander of the formidable forces of heaven,

He will blow the golden trumpet

Let him climb the steep mountain.

Yes, all the dead will awaken here,

They will rise from their graves,

And righteous judgment will begin

Yes, over many-sinful, many-sick souls.

Archangel Michael the Light will exclaim:

“Are you a goy, why are you crying?

Why are you shedding burning tears?

Have Ali committed many atrocities?”

The many-sick souls answer him:

“You are a goy, Michael the Light Archangel!

We are to blame, sinful souls,

That they walked a special path.

And what God's chosen ones we were,

And how cathedral we were -

You ask the commander of our brave

Yes, merciful princes and kings,

They transferred us a little, without counting,

It’s like enemies roaming the earth.

We all interfered with them, many sick people, -

We lie in three layers in damp soil.

And we were meek and meek,

Is it possible that here and there with a hatchet -

So not out of malice, but out of unconsciousness,

From drunken courage and from daring.

You came to us, Mikhailo, into fiery torment,

You put us on hot frying pans,

Let it drown with boiling resin,

So that we forget and not be remembered,

We are tired - there is no urine.”

Michael the Archangel answers them:

“Oh, you sinful, many-sick souls,

You shouldn't put a two-headed eagle in your coat of arms -

The bird is a werewolf, and the crow is black.

The black raven is a cunning bird,

Black raven is a bird of prophecy,

The black raven is a family bird.

And your eagle, you know, is unlivable:

It doesn’t produce offspring, it doesn’t build a nest -

There are two heads, but they don’t move.

What a state of poverty I have brought you to..." -

Here all the power of heaven will shake.

The Last Judgment is coming, the judgment in heaven,

The trumpets are blowing, but the earth is burning.

«<…>- Wait, my friend, wait. I lived for forty-two years. God saved me and, perhaps, will give me the intelligence and strength to establish the state for which He intended me. Let us rely on His Goodness.”

Following this, he immediately got into the carriage and at 8 1/2 o'clock in the evening drove into St. Petersburg<…>.

<…>The palace was filled with people of every rank<…>, everyone was anxiously awaiting the end of one long-term reign for the entry into another, completely new one.<…>Questions were repeated about the hour of death, about the effect of medications, and about the doctors’ opinions. Everyone told different things, but the common desire was to have at least a faint hope for her recovery. “Suddenly a rumor spread (and everyone was delighted) that the empress, when taking away the Spanish flies, opened her eyes and asked for a drink; but then, a minute later, everyone returned to their previous opinion that there was nothing left to expect except the hour of her death" ( Rostopchin. pp. 161–164).

“Her body still lived, but her consciousness died: a vein in her brain was interrupted” ( Golovin. P. 154).

“The heir, having gone into his room in the Winter Palace for a minute, went to the empress’s half. Passing through rooms filled with people awaiting his accession to the throne, he showed everyone an affectionate and courteous appearance.<…>, having asked about all the details of what had happened, he went with his wife to the coal office<…>and there he called those with whom he wanted to talk or to whom he wanted to order something" ( Rostopchin. pp. 164–165).

“Grand Duke Paul settled down in the office behind his mother’s bedroom, so that everyone to whom he gave orders passed by the empress, who had not yet died, as if she no longer existed” ( Golovin. P. 157).

"At dawn, 24 hours after the blow, the heir went to the room where the empress’s body lay. Having asked the doctors whether they had hope, and receiving the answer that there was none, he ordered to call the Most Reverend Gabriel with the clergy to read a silent confession and commune the Empress with the Holy Mysteries, which was done" ( Rostopchin. P. 165).

“In the morning an order was received to put on Russian dresses. This meant that the empress was ending" ( Golovin. P. 158).

«<…>everyone was expecting the end of the empress’s life every minute, and the palace was more and more filled with people of every rank” ( Rostopchin. P. 166).“I entered the hall and was as much amazed as I was depressed by sadness.<…>The most famous persons, the top officials who managed state affairs, stood as if already deprived of their positions and titles, with their heads bowed.<…>. People of small ranks, about whom no one thought a day ago, no one knew them, were running around, commanding, establishing” ( Shishkov. P. 9); “Grand Dukes Alexander and Konstantin were already in the uniforms of the battalions they commanded in the Gatchina model army<…>.

At one o'clock in the afternoon in the corridor, behind the bedroom, they set a table, at which the heir and his wife ate together<…>.

At three o'clock in the afternoon The Vice-Chancellor, Count Osterman, was ordered to go to Count Morkov, pick up all his papers on foreign affairs, seal them and bring them; but I don’t know why Count Osterman got the idea that the order to bring papers imposed on him the obligation to bring them into the palace himself; and as they were tied into two tablecloths, Osterman dragged these two piles of papers through all the rooms of the palace just as children, when playing, drag small sleds loaded beyond their strength.<…>“The heir ordered Chief Marshal Prince Baryatinsky to go home, and entrusted his position to Count Sheremetev” ( Rostopchin. pp. 166–167).- “Princess Dolgorukaya asked to have mercy on her father, Prince Baryatinsky, but was refused<…>. The emperor replied: “I also had a father, madam!” ( Golovin. P. 167).- “From three o’clock in the afternoon, the weakness of the empress’s pulse became much more noticeable; three or four times the doctors thought that the end would follow; but the strength of the build and the multitude of forces, fighting against death, held back and delayed the final blow. “The body lay in the same position, on the morocco mattress, motionless, with eyes closed. Strong wheezing in the throat was heard in the other room<…>. “During the day, the heir called Prince Zubov to him five or six times, spoke to him graciously and assured him of his favor. The despair of this temporary worker cannot be compared with anything. I don’t know which feelings had a stronger effect on his heart; but the confidence of fall and insignificance was depicted not only on his face, but also in all his movements. Passing through the empress's bedroom, he stopped several times before the empress's body and came out sobbing.<…>The crowd of courtiers moved away from him as if he were infected<…>.

At five o'clock in the afternoon the heir ordered me to ask Count Bezborodko if there were any matters that were urgent, and although ordinary reports arriving by mail did not require a hasty report, Count Bezborodko decided to enter the office with them, where the heir ordered me to stay . He was extremely surprised by the memory of Count Bezborodko, who not only learned from the signatures where the packages were from, but also called the writers by name.<…>When Count Bezborodko, having finished, left the office, the heir, still in surprise, explained himself very flatteringly about him, saying:

– This man is a gift from God to me; thank you for reconciling me with him<…>.

10 o'clock in the evening. Winter Palace

<…>Rogerson, entering the office in which the heir and his wife were sitting, announced that the empress was coming to an end. The Grand Dukes, Duchesses and Princesses, Alexandra and Elena, were immediately ordered to enter the bedroom, with whom State Lady Lieven entered, followed by Prince Zubov, Count Osterman, Bezborodko and Samoilov. This minute will remain in my unforgettable memory until now and until the end of my life. On the right side of the empress’s body stood the heir, his wife and their children; at the head, Pleshcheev and I were called into the room; on the left side are the doctors, the healer and all of Catherine’s services. Her breathing became difficult and rare; the blood either rushed to the head and completely changed his facial features, then, falling down, returned his natural appearance. The silence of all those present, the gaze of everyone fixed on a single important object, the distance for that moment from everything earthly, the weak light in the room - all this was filled with horror, announcing the imminent coming of death.<…>

The first quarter of eleven o'clock struck. The Great Catherine breathed her last breath and, along with others, appeared before the court of the Almighty" ( Rostopchin. pp. 167–170).

“Catherine the Great does not exist! Terrible words! ( Gribovsky. P. 33)– “The Russian sun has gone out! Catherine the Second - body in the tomb, soul in heaven! Paul the First reigned" ( Shishkov. P. 9).

“Her son and heir, bowing his head before the body, went out, bursting into tears, into another room; The bedroom was instantly filled with the screams of the women who served Catherine.<…>Tears and sobs did not extend further than the room in which the empress’s body lay. The rest were filled with noble and official people, who in all events, both happy and unfortunate, were occupied only with themselves, and this moment for all of them was what the Last Judgment was for sinners. Count Samoilov, coming out into the duty room, naturally with a stupid and important face, which he vainly forced to express regret, said:

- Dear sirs! Empress Catherine died, and Tsar Pavel Petrovich deigned to ascend to the All-Russian throne.

Here some (whom I don’t want to name, not because I have forgotten their names, but because of the living disgust that I feel for them) rushed to hug Samoilov and everyone present, congratulating him on the emperor” ( Rostopchin. pp. 170, 171, 174).

“A manifesto was drawn up, which announced for public information the death of Empress Catherine and the accession to the throne of Emperor Paul I.<…>The Senate and Synod were assembled" ( Sablukov. P. 21).“Chief Ceremony Valuev came with a report that everything in the court church is ready for the oath. The Emperor with his entire family, accompanied by everyone who had gathered in the palace, deigned to go to church<…>.

Half past 12 at night

<…>Having arrived, he stood in the imperial place, and everyone read the oath after the clergy. After the oath, Empress Maria, approaching the emperor, wanted to throw herself on her knees, but was restrained by him, as were all the children. For this, everyone kissed the cross and the Gospel and, having signed his name, came to the sovereign and the empress’s hand" ( Rostopchin. P. 174).

“After midnight, all the guards regiments were assembled in their regimental yards to swear an oath to Emperor Paul I, who had ascended the throne” ( Volkonsky. P. 179).

“The last day of the life of Empress Catherine has ended” ( Rostopchin. P. 17).

PAUL THE FIRST

EMPEROR AND AUTOCRATIC ALL-RUSSIAN:

MOSCOW, Kyiv, VLADIMIR,

NOVGORODSKY, TSAR OF KAZAN, TSAR

ASTRAKHAN, KING OF SIBERIAN, TSAR

CHERSONESES-TAURISE,

THE GOVERNOR OF PSKOV AND THE GRAND DUKE

SMOLENSKY, LITHUANIAN, VOLYNSKY,

PODILSKY, PRINCE OF ESTLAND,

LIFLYANDSKY, KURLANDSKY AND SEMIGALSKY,

SAMOGITSKY, KORELSKY, TVERSKY,

YUGOR, PERM, VYATSK AND OTHERS,

GOVERNMENT AND GRAND DUKE OF NOVAGOROD

NIZOVSKY LAND, CHERNIGOV, RYAZAN,

POLOTSK, ROSTOV, YAROSLAVSK,

BELOZERSKY, UDORSKY, OBDORSKY,

KONDIYSKY, VISHEPSKY, MSTISLAVSKY AND

ALL NORTHERN COUNTRIES, LORD AND SOVEREIGN

IVERian LAND, KARTALIN AND GEORGIAN

TSAR AND KABARDIN LANDS, CHERKASSY AND

MOUNTAIN PRINCE AND OTHER HERIATIVE GOVERNMENT

AND OTHER, AND OTHER, AND OTHER

“At the end of the oath, the sovereign went straight to the bedroom of the late empress, whose body in a white dress was already laid on the bed, and the deacon was reading the Gospel on a lehenga. Having bowed to her, the sovereign returned to his own chambers for a few minutes and, calling Nikolai Petrovich Arkharov to him, asked him something; Having come to the office, while he was undressing, he called me to him and said:

“You’re tired, and I’m ashamed; but please take the trouble to go with Arkharov to Count Orlov and take him to the oath. He was not in the palace, and I don’t want him to forget June 28th. Tomorrow tell me how things turn out for you.

Then it was already past midnight, and I, getting into the carriage with Arkharov, went to Vasilyevsky Island, where Count A.G. Orlov lived in his house. I would pay very dearly not to have this order.<…>Nikolai Petrovich Arkharov, almost not knowing me at all, but seeing the new temporary worker, did not stop saying nasty things about Count Orlov<…>. Arriving at Orlov's house, we found the gates locked. Having entered the house, I ordered the first person we came across to call the count's valet, who was to be told to wake up the count and announce our arrival. Arkharov, out of impatience or for some reason unknown to me, followed the valet, and we entered the room where Count Orlov was sleeping. He had been unwell for a week and did not have the strength to stay in the palace; A few hours after the heir arrived from Gatchina, he went home and went to bed. When we arrived he was fast asleep. The valet, waking him up, said:

- Your Excellency! Nikolai Petrovich Arkharov has arrived.

– I don’t know: he wants to talk to you.

Count Orlov ordered his shoes to be brought to him and, putting on a sheepskin coat, asked Arkharov rather menacingly:

“Why, dear sir, did you come to me at this time?”

Arkharov, approaching him, announced that he and I (calling me by name and patronymic) had been sent to swear him in, by order of the Emperor.

– Isn’t the Empress already gone? - asked Count Orlov and, receiving the answer that she died at the 11th hour, raised his eyes filled with tears and said: - Lord! Remember her in Your kingdom! Eternal memory to her!

Then, continuing to cry, he spoke with grief about how the sovereign could doubt his loyalty; He said that, while serving his mother and fatherland, he served the heir to the throne and that he swore allegiance to him, as the emperor, with the same feeling as he swore allegiance to the heir of Empress Catherine. He concluded all this with a proposal to go to church. Arkharov immediately showed his readiness for this; but I, having already taken upon myself the first character, asked the count not to go to church, but that I brought an oath, to which his assault would be enough.

“No, dear sir,” the count answered me, “I will and want to swear allegiance to the sovereign before the image of God.” - And, having removed the image itself from the wall, holding a lit candle in his hand, he read the oath in a firm voice and, at the end, put his hand to it; and then, having bowed to him, we both went out, leaving him alone. Despite Count Orlov's difficult position, I did not notice in him the slightest movement of cowardice or meanness. - Arkharov took me to the house in which I lived, talking all the way about the oppression that he suffered during the past reign, making me feel that he suffered for his loyalty to the sovereign. Anyone who didn’t know him would have thought in my place that he was persecuted for his strength of spirit and honor” ( Rostopchin. pp. 171–174).

“During the night deep snow fell, and by morning there was a thaw and light rain began” ( Sablukov. P. 22). - “I went to Palace Square,<…>seeing several officers walking near the middle gate of the Winter Palace,<…>I went to them out of curiosity; Imagine my surprise to see the heir himself<Александра Павловича>, at 2 o'clock in the morning, in the uniform of the Life Guards Semenovsky Regiment of the new<гатчинского>cut, in St. Andrew's ribbon and a scarf over the caftan and with him the newly appointed St. Petersburg commandant, Major General Arakcheev, Parade Major Kaptsevich and Parade Adjutant Aprelev, setting up new colorful booths and sentries" ( Volkonsky. pp. 178–179). - “As soon as we reached Palace Square, we were already informed of many new orders” ( Sablukov. P. 22).

The first minutes and hours of the new king were striking in the absence of immediate executions. The closer the subjects were to the throne in the previous reign, the less favors they could expect for themselves from Catherine's heir: the heir was known for his gloominess and suspicion; everyone knew that in the last months before her death, Catherine was going to remove Paul from the throne, bequeath the state to her grandson Alexander Pavlovich, and maybe even crown her grandson as king. They believed that for this alone Pavel would take revenge on the memory of his mother. Everyone knew that Pavel was not only humiliated and insulted, but was outraged by the very way his mother ruled: he believed that Catherine had ruined the state, that things were going wrong (see. Sat. RIO. T. 20. P. 412), that the first steps at court are occupied by caresses and thieves; as if he even said that as soon as he received power, he would flog and expel all Catherine’s nobles and favorites (see. Arnets. T. 1. P. 123).

It was scary to think, scary to look ahead...

However, in the first minutes and hours nothing terrible happened. On the contrary, all the persons who took precedence under Catherine are the Empress’s favorite Prince Platon Zubov, his brother Count Nikolai, Count Bezborodko, Count Osterman, Prosecutor General Samoilov, etc., and so on, and so on. - were awarded confirmation of their powers, and others received even greater awards and promotions to the highest possible ranks.

True, already in those moments when Catherine was still alive and lying motionless in the entrance hall, people who were not the most noticeable at the empress’s court began to appear in the palace and give orders, like Chamberlain Rostopchin. Of course, all the senior senior officials could not help but think about their future when the names of his Gatchina favorites, not known at all at Catherine’s court, appeared in Paul’s first orders, like Colonel Arakcheev or valet Kutaisov. However, nothing frightening has yet been revealed in the behavior of the sovereign: he showed everyone his prudence, prudence, and determination - he did not exercise self-rule and did not execute. Words arrest And link were used in these minutes and hours only in the opposite sense - in the sense of amnesty.

Round hats, low boots, high ties, quilted hats, wide curls, colored collars, shoes with bows, trousers, tailcoats, vests, sideburns, trips abroad, private printing houses, foreign books and sheet music were not yet prohibited. The time was still far away when, when meeting the emperor on the street, it was necessary to get out of the carriage in order to show him your high veneration.

It still seemed that everything would work out.

The first minutes and hours brought refreshing measures: military operations in Transcaucasia ceased, the recently announced recruitment was cancelled, petitions were allowed to be submitted to the sovereign himself, and the sovereign promised to respond to the complaints of his subjects himself. It immediately became clear: the symbols of the new reign would be order And justice. It was obvious that the emperor was looking for something to do and wanted, with his own hands, like Peter the Great, to establish the state that God had destined for him. “He drew up the budget for the next year with his own hands.

On the third day, everyone understood: reforms were underway in the country.

A week later, the first signs of opposition appeared.

Two years later, the first resignations, arrests and exiles began. By the end of the month, it became clear: the very thing that was so feared on the night of November 6-7 had begun.

Court reform

EMPEROR PAUL THE FIRST RESTORES THE STATUS OF THE ROYAL DOCTOR

“Never before has there been such splendor at court, such pomp and rigor in ritual. On major holidays, all court and civil ranks of the first five classes were required to wear French caftans, glazed, velvet, cloth, embroidered with gold or at least silk, or with rhinestone buttons, and ladies in ancient robes with a long tail and huge sides ( fishbeins), which were already forgotten by their grandmothers. “The emperor’s exit from the inner chambers to listen to the liturgy in the palace church was preceded by a loud command word and the sound of guns and broadswords, which was heard in several rooms, along which, on both sides, tall cavalry guards were lined up in front, under helmets and in armor” ( Dmitriev. P. 338). – “It is known that Catherine did not love her son<…>. Under her, the Grand Duke, the heir to the throne, did not matter at all. He saw himself placed below the dominant favorites, who often made him feel their impudent arrogance<…>. This gave rise to a character trait that, during his reign, caused perhaps the most misfortunes: the constant fear that he was not being given due respect.<…>. He could not rid himself of the thought that even now<когда он царствует>his dignity is not respected enough; every involuntary or even imaginary insult to his dignity again reminded him of his previous position; With this memory, the previous feelings that he hated returned, but with the consciousness that from now on it was in his power not to tolerate the previous treatment, and thus thousands of hasty, thoughtless actions appeared, which seemed to him only a restoration of his violated rights "( Kotzebue. pp. 277–279).

Notes

The dates of events that took place in Russia are reported according to the Julian calendar (old style), which lagged behind the Gregorian calendar (new style) adopted by Europe - in the 18th century by 11 days, in the 19th century - by 12. When it comes to events taking place in Europe, dates according to both calendars are usually indicated.

In Rostopchin’s note, from which the quoted fragment is taken, Paul’s speech is given in French: “Attendez, mon cher, attendez. J'ai v?cu quarante deux ans. Dieu m'a soutenu; peut-etre, donnera-t-Il la force et la raison pour support-er l’?tat, auquel Il me destine. Esp?rons tous de Sa bont?

The rewards and promotions of Catherine's senior officers in the early days of Paul's reign were proportionate to the loyalty and helpfulness shown by the respective persons in these early days. Thus, Count Nikolai Zubov received the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called - the highest Russian award - for the fact that he was the first to come to Paul in Gatchina with a message about the blow that happened to Catherine. Count Bezborodko received a promotion, as they said, because it was he who placed in the hands of Paul all of Catherine’s papers relating to the succession to the throne. - However, in the place of our text to which this footnote is attached, we are talking only about the first minutes, hours and days of Paul’s reign. Very soon (by the end of 1796 - beginning of 1797) decisive personal changes would begin in the government.

All political criminals were released from custody, except for the insane. Among them are the leaders of the Polish uprising of 1794, suppressed by Suvorov - Kosciuszko, Nemtsevich, Potocki, as well as all other captured Poles; Moscow Martinists: from the Shlisselburg fortress - Novikov, from exile - Prince. Trubetskoy, Turgenev, I.V. Lopukhin; finally, from Siberia - Radishchev, the author of a book that broke all domestic records for the amount of time during which it was not allowed to be printed in full in Russia - “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” was first published in our country in full 115 years after the first edition was confiscated and destroyed.

This refers to the end of the war with Persia, started by Catherine in the spring of 1796 on the territory of Dagestan.

Over time, the practice of personal appeals with complaints to the emperor was regulated - in particular, by a decree of May 6, 1799, which prohibited the submission of irrelevant petitions: “Having established Our Throne on justice and mercy, We have never closed Our ears and attention to the true and rightful complaints of Our faithful subjects<…>; but unfortunately for Ours, two years of experience has confirmed to us that insolence and ignorance, using Our patience for evil, occupy Our attention with countless, ineffective, whimsical requests, incompatible with order and law.<…>. We do not prevent Our faithful subjects from bringing to Us complaints based on oppression.<…>, but at the same time we find it necessary to confirm that in order to burden Our attention with irrelevant requests, We will be forced to renew and put into effect the full force of the decrees issued in 1714, 1718 and 1765" ( PSZ. No. 18957).

End of free trial.

Page

Introduction 2

1. About the book by A. M. Peskov Pavel 1 3

Conclusion 9

List of used literature.

Introduction

1. About the book by A. M. Peskov Pavel 1

Conclusion

List of used literature.

Peskov A.M. Pavel 1. -M.: 1999. -421 p. Sakharov A.N. History of Russia from the beginning of the 18th to the end of the 19th century.-M.:AST, 1996. – 544 p.

Alexey Mikhailovich Peskov

Preface

History is a property of our psyche, a function of thinking, a game of the mind: it is a collective memory expressed by anecdotes of eyewitnesses and myths of generations.

The events of life disappear without a trace in the minute they happen. But if an eyewitness informs others about the most insignificant of them, others tell others, thirds tell fourths, etc. - in a word, if an anecdote is preserved not in private, but in general memory, it will become a fact of history, so that, united with other anecdotes about other events, to form a myth about their era.

The more anecdotes, the more versions of what happened. Each eyewitness speaks about his own story. Not all narrators are truthful: some lie for their own pleasure, vanity or justification; others imagined, the third dreamed, the fourth convey to the fifth what the first lie about, what the second imagined and dreamed of the third. But even if someone conscientiously wants to tell the whole truth, he still will not be able to tell how things really happened, because any truth and any truth is relative to the conditions of their observation and the observer’s horizons.

Of course, not only anecdotes and myths remain from a past life, but also things and documents. However, by themselves they cannot preserve their meaning. Things and documents, no matter how real, are only transformed into facts of history when they become significant details of anecdotes and myths.

Life is going. Time passes. New generations are coming. – With these metaphors of walking we mean the meaning of life: all living things move. From where and where? – they don’t know metaphors. Each new generation answers this question anew. Meanwhile, the facts of history remain immovably attached to their long-past minutes. New generations begin to revive them according to their concepts about the meaning of the movement of life.

New generations do not select everything from the historical facts that have reached them - they cannot remember everything, and they are not needed. We only need those that define the meaning of the movement. Old jokes are summarized, compressed into an abbreviated retelling, the meaning of the past is called in new words.

Meanwhile, life goes on. More time passes. Other generations are coming. Political regimes are changing. Previously unknown concepts are learned. Fresh retellings of old jokes are being written. The meaning of the movement of life is redefined by the newest words. The memory of the coming generations forgets what the memory of previous generations fed on.

This is how life is endlessly re-remembered, retold and rewritten. This is called history.

History is the myths of different generations: narrative duplicates of a past life.

The myths of history are apparently based on chronology. But this is only a pro forma - a narrative device that allows you to organize the placement of plot materials. In its essence, historical myth knows only the feeling of the present, now passing minute - the moment of the narrative, experienced as an instant of eternal truth. Myth matches in one - everything multi-temporal past: the wisdom of different centuries, significant for the current generation, is layered on a combination of anecdotes about a particular century or about a particular event, and it turns out that when talking about what happened Then, we're talking about what happened Always, and this Always is only true Now.

History begins with tomorrow's newspaper - our life today will be rewritten there according to the laws of anecdote and myth, presenting a string of identical causes and effects, symptoms and outcomes:

War. - Victory. - General rejoicing. – The boundaries have been expanded. – New territories are being populated. – Despotism is intensifying. - Jokes. - Arrests. - Executions. - The people are silent. – Measures to strengthen discipline and order. - The party is prohibited. - CONSPIRACY. - Gossip. - The collapse of tyranny. - Euphoria. - The monument was demolished. - Riotousness of the people. - General theft. - Emission. – Inflation. - Destruction. - Manifesto. - Party allowed. - Executions. - Arrests. - Jokes. - War. - Defeat. – Revision of boundaries. – Evacuation from occupied territories. - Gossip. - Coup. - A monument has been erected. – Reforms. – Inflation. - Emission. - Epidemic. - Waiting for the end of the world. – Measures to strengthen order and discipline. - Gossip. - Crop failure. - Universal theft. - Mutiny. - Hunger. – Reforms. - General rejoicing. - Victory. - War. - And so on, and so on, and so on. Read newspapers, replace names and things with past or future names and things - get a model of history: what happened Then, - will Always.

Alexey Mikhailovich Peskov

Preface

History is a property of our psyche, a function of thinking, a game of the mind: it is a collective memory expressed by anecdotes of eyewitnesses and myths of generations.

The events of life disappear without a trace in the minute they happen. But if an eyewitness informs others about the most insignificant of them, others tell others, thirds tell fourths, etc. - in a word, if an anecdote is preserved not in private, but in general memory, it will become a fact of history, so that, united with other anecdotes about other events, to form a myth about their era.

The more anecdotes, the more versions of what happened. Each eyewitness speaks about his own story. Not all narrators are truthful: some lie for their own pleasure, vanity or justification; others imagined, the third dreamed, the fourth convey to the fifth what the first lie about, what the second imagined and dreamed of the third. But even if someone conscientiously wants to tell the whole truth, he still will not be able to tell how things really happened, because any truth and any truth is relative to the conditions of their observation and the observer’s horizons.

Of course, not only anecdotes and myths remain from a past life, but also things and documents. However, by themselves they cannot preserve their meaning. Things and documents, no matter how real, are only transformed into facts of history when they become significant details of anecdotes and myths.

Life is going. Time passes. New generations are coming. – With these metaphors of walking we mean the meaning of life: all living things move. From where and where? – they don’t know metaphors. Each new generation answers this question anew. Meanwhile, the facts of history remain immovably attached to their long-past minutes. New generations begin to revive them according to their concepts about the meaning of the movement of life.

New generations do not select everything from the historical facts that have reached them - they cannot remember everything, and they are not needed. We only need those that define the meaning of the movement. Old jokes are summarized, compressed into an abbreviated retelling, the meaning of the past is called in new words.

Meanwhile, life goes on. More time passes. Other generations are coming. Political regimes are changing. Previously unknown concepts are learned. Fresh retellings of old jokes are being written. The meaning of the movement of life is redefined by the newest words. The memory of the coming generations forgets what the memory of previous generations fed on.

This is how life is endlessly re-remembered, retold and rewritten. This is called history.

History is the myths of different generations: narrative duplicates of a past life.

The myths of history are apparently based on chronology. But this is only a pro forma - a narrative device that allows you to organize the placement of plot materials. In its essence, historical myth knows only the feeling of the present, now passing minute - the moment of the narrative, experienced as an instant of eternal truth. Myth matches in one - everything multi-temporal past: the wisdom of different centuries, significant for the current generation, is layered on a combination of anecdotes about a particular century or about a particular event, and it turns out that when talking about what happened Then, we're talking about what happened Always, and this Always is only true Now.

History begins with tomorrow's newspaper - our life today will be rewritten there according to the laws of anecdote and myth, presenting a string of identical causes and effects, symptoms and outcomes:

War. - Victory. - General rejoicing. – The boundaries have been expanded. – New territories are being populated. – Despotism is intensifying. - Jokes. - Arrests. - Executions. - The people are silent. – Measures to strengthen discipline and order. - The party is prohibited. - CONSPIRACY. - Gossip. - The collapse of tyranny. - Euphoria. - The monument was demolished. - Riotousness of the people. - General theft. - Emission. – Inflation. - Destruction. - Manifesto. - Party allowed. - Executions. - Arrests. - Jokes. - War. - Defeat. – Revision of boundaries. – Evacuation from occupied territories. - Gossip. - Coup. - A monument has been erected. – Reforms. – Inflation. - Emission. - Epidemic. - Waiting for the end of the world. – Measures to strengthen order and discipline. - Gossip. - Crop failure. - Universal theft. - Mutiny. - Hunger. – Reforms. - General rejoicing. - Victory. - War. - And so on, and so on, and so on. Read newspapers, replace names and things with past or future names and things - get a model of history: what happened Then, - will Always.

However, the invisible stream of life, contrary to the newspapers, flows (another metaphor for movement) - flows quietly and imperceptibly, undermining the cornerstones of history. Therefore, no matter the era, no generation, no matter the people, every time it turns out not quite the same as it was. Each time, causes and consequences, symptoms and outcomes are arranged in a different plot sequence than before. And the model of history is irreversibly overturned: what was Then, looks Now differently than Always.

Historical myth is a game of our memory, rearranging causes and effects in accordance with the mythological rule of conjugation everything - in one. Here is the classic definition of universal history: “It must gather all the peoples of the world, separated by time, chance, mountains, seas, and unite them into one harmonious whole; from them compose one majestic complete poem" ( Gogol. P. 42; for a list of abbreviations, see the end of the book). Private history - the history of one era and a single life - does approximately the same thing: collects, connects and composes everything disparate into one whole - only in smaller formats.

Here is an example of one of these private stories, directly related to the upcoming presentation of the life and reign of Emperor Paul the First:

“The government policy pursued during these years was fully consistent with the personality of the emperor - a capricious, despotic man, changeable in his decisions and affections, easily subject to unbridled anger and just as easily changing anger to mercy; his sentimentality coexisted with cruelty. – These character traits of Paul were evident even in the years when he was heir to the throne. Two hobbies completely absorbed his energy: a passion for wine and a passion for drill.<…>The mania for persecution is no less clearly visible. Paul's suspicion extended not only to courtiers and nobles, but also to members of his own family.<…>His claims regarding the concentration of all power in his own hands were limitless, but they far exceeded his abilities" ( Russian history. Textbook 1996. pp. 368, 370).