Alexander 1 full biography. Family of Alexander I

Alexander 1 (Blessed) short biography for children

Alexander 1 - briefly about the life of the Russian emperor, who received the name Blessed for ridding the country of the invasion of the invincible army of Napoleon Bonaparte.

Alexander Pavlovich Romanov is the eldest son and heir of Emperor Paul I. Born in 1777. The Great Empress Catherine II, his grandmother, did not entrust the upbringing of the future ruler of Russia to her son and daughter-in-law, and from birth she personally monitored the life and education of her grandson, essentially taking him away from his parents.

She dreamed of raising Alexander to be a future great ruler, and it was her grandson, and not her son, that she saw as her heir. Catherine II forgot that her son was taken away from her in the same way, not entrusting the upbringing of the future emperor to a young woman.

The character of Alexander I, in short, was complex. Since childhood, he had to constantly hide and control his feelings. The Great Empress adored her grandson immensely and did not hide her intention to make Alexander her successor. This could not but irritate Pavel Petrovich. The future emperor had to make a lot of efforts to remain an equally loving son and grandson.

This is how his character was formed - under the guise of a benevolent, courteous and pleasant person to talk to, the emperor skillfully hid his true feelings. Even Napoleon, an astute diplomat, failed to unravel the real attitude of Alexander I towards him.
Until the end of his life, the emperor was haunted by suspicions about his involvement in a conspiracy against Paul I, as a result of which he was killed. Maybe it was this that, at the end of his life, prompted Alexander I to talk about his desire to abdicate the throne and start the life of an ordinary person.

Having come to power, the young emperor decided not to make the mistakes of his father, who saw the nobility as the main opposition. Alexander I understood that this was a serious force that was better to have in his friends. Therefore, everyone who fell into disgrace under his father was returned to the court. The bans and censorship introduced by Paul I were abolished. The emperor also understood the seriousness of the peasant issue. The main merit of Alexander I was the introduction of the decree “On Free Plowmen”. Unfortunately, many other bills that improve the lives of peasants remain only on paper.

In foreign policy, Alexander I adhered to the tactics of maintaining good relations with Great Britain and France. But for many years he had to fight with French troops. After expelling the enemy from Russian territory, he led a coalition of European countries against Napoleon.

Alexander I died suddenly at the age of 47. This happened in Taganrog in 1825. The mysterious circumstances of his death and confusion with his heirs were the cause of the Decembrist uprising in the same year.

More short biographies of great commanders:
-

Alexander Pavlovich Romanov was born on December 12, 1777 in St. Petersburg. He was the favorite grandson of Catherine II and the eldest son of the heir to the throne, Paul. The child had a strained relationship with his father, so he was raised by his crowned grandmother.

Heir to the throne

At this time, the ideas of enlightenment and humanism were popular. Alexander 1 was also brought up according to them. The short biography of the future monarch contained lessons based on the work of Rousseau. At the same time, the father accustomed the child to military affairs.

In 1793, the young man married a German princess, who received the name Elizaveta Alekseevna at baptism. At the same time, he served in the Gatchina troops, which were created by Paul. With the death of Catherine, her father became emperor, and Alexander became his heir. In order for him to become accustomed to state affairs, Alexander was made a member of the Senate.

Alexander 1, whose short biography was full of ideas of enlightenment, was infinitely far from his father with his views. Paul often argued with his son and even forced him to swear allegiance several times. The emperor was maniacally afraid of conspiracies, which were common in the 18th century.

On March 12, 1801, a group of nobles was organized in St. Petersburg. At the center of it was a group of nobles. Researchers are still arguing whether Alexander knew about the plans of the conspirators. One way or another, it is certain that when Paul was killed, the heir was informed about it. So he became the Emperor of Russia.

Reforms

The first years of his reign, the policy of Alexander 1 was entirely aimed at the internal transformation of the country. The initial step was a broad amnesty. She freed many freethinkers and victims during Paul's reign. Among them was one who lost his freedom for publishing the essay “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow.”

Subsequently, Alexander relied on the opinion of high-ranking associates who formed a secret committee. Among them were friends of the emperor’s youth - Pavel Stroganov, Viktor Kochubey, Adam Czartoryski, etc.

The reforms were aimed at weakening serfdom. In 1803, a decree appeared according to which landowners could now free their peasants along with the land. The patriarchal order of Russia did not allow Alexander to take more decisive steps. The nobles could resist the changes. But the ruler successfully banned serfdom in the Baltic states, where Russian orders were alien.

Also, the reforms of Alexander 1 contributed to the development of education. Moscow State University received additional funding. It was also open (young Alexander Pushkin studied there).

Speransky's projects

Mikhail Speransky became the emperor's closest assistant. He prepared a ministerial reform, which was approved by Alexander 1. A brief biography of the ruler received another successful initiative. New ministries replaced the ineffective colleges of the Petrine era.

In 1809, a project was being prepared on the separation of powers in the state. However, Alexander did not dare to give life to this idea. He was afraid of the grumbling of the aristocracy and the next palace coup. Therefore, Speransky eventually faded into the shadows and was sent into retirement. Another reason why the reforms were curtailed was the war with Napoleon.

Foreign policy

At the end of the 18th century, France experienced the Great Revolution. The monarchical system was destroyed. Instead, a republic first appeared, and then the sole rule of the successful commander Napoleon Bonaparte. France, as a hotbed of revolutionary sentiments, became an opponent of the absolute monarchies of Europe. Both Catherine and Paul fought with Paris.

Emperor Alexander 1 also entered into However, the defeat at Austerlitz in 1805 led to the fact that Russia was on the verge of defeat. Then the policy of Alexander 1 changed: he met with Bonaparte and concluded the Peace of Tilsit with him, according to which neutrality was established, and Russia had the opportunity to annex Finland and Moldova, which was done. It was on the new northern territory that the emperor applied his reforms.

Finland was annexed as a Grand Duchy with its own Diet and civil rights. And subsequently this province was the freest in the entire state throughout the 19th century.

However, in 1812 Napoleon decided to attack Russia. Thus began the Patriotic War, known to everyone from Tolstoy’s “War and Peace.” After the Battle of Borodino, Moscow was surrendered to the French, but this was a fleeting success for Bonaparte. Left without resources, he fled Russia.

At the same time, Alexander 1, whose short biography is full of various events, led the army in the Foreign Campaign. He triumphantly entered Paris and became a hero throughout Europe. The triumphant leader of the Russian delegation at the Congress of Vienna. The fate of the continent was decided at this event. By his decision, Poland was finally annexed to Russia. It was given its own constitution, which Alexander did not dare to introduce throughout the country.

Last years

The last years of the autocrat's reign were marked by the fading of reforms. The emperor became interested in mysticism and became seriously ill. He died in 1825 in Taganrog. He had no children. The dynastic crisis became the reason for As a result, Alexander's younger brother Nicholas came to power, who became a symbol of reaction and conservatism.

1. Introduction

2 Birth and name

3 Childhood, education and upbringing

4 Accession to the throne

5 Personality

6 The last years of the reign of Alexander I

• 8 Literature

Introduction

By chance, I came across a work on the topic of the personality of Alexander I. In this work I will give the main biographical events from the life of the emperor, a brief description of his political influence, and dwell in detail on the personality of Alexander Pavlovich.

Alexander I Pavlovich Blessed(December 12 (23), 1777, St. Petersburg - November 19 (December 1), 1825, Taganrog) - Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia (from March 12 (24), 1801), Protector of the Order of Malta (from 1801), Grand Duke of Finland (from 1809) , Tsar of Poland (since 1815), eldest son of Emperor Paul I and Maria Feodorovna.

At the beginning of his reign, he carried out moderately liberal reforms developed by the Secret Committee and M. M. Speransky. In foreign policy he maneuvered between Great Britain and France. In 1805-1807 participated in anti-French coalitions. In 1807-1812. temporarily became closer to France. He waged successful wars with Turkey (1806-1812), Persia (1804-1813) and Sweden (1808-1809). Under Alexander I, the territories of Eastern Georgia (1801), Finland (1809), Bessarabia (1812), and the former Duchy of Warsaw (1815) were annexed to Russia. After the Patriotic War of 1812, he headed in 1813-1814. anti-French coalition of European powers. He was one of the leaders of the Congress of Vienna in 1814-1815 and the organizers of the Holy Alliance.

Alexander I was a complex and contradictory personality. With all the variety of reviews from contemporaries about Alexander, they all agree on one thing - the recognition of insincerity and secrecy as the main character traits of the emperor. In the last years of his life, he often spoke about his intention to abdicate the throne and “remove himself from the world,” which, after his unexpected death from typhoid fever in Taganrog, gave birth to the legend of “elder Fyodor Kuzmich.”

Birth and name

Catherine II named one of her grandchildren Konstantin in honor of Constantine the Great, the other - Alexander in honor of Alexander Nevsky. This choice of names expressed the hope that Constantine would liberate Constantinople from the Turks, and the newly-minted Alexander the Great would become the sovereign of the new empire. She wanted to see Constantine on the throne of the Greek Empire that was supposed to be recreated.

“By this very choice of name, Catherine predicted a great future for her grandson and prepared him for a royal vocation, which, in her opinion, should have been facilitated, first of all, by a militarized upbringing oriented towards ancient models.” The name “Alexander” was not typical for the Romanovs; before that, the early deceased son of Peter the Great had been baptized this way only once. However, after Alexander I, it became firmly established in the Romanov nomenclature.

Childhood, education and upbringing

Grew up in the intellectual court of Catherine the Great; teacher - Swiss Jacobin Frederic Cesar Laharpe. In accordance with his convictions, he preached the power of reason, the equality of people, the absurdity of despotism, and the vileness of slavery. His influence on Alexander I was enormous. Military teacher Nikolai Saltykov - with the traditions of the Russian aristocracy, his father passed on to him his passion for military parade and taught him to combine spiritual love for humanity with practical concern for his neighbor. Catherine II adored her grandson and predicted, bypassing Paul, to be the heir to the throne. From her, the future emperor inherited flexibility of mind, the ability to seduce his interlocutor, and a passion for acting bordering on duplicity. In this, Alexander almost surpassed Catherine II. “A real seducer,” M.M. wrote about him. Speransky.

The need to maneuver between the “big court” of Catherine II in St. Petersburg and the “small” court of Father Pavel Petrovich in Gatchina taught Alexander to “live on two minds” and developed distrust and caution in him. Possessing an extraordinary mind, refined manners, and, according to his contemporaries, “an innate gift of courtesy,” he was distinguished by his masterly ability to win over people of different views and beliefs.

In 1793, Alexander married Louise Maria Augusta of Baden (who took the name Elizaveta Alekseevna in Orthodoxy) (1779–1826).

For some time he served in the Gatchina troops formed by his father; here he developed deafness in his left ear “from the strong roar of cannons.” On November 7, 1796, he was promoted to colonel of the guard.

In 1797, Alexander was the St. Petersburg military governor, chief of the Semenovsky Guards Regiment, commander of the capital division, chairman of the food supply commission and performed a number of other duties. Since 1798, he, in addition, presided over the military parliament, and starting the next year, sat in the Senate.

Accession to the throne

At half past two on the night of March 12, 1801, Count P. A. Palen informed Alexander about the murder of his father. According to legend, Alexander I, who demanded that Paul’s life be spared, fell into frustration, to which Count Palen told him: “Stop being childish, go reign!”

Already in the manifesto of March 12, 1801, the new emperor committed himself to governing the people " according to the laws and according to the heart of the late august grandmother of our Empress Catherine the Great" In decrees, as well as in private conversations, the emperor expressed the basic rule that would guide him: to actively introduce strict legality in place of personal arbitrariness. The Emperor more than once pointed out the main drawback that plagued the Russian state order. He called this shortcoming " the arbitrariness of our rule" To eliminate it, it was necessary to develop fundamental laws, which almost did not exist in Russia. It was in this direction that the transformative experiments of the first years were carried out.

Within a month, Alexander returned to the service all those previously dismissed by Paul, lifted the ban on the import of various goods and products into Russia (including books and musical notes), declared an amnesty for fugitives, restored noble elections, etc. On April 2, he restored the validity of the Charter nobility and cities, liquidated the secret chancellery.

On June 5 (17), 1801, a Russian-English convention was signed in St. Petersburg, ending the interstate crisis, and on May 10, the Russian mission in Vienna was restored. On September 29 (October 11), 1801, a peace treaty was signed with France, and a secret convention was concluded on September 29 (October 11).

On September 15, 1801, in the Assumption Cathedral of Moscow, he was crowned Metropolitan of Moscow Platon (Levshin); The same coronation sequence was used as under Paul I, but the difference was that Empress Elizaveta Alekseevna “during her coronation she did not kneel before her husband, but stood up and accepted the crown on her head.”

Personality

The unusual character of Alexander I is especially interesting because he is one of the most important characters in the history of the 19th century. His entire policy was quite clear and thoughtful. An aristocrat and a liberal, at the same time mysterious and famous, he seemed to his contemporaries a mystery that everyone solves in his own way. Napoleon considered him an “inventive Byzantine”, a northern Talma, an actor who is capable of playing any significant role. It is even known that Alexander I was called the “Mysterious Sphinx” at court.

A tall, slender, handsome young man with blond hair and blue eyes. Fluent in three European languages. He had an excellent upbringing and brilliant education.

Another element of the character of Alexander I was formed on March 23, 1801, when he ascended the throne after the murder of his father: a mysterious melancholy, ready at any moment to turn into extravagant behavior. At the beginning, this character trait did not manifest itself in any way - young, emotional, impressionable, at the same time benevolent and selfish, Alexander from the very beginning decided to play a great role on the world stage and with youthful zeal set about realizing his political ideals. Temporarily leaving in office the old ministers who had overthrown Emperor Paul I, one of his first decrees appointed a so-called secret committee with the ironic name “Comité du salut public” (referring to the French revolutionary “Committee of Public Safety”), consisting of young and enthusiastic friends : Viktor Kochubey, Nikolay Novosiltsev, Pavel Stroganov and Adam Czartoryski. This committee was to develop a scheme for internal reforms. It is important to note that the liberal Mikhail Speransky became one of the closest advisers to the tsar and drew up many reform projects. Their goals, based on their admiration for English institutions, far exceeded the capabilities of the time and even after they were elevated to the ranks of ministers, only a small proportion of their programs were realized. Russia was not ready for freedom, and Alexander, a follower of the revolutionary-minded Laharpe, considered himself a “happy accident” on the throne of the kings. He spoke with regret about “the state of barbarity in which the country was found due to the serfdom.”

According to Metternich, Alexander I was an intelligent and insightful man, but “devoid of depth.” He quickly and passionately became interested in various ideas, but he also easily changed his hobbies. The researchers also note that since childhood, Alexander was accustomed to doing “what his grandmother Ekaterina and father Pavel liked.” “Alexander lived with two minds, had two ceremonial appearances, double manners, feelings and thoughts. He learned to please everyone - it was his innate talent, which ran like a red thread through his entire future life.”

Family

In 1793, Alexander married Louise Maria Augusta of Baden (who took the name Elizaveta Alekseevna in Orthodoxy) (1779-1826, daughter of Karl Ludwig of Baden). Both of their daughters died in early childhood:

Maria (1799-1800)

Elizabeth (1806-1808)

The paternity of both girls in the imperial family was considered doubtful - the first was considered born from Czartoryski; the father of the second was the cavalry guard headquarters captain Alexey Okhotnikov.

For 15 years, Alexander practically had a second family with Maria Naryshkina (nee Chetvertinskaya). She bore him two daughters and, according to some reports, even insisted that Alexander dissolve his marriage to Elizaveta Alekseevna and marry her. Researchers also note that from his youth Alexander had a close and very personal relationship with his sister Ekaterina Pavlovna. Historians with the most playful imagination count 11 of his illegitimate children.

Alexander was also the godfather of the future Queen Victoria (baptized Alexandrina Victoria in honor of the Tsar) and the architect Vitberg (baptized Alexander Lavrentievich), who created the unrealized project of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior.

The last years of the reign of Alexander I

Alexander claimed that under Paul “three thousand peasants were distributed like a bag of diamonds. If civilization were more developed, I would end serfdom, even if it cost me my head.” While addressing the issue of widespread corruption, he was left without people loyal to him, and filling government positions with Germans and other foreigners only led to greater resistance to his reforms from the “old Russians.” Thus, the reign of Alexander, begun with a great opportunity for improvement, ended with the heavier chains on the necks of the Russian people. This happened to a lesser extent due to the corruption and conservatism of Russian life and to a greater extent due to the personal qualities of the tsar. His love of freedom, despite its warmth, was not based in reality. He flattered himself, presenting himself to the world as a benefactor, but his theoretical liberalism was associated with an aristocratic willfulness that did not tolerate objections. “You always want to teach me! - he objected to Derzhavin, the Minister of Justice, “but I am an emperor, and I want this and nothing else!” “He was ready to agree,” wrote Prince Czartoryski, “that everyone could be free if they freely did what he wanted.”

Moreover, this patronizing temperament was combined with the habit of weak characters of seizing every opportunity to delay the application of the principles which he publicly supported. Under Alexander I, Freemasonry became almost a state organization (at that time the largest Masonic lodge of the Russian Empire, “Pont Euxine,” which the emperor himself visited in 1820, was located in Odessa), but was prohibited by a special imperial decree in 1822. The Tsar himself, before his passion for Orthodoxy, patronized the Freemasons and in his views was more of a republican than the radical liberals of Western Europe.

In the last years of the reign of Alexander I, A. A. Arakcheev acquired special influence in the country. A manifestation of conservatism in Alexander's policy was the establishment of military settlements in 1815. At one time, mystically minded persons, in particular Baroness Kridener, had a great influence on him.

On August 16, 1823, Alexander ordered the drawing up of a secret manifesto, in which he accepted the abdication of his brother Constantine from the throne and recognized his younger brother, Nicholas, as the legal heir. The last year of Alexander's life was overshadowed by the death of his only undisputed child, his 16-year-old illegitimate daughter Sophia.

Death

Emperor Alexander died on December 1, 1825 in Taganrog, in the house of Papkov, of a fever with inflammation of the brain at the age of 47. A. Pushkin wrote an epitaph: “ He spent his entire life on the road, caught a cold and died in Taganrog" In the house where the sovereign died, the first memorial museum in Russia named after him was organized, which existed until 1925.

The sudden death of the emperor gave rise to a lot of rumors among the people (N.K. Schilder, in his biography of the emperor, cites 51 opinions that arose within a few weeks after Alexander’s death). One of the rumors reported that " the sovereign fled in hiding to Kiev, there he will live in Christ with his soul and begin to give advice that the current sovereign Nikolai Pavlovich needs for better governance of the state».

Later, in the 30-40s of the 19th century, a legend appeared that Alexander, allegedly tormented by remorse (as an accomplice in the murder of his father), staged his death far from the capital and began a wandering, hermit’s life under the name of Elder Fyodor Kuzmich (died January 20 (February 1) 1864 in Tomsk ). This legend appeared during the life of the Siberian elder and became widespread in the second half of the 19th century.

In the 20th century, unreliable evidence appeared that during the opening of the tomb of Alexander I in the Peter and Paul Cathedral, carried out in 1921, it was discovered that it was empty. Also in the Russian emigrant press in the 1920s, a story by I. I. Balinsky appeared about the story of the opening of the tomb of Alexander I in 1864, which turned out to be empty. The body of a long-bearded old man was allegedly placed in it in the presence of Emperor Alexander II and the Minister of the Court Adlerberg.

The question of the identity of Fyodor Kuzmich and Emperor Alexander has not been clearly defined by historians. Only a genetic examination could definitively answer the question of whether Elder Theodore had any relation to Emperor Alexander, the possibility of which is not ruled out by specialists from the Russian Center for Forensic Expertise. Archbishop Rostislav of Tomsk spoke about the possibility of conducting such an examination (the relics of the Siberian elder are kept in his diocese).

In the middle of the 19th century, similar legends appeared regarding Alexander’s wife, Empress Elizaveta Alekseevna, who died after her husband in 1826. She began to be identified with the recluse of the Syrkov Monastery, Vera the Silent, who first appeared in 1834 in the vicinity of Tikhvin.

Conclusion

The life and death of Alexander I is truly a dramatic page in Russian history; to an even greater extent, this is the drama of a living human personality, forced to combine, it seems, such incompatible principles as “power” and “humanity.”

He was one of the first to talk about the importance of limiting autocratic power, introducing a Duma and a constitution. With him, voices calling for the abolition of serfdom began to sound louder, and a lot of work was done in this regard. During the reign of Alexander I, Russia was able to successfully defend itself against an external enemy that conquered all of Europe. The Patriotic War of 1812 became the personification of the unity of the Russian people in the face of external danger.

None of the major state undertakings of Alexander I can be considered, on the one hand, outside of his desire to justify his accession to the throne, “to bring happiness to people,” and on the other, without a constant feeling of fear for his life, which he could pay if his policies would come into conflict with the powerful conservative nobility.

Literature

Alexander I//Russian biographical dictionary: in 25 volumes. - St. Petersburg-M., 1896-1918.

Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich."Emperor Alexander I: Experience of historical research." - Pg., 1915.

N. K. Schilder. Emperor Alexander the First. His life and reign. - In 4 volumes: volume 1 - before accession to the throne. v.2 - 1801-1810. vol.3 - 1810-1816. v.4 - 1816-1825. - St. Petersburg: “New Time” by A. S. Suvorin, 1897.

Valishevsky K.. Alexander I. History of the reign. In 3 volumes - St. Petersburg: “Vita Nova”, 2011. - vol. 1 - p. 480. -ISBN 978-5-93898-318-2- vol. 2 - p. 480. -ISBN 978-5-93898-320-5- vol. 3 - p. 496 -ISBN 978-5-93898-321-2- Series: Biography

http://www.seaofhistory.ru/shists-331-1.html

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80_I

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D1%91%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%9A%D1%83%D0%B7%D1%8C%D0 %BC%D0%B8%D1%87

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BF,_%D0%A4%D1%80%D0%B5 %D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA_%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%80

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC

After the death of Paul I as a result of a conspiracy, the throne was taken by his eldest son, Alexander Pavlovich . Immediately after ascending the throne, he canceled a number of decisions of his father, which caused the greatest rejection of the noble class; in particular, the guarantees given under Catherine II in the Letters of Grant to the nobility and cities of 1785 were confirmed. Some relaxations in censorship were introduced , the ban on the activities of private printing houses has been lifted.

Under Alexander I, the so-called Secret Committee began to play an important role (operating from 1801 to 1803), which included V. P. Kochubey, P. A. Stroganov, A. A. Chartorysky, N. N. Novosiltsev . This unofficial body played a decisive role in the development of reforms carried out during the reign of Alexander I. The committee attached a special role to the peasant issue. On February 20, 1803, in accordance with the decree “On free cultivators,” landowners received the right to free their peasants from serfdom. At the same time, the peasant received a land plot, but for a fairly large ransom. Very few landowners took advantage of this decree, but its very appearance demonstrated to society the government’s readiness to make concessions in resolving the peasant issue.

At meetings of the Secret Committee, the possibility of reforming the public administration system was also discussed. The result of these discussions was the publication of a decree in September 1802 on the reform of higher state institutions. Instead of boards, corresponding ministries were created , and, in addition, the State Treasury, which had the same powers as the created ministries. The Committee of Ministers controlled the activities of ministries and their interaction with each other.

Further reform of the public administration system is connected with the work of M. M. Speransky , who in 1807 took the position of Secretary of State of Alexander I, and in 1808 - the position of Minister of Justice. According to Speransky’s project, the legislative body of the empire was to become the State Duma, which would have priority in the adoption of the country’s laws. Ministries were to become the executive body of government. The State Council was supposed to be the advisory body under the emperor. , which should have included the highest dignitaries. At the same time, the emperor retained the preemptive right to appoint ministers and introduce legislative initiatives.

The class structure of society was supposed to be made more mobile (that is, it was about the possibility of moving from one class to another with the acquisition of the corresponding civil rights). As a result, most of Speransky’s transformation plans remained only on paper, but they had a certain influence on the views of Alexander I, who on January 1, 1810 issued a decree on the formation of the State Council. M. M. Speransky became the head of his office. Although the functions of the new body were exclusively advisory, even in this form they did not live up to Speransky’s hopes. At the same time, the functions and powers of the ministries were clarified (June 1811). Their activities were to be based on the principle of unity of command, i.e. all responsibility for decision-making fell on the minister. Speransky's initiative to reform the Senate was blocked by the State Council.

Despite the fact that most of Speransky’s proposals were not implemented, even the transformations that Alexander I undertook caused a sharply negative reaction from a significant part of the nobles. Therefore, in March 1812, Speransky was fired and sent into retirement, and then exiled to Perm.

The State Sejm, consisting of two chambers, was to become the highest legislative body with the right to veto, while the legislative initiative remained in the hands of the emperor, the head of the executive branch. In addition, it was supposed to introduce some civil liberties and judicial independence. However, like the previous proposals of M.M. Speransky, these projects were not implemented, which was to some extent due to the deterioration of the foreign policy situation.

Military settlements. Arakcheevshchina

The name of the Minister of War A. A. Arakcheev is associated with the creation of military settlements (since 1810). (In fact, the establishment of military settlements was initiated by Alexander I himself, and not by Arakchey). With the help of these military settlements it was supposed to optimize the costs of maintaining the army. According to Arakcheev, military villagers had to simultaneously work, that is, provide for themselves, and engage in military service.

This initiative did not meet with understanding among the military. Unrest periodically broke out in military settlements, which were brutally suppressed. Although in the end it was possible to save money on the maintenance of the army, the quality of military training noticeably decreased. In addition, their maintenance placed a heavy burden on the residents of the areas where these military settlements were located. They were never officially abolished and virtually disappeared by 1857.

Foreign policy of Alexander I

1801-1812 At the very beginning of his reign, Alexander I began to improve relations with England and in 1801 an Anglo-Russian treaty “on mutual friendship” was signed. Thus, Russia and England formed a coalition against France. Relations with France were finally severed in 1804, when Russia joined the 3rd anti-French coalition (England, Austria and Sweden).

In November 1805, the Russian-Austrian army was defeated at Austerlitz . After this defeat, Austria announced its withdrawal from the war. By 1806, the 4th coalition against France (Russia, Prussia, England, Sweden) was formed. That same year, the Prussian army was defeated by the French at Jena and Auerstedt, and as a result Napoleon occupied Berlin. The Russian army managed to win a number of important battles (near Pultusk in December 1806, near Preussisch-Eylau in January 1807). However, in the summer of 1807, Russian troops were defeated in East Prussia, and Russia was forced to sign the Peace of Tilsit (June 25, 1807).

In accordance with the agreement signed in Tilsit, Russia entered into an alliance with France, broke off relations with England and recognized all recently made territorial acquisitions by France. In addition, Russia managed to preserve the integrity of Prussia, which Napoleon intended to divide into several state entities. Russia joined the continental blockade of England, which implied a refusal to trade with this state. This was all the more painful for Russia, given the fact that England was its main economic partner.

In 1808, a meeting between Alexander I and Napoleon I took place in Erfurt. Based on the terms of the signed agreement, Russia was forced to declare war on Austria in 1808, but in reality Russian troops did not take part in the war. According to the same agreement, Russia felt more or less free in the north-east of Europe and therefore in 1808-1809. Russia waged military operations with Sweden. The result of this war was the inclusion of Finland into Russia, which received self-government and the Asland Islands (Treaty of Friedrichsham (1809)).

East direction. The entry into the Russian Empire of a number of territories in the Caucasus (Eastern Georgia, Megrelia, Imereti) became the cause of the war with Iran (1804-1813). According to the Gulistan Peace Treaty, Iran was forced to recognize the Baku, Ganja and Derbent principalities for Russia. The next war with Turkey (1806-1812) was also successful for Russia. In accordance with the Bucharest Peace Agreement, Bessarabia, part of Georgia and Abkhazia were ceded to Russia. In addition, Russia managed to defend autonomy for Serbia from Turkey.

War of 1812 The French army invaded Russian territory on June 12, 1812. On the side of France were the troops of Austria and Prussia, which not long before had concluded military alliances with Napoleon. The numerical superiority was on the side of the French army (almost twice). War Minister Barclay de Tolly led the Russian army. From the very beginning of hostilities 1. a); Barklay de Tolly's army began to retreat inland to join the 2nd army of P.I. Bagration. Despite the connection of the armies, Napoleon occupied Smolensk. The advance of one of Napoleon’s armies towards St. Petersburg was stopped: in July 1812, the French were defeated at Klyastitsy.

Due to the ongoing offensive of the French troops and under the influence of public opinion, M.I. Kutuzov was appointed commander-in-chief of the Russian army. On August 26, 1812, the Battle of Borodino took place on the outskirts of Moscow, as a result of which Kutuzov decided to withdraw troops and to preserve the -mission to surrender Moscow for further hostilities. On September 2, Napoleon's army entered the deserted city.

On October 6, the French left Moscow, which by that time had almost completely burned out. Russian troops, having gained strength in the Tarutino camp, were able to successfully resist the French under Maloyaroslavets and near Krasny, thus preventing Napoleon from advancing south. Therefore, the French army was forced to retreat along the devastated Smolensk road. In addition to this, the early frosts also caused serious damage to Napoleon’s army: the French were completely unprepared for this. Napoleon himself on November 23, having managed to cross the river with the remnants of his army. Berezina, fled from Russia.

December 25 Alexander I issued a manifesto ending the war. However, the military actions of the Russian army did not end there: in January 1813, Russian troops occupied Warsaw, Hamburg, and Berlin. The new anti-French coalition, now consisting of Russia, England, Prussia and Austria, inflicted a crushing defeat on Napoleon at Leipzig (October 4-7, 1813). In March 1814, the Allies occupied Paris, after which Napoleon was forced to abdicate the throne and was exiled to Fr. Elbe.

During the Congress of Vienna, which began in September 1814, Napoleon fled from Fr. Elba and began hastily recruiting troops to continue the fight (“one hundred days”). On June 6, 1815, the Battle of Waterloo took place between the troops of Napoleon, on the one hand, and England and Prussia, on the other. Napoleon suffered a crushing defeat, after which he was exiled to Fr. Saint Helena. As a result of the Vienna Congress, on May 28, 1815, an agreement was signed between its participants, according to which Bessarabia and Finland remained with Russia. As a new acquisition, Russia received the Duchy of Warsaw (which arose during the Peace of Tilsit), transformed into the Kingdom of Poland.

On September 14, 1815, a Holy Alliance was concluded between Russia, Austria and Prussia, which later included most European countries. The forces of the Holy Alliance suppressed revolutionary uprisings in a number of regions of Western Europe.

Decembrist revolt

1814-1815 secret societies of officers began to emerge throughout Russia, which discussed at their meetings projects for the abolition of serfdom.

The “Union of Salvation” was created in 1816 by the Trubetskoy brothers, the Muravyov-Apostles, S.P. Trubetskoy and I.D. Yakushkin. In addition to the abolition of serfdom, the society set as its goal the introduction of a constitution in Russia. In 1818, this organization transformed into the Union of Welfare. The charter of the new organization was more streamlined and did not address the issues of the abolition of serfdom and the constitution. The Union had a branched structure throughout Russia. At the beginning of 1821, the Union was disbanded, and the Northern and Southern societies were formed.

The Southern Society included P.I. Pestel, M.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, the Muravyev-Apostol brothers and others. The main document of the Southern Society - “Russian Truth” by P. I. Pestel - provided for the declaration of Russia as a republic, the abolition of the class structure of society, and the abolition of serfdom. The Northern Society included I. I. Pushchin, K. F. Ryleev, M. S. Lunin and others. According to the “Constitution” written by N. M. Muravyov, Russia was supposed to become a constitutional monarchy built on a federal basis. The class division was also abolished, but upon liberation the peasants received only a small plot of land.

The coup was planned to take place in the summer of 1826. However, the death of Alexander I on November 19, 1825 forced the participants in the conspiracy to speed up preparations for the uprising. Alexander I had no children and therefore the main contender for the throne should have been Alexander’s brother Constantine, who abdicated the throne back in 1822. Thus, the third brother, Nicholas, became the heir to the throne. On December 12, Constantine confirmed his decision to abdicate the throne and an oath of allegiance to Nicholas was scheduled for December 14. On this day, the participants in the conspiracy decided to disrupt the planned oath. Some members of the Union proposed arresting the entire royal family and killing Nicholas himself (P. G. Kakhovsky).

The leader of the uprising was to be S.P. Trubetskoy. The Decembrists were supported by part of the army, especially in the south. On the morning of December 14, the conspirators brought their subordinate military units to Senate Square, where the oath of office to the new emperor was soon to take place. However, by this time the Senate and the State Council had already managed to swear allegiance to Nicholas and thus time was lost. Trubetskoy himself did not come to Senate Square and instead of him, E.P. Obolensky was hastily appointed as leader. By the end of the day, the artillery forces arrived and dispersed the rebels and Senate Square was cleared. At the end of December, S.I. Muravyov-Apostol and M.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin raised the Chernigov regiment, but their resistance was soon suppressed.

The trial of the Decembrists sentenced five participants in the uprising to hanging (Pestel, Ryleev, S. Muravyov-Apostol, Bestuzhev-Ryumin and Kakhovsky). More than a hundred people were sentenced to exile and exile.

(In historiography, the question is being developed: was the Decembrist uprising doomed to defeat. The traditional answer of researchers is yes. The famous work of N. Ya. Eidelman, dedicated to the Decembrists, is called “The Doomed Detachment.” However, the St. Petersburg writer and researcher Ya. A. Gordin believes that the Decembrist movement had prospects. He fits the uprising into the general European context, which allows him to demonstrate examples when typologically similar armed uprisings (for example, in Spain) were successful.)

Key dates and events:

1801-1825 - years of reign of Alexander I,

1815 - introduction of a constitution in the Kingdom of Poland,

1805 - Battle of Austerlitz,

1809 - Treaty of Friedrichsham,

1812 - Peace of Bucharest,

September 2, 1812 - French troops occupied Moscow,

1813 - Peace of Gulistan,

1816 - formation of the Union of Salvation,

1818 - formation of the Union of Welfare,

1821 - formation of the Northern and Southern societies,

• Assassination of Paul I
• Promises of reform
• Peace with Napoleon
• Speransky
• Patriotic War
• Mystic Emperor
• Holy Alliance
• Arakcheevshchina
• Pushkin era
• Birth of the opposition
• Fedor Kuzmich

1. Assassination of Paul I and accession to the throne

In a nutshell: The elite hated Emperor Paul I, and his son Alexander became the natural center of gravity for the conspirators. Alexander allowed himself to be convinced that his father would be deposed peacefully; without interfering with the conspiracy, he actually sanctioned the coup, which ended in regicide. Upon his accession to the throne, Alexander promised that under him everything would be like under his grandmother, Catherine II.

Alexander was born in 1777, he was the eldest son of Paul and from childhood he was preparing to rule Russia. He was taken away from his father early, and his entire upbringing was completely directed by his grandmother, Catherine II. Relations between Catherine and Paul were tense, and this created a specific expectation that the empress would want to transfer the throne to her grandson, bypassing her son - there were rumors about the existence of such a will. However, modern historians, who have studied this issue extensively and specifically, are inclined to believe that such a will never existed.

State Museum-Reserve "Pavlovsk"

When Paul finally became emperor, conflict quickly developed between him and the noble elite. This led to the fact that Alexander began to be perceived as the natural center of the opposition. Paul was not a tyrant at all: he was a very hot-tempered man, but easy-going and did not hold a grudge. In fits of rage, he could insult people, humiliate them, make wild decisions, but at the same time he was not cruel and bloodthirsty. This is a very bad combination for a ruler: he was not feared enough, but because of his rudeness and absolute unpredictability, he was hated. There was general hostility towards Paul's policies. Among his decisions there were many unpopular ones: there was a recall of the famous campaign in Persia; there were sharp fluctuations between anti-Napoleonic and pro-Napoleonic policies; there was a constant struggle with noble privileges.

But a palace coup, of which there were many in the 18th century, was impossible until the conspirators secured the consent of the heir to the throne. Alexander at least did not interfere with the conspiracy. He considered himself a more suitable monarch than his father, and on the other hand, he was afraid to take upon himself the sin of parricide. He really wanted to believe that he could force Paul to recant and avoid bloodshed, and Alexander allowed the conspirators to convince him of this. His grandmother killed her own husband and did not feel the slightest concern about this, but it was harder for him: he was raised differently.

Wikimedia Commons

Upon learning that Paul did not abdicate the throne at all, but was killed, Alexander fainted. It was rumored that soldiers gathered under the walls of the palace and said that the nobles had killed both the emperor and the heir. The moment was completely critical: the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna walked along the corridors of the palace and said in German: “I want to reign.” In the end, Alexander went out onto the balcony and said: “Father died of apoplexy. With me, everything will be like with my grandmother,” he left the balcony and fainted again.

By giving his consent to the conspiracy, Alexander believed that major reforms were needed for Russia. His accession was met with general jubilation - and Alexander, feeling this, instantly began to act. All those exiled by Paul were amnestied; the Secret Chancellery was disbanded; the collegiums that had existed since Peter's time were replaced by ministries - according to the French model. Alexander appointed the old nobles of Catherine’s time to the posts of ministers, and made his young confidants their deputies, with whom he was going to reform the country.

Wikimedia Commons

2. Promises of reform

In a nutshell: In theory, Alexander was in favor of the abolition of serfdom, the limitation of autocracy, and even the transformation of Russia into a republic. However, all reforms were constantly postponed until later and fundamental changes were never achieved.

It is not worth calling the beginning of Alexander’s reign liberal: the word “liberal” is used in hundreds of different meanings and has become somewhat meaningless.

Nevertheless, the emperor did harbor plans for monumental reforms. The fact is that Alexander, like all Russian monarchs, with the exception of Paul, was an unconditional and firm opponent of serfdom. The creation of state institutions that could limit the power of the emperor was also actively discussed. But Alexander immediately fell into the standard trap of any Russian monarch-reformer - on the one hand, it is necessary to limit his own power, but if you limit it, then how to carry out reforms?

Musée historique de Lausanne

Alexander's teacher was the Swiss thinker Frederic Cesar La Harpe, who was a republican by conviction. Having already become emperor, Alexander constantly said that his ideal was a Swiss republic, that he wanted to make Russia a republic, and then leave with his wife somewhere on the Rhine and live out his days there. At the same time, Alexander never forgot that he was a ruler, and when he could not come to an agreement with his inner circle, he said: “I am an autocratic monarch, this is how I want it!” This was one of his many internal contradictions.

During Alexander's reign there were two waves of reform: the first was associated with the establishment of the Secret Committee and the State Council (the period from accession to the throne until 1805-1806), the second - with the activities of Speransky after the Peace of Tilsit in 1807. The task of the first stage was the creation of stable institutions of state power, forms of class representation, as well as “indispensable laws”, that is, the limitation of arbitrariness: the monarch must be under the authority of the law, even if created by himself.

At the same time, reforms were constantly pushed back to later: this was Alexander’s political style. The transformations were supposed to be grandiose - but someday later, not now. A case in point is the Decree on Free Plowmen, a temporary measure by which Alexander planned to accustom public opinion to the fact that serfdom would eventually be abolished. The decree allowed the landowners to set the peasants free by concluding contracts with them and giving them a piece of land. Before the abolition of serfdom, a little more than one percent of the peasant population of Russia took advantage of the Decree on free cultivators. At the same time, the decree remained the only real step towards resolving the peasant issue taken on the territory of the Great Russian part of the empire until 1861.

Another example is the creation of ministries. It was assumed that the minister must countersign the imperial decree: any decree other than the imperial one must also have the signature of the minister. At the same time, it is natural that the formation of the cabinet of ministers was completely the prerogative of the emperor; he could replace anyone who did not want to countersign this or that decree. But at the same time, this was still a restriction on making spontaneous, arbitrary decisions characteristic of the reign of his father.

Of course, the political climate has changed, but serious institutional changes take time. The problem with Alexander's political style was that he created a huge inertia of uncontrollable expectations and constantly postponed real steps to implement them. People were waiting for something all the time, and expectations naturally tend to lead to disappointment.

3. Relations with Napoleon

Wikimedia Commons

In a nutshell: In the first years of his reign, Alexander fought with Napoleon; The first mass propaganda campaign in Russian history was carried out: Napoleon was declared an aggressor and the Antichrist. Conservatives rejoiced: during the war, Alexander had no time for “liberal” sentiments. The conclusion of the Treaty of Tilsit by Alexander and Napoleon in 1807 came as a shock to both the elite and the people: the country's official position changed to pro-French.

In 1804, Russia entered into an alliance with Austria and entered into the third anti-Napoleonic coalition, which also included England and Sweden. The campaign ends with a terrible defeat at Austerlitz in 1805. In conditions of war and military defeat, it is very difficult to carry out any reforms - and the first wave of Alexander’s reformist activities comes to an end. In 1806, a new war begins (this time Russia in alliance with England, Prussia, Saxony, Sweden), Napoleon again celebrates victory and concludes a peace treaty with Alexander that is beneficial for himself. Russia suddenly changes its anti-French policy to a sharply pro-French one.

Wikimedia Commons

The Peace of Tilsit meant a respite for both Russia and France. Napoleon understood that Russia is a huge country that is difficult to break. He considered England his main enemy, and after the defeat at the Battle of Trafalgar Battle of Trafalgar- a naval battle between English and Franco-Spanish naval forces. Occurred on October 21, 1805 at Cape Trafalgar on the Atlantic coast of Spain near the city of Cadiz. During the battle, France and Spain lost 22 ships, while England lost none. he could not count on a military invasion of the island and his main weapon was the economic blockade of England, the so-called continental blockade. As a result of the peace, Russia officially pledged to join it - however, it subsequently systematically violated this obligation. In exchange, Napoleon actually gave Finland to Alexander: he guaranteed his neutrality in the war with Sweden. It is interesting that the annexation of Finland is the first campaign of conquest in Russian history that was not approved by public opinion. Perhaps because everyone understood that this was by agreement with Napoleon, there was a feeling that we had taken away someone else’s.

Peace with Napoleon was a shock not only for the elite, but for the entire country. The fact is that the active anti-Napoleonic campaign of 1806 is the first example of national political mobilization in Russian history. Then a militia was created, the peasants were told in the tsar’s manifestos that Napoleon is the Antichrist, and a year later it turns out that this Antichrist is our friend and ally, with whom the emperor hugs on a raft in the middle of the Neman River.

Wikimedia Commons

Lotman often quoted an anecdote: two men are talking to each other, and one says: how did our Orthodox father Tsar hug the Antichrist? And the second one says: uh, you didn’t understand anything! He made peace with him on the river. So, he says, he first baptized him, and then made peace.

The national mobilization of 1806 is a very important plot for understanding the era. The fact is that the ideology of a single nation, a national body, is of German origin. In Germany, the idea was considered liberal and was directed against all the then twenty-one monarchies and for the unity of the German people. Moreover, the idea of ​​a single people implied the destruction of class barriers or at least their softening: we are all one, therefore we should all have the same rights. In Russia, everything was the other way around: we are a single people, therefore the peasants should have a father landowner, and the landowners should have a father tsar.

In 1806, the conservatives became very animated, they felt that for the first time under Alexander they were in favor: at last, dubious liberals, people who compared themselves with the Jacobins, were being removed from affairs. Suddenly, in 1807, along with the Peace of Tilsit, a complete change in policy occurred: the conservatives were again pushed somewhere, and Speransky appeared in their place. Moreover, it is obvious that Alexander had no illusions about peace with Napoleon and that is why he invited Speransky: he needed a person who would quickly and effectively prepare the country for a new big war.

But formally Russia supported France. Therefore, a very powerful opposition has formed within the country. Conservatives met at Derzhavin's house in 1811, six months before the war; Admiral Shishkov gave a speech there about love for the Fatherland, while the guests actively criticized peace with France. This was the first case of an open unofficial ideological campaign. As soon as Alexander realized that war would happen very soon, the first thing he did was dismiss Speransky and appoint Shishkov in his place. It was a strong ideological gesture addressed to public opinion.

After the Peace of Tilsit, Napoleon continued to expand his empire. In 1809, he finally defeated Austria and began to prepare for a decisive war with England, but before that he was going to force Russia to fulfill the Tilsit agreements. Napoleon did not intend to conquer Russia: he believed that he would quickly defeat the Russian army and Alexander would be forced to sign another peace treaty with him. This was a monstrous strategic miscalculation.

State Hermitage Museum

In Russia, the Minister of War was Barclay de Tolly, who was tasked with developing a plan of action for the Russian army in the event of a war with Napoleon. And Barclay, being a very educated man, developed a campaign plan based on the wars of the Scythians against the Persians. The strategy required the presence of two armies: simultaneously retreating and luring the enemy into the interior of the country, using scorched earth tactics. Back in 1807, Barclay met the famous historian of antiquity Niebuhr and began to consult with him about the Scythians, not knowing that Niebuhr was a Bonapartist. He was not a stupid man, he guessed why Barclay was asking him, and told General Dumas, the writer’s father, about this, so that the French general staff would take into account the thoughts of the Russian general staff. But no one paid attention to this story.

4. Speransky: rise and fall

State Hermitage Museum

In a nutshell: Mikhail Speransky was the number two man in the country and a person of Napoleonic proportions: he had a plan to transform all aspects of the life of the state. But he made many enemies, and Alexander had to hand over his assistant in order to strengthen his own reputation before the War of 1812.

Mikhail Speransky was a priest, the son of a village priest, he studied at the provincial theological seminary, then at the Alexander Nevsky Lavra. Capable seminarians were a personnel reserve for the bureaucracy: the nobles wanted to go only to military or diplomatic service, and not to civil service. As a result, they paid attention to Speransky: he becomes the secretary of Prince Kurakin, then begins to serve in the office of Prince Kochubey, a member of the Secret Committee, and very quickly becomes his confidant; Finally, he is recommended to Alexander. After the Peace of Tilsit, Alexander quickly made him Secretary of State, in fact his closest assistant, the number two man in the state. Alexander, like any autocrat, needed someone who could be entrusted with all unpopular decisions, in particular raising taxes in order to stabilize the financial system.

Speransky was the only one who had a systematic plan for unified transformations in Russia. It is not clear whether this plan was feasible; it is important that one person could cover the politics of the country as a whole - external, internal, financial, administrative, class. He had a project for the gradual abolition of serfdom, a gradual transition to a constitutional monarchy through the creation of the State Council, first as an advisory body, then as a body limiting autocracy. Speransky considered it necessary to create a unified set of laws: this would protect the country from administrative arbitrariness. In personal conversations with Speransky, Alexander supported this project. A State Council was created, but never received greater powers. Krylov’s fable “Quartet” was written for the convening of the State Council, and its meaning is completely clear: decisions must be made by one person - the sovereign himself.

Speransky had gigantic plans to educate the personnel elite. He blocked automatic promotion through the table of ranks and introduced an exam for promotion to the eighth grade (a relatively high rank), which was supposed to weed out the uneducated layer from the highest positions. Elite educational systems were created, including the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum. He was a man of fantastic ambition, of Napoleonic proportions, a personality of the flesh of the early romantic period. He believed that he himself could take out an entire country and completely transform and change it.

There was a narrow layer of people who endlessly trusted Speransky (remember Prince Andrei’s initial love for him from War and Peace). But the wider elite, of course, hated him terribly. Speransky was considered the Antichrist, a thief, they said that he was in cahoots with Napoleon and wanted to get the Polish crown. There was no sin that would not be pinned on him; The asceticism of Speransky's life was well known, but they talked about his millions. He accumulated hatred on himself: the emperor’s sister Ekaterina Pavlovna secretly gave Karamzin Speransky’s draft to read, and he wrote a furious rebuke - “A Note on Ancient and New Russia.” Joseph de Maistre Joseph de Maistre(1753-1821) - Catholic philosopher, writer, politician and diplomat, founder of political conservatism. bombarded Alexander with letters against Speransky. His resignation in March 1812 became practically a national holiday - just like the murder of Paul 12 years earlier.

In fact, Alexander had to hand over Speransky. He fired him without explanation, saying only: “For reasons known to you.” Speransky’s verbose letters to Alexander have been published, in which he tries to understand the reason for the sovereign’s disfavor, and at the same time justify himself. Speransky went into exile - first to Nizhny, then to Perm. There were many legends about Alexander’s last conversation with Speransky. Allegedly, the emperor told him that he must remove Speransky, because otherwise he would not be given money: what this could mean under the conditions of an absolute monarchy is difficult to understand. They said that, having announced his resignation to Speransky, Alexander hugged him and cried: he was generally easy to cry. He later told some that Speransky was taken away from him and he had to make a sacrifice. To others - that he exposed treason and even intended to shoot the traitor. To others he explained that he did not believe the denunciations and, if he had not been forced by lack of time before the war, he would have spent a year studying the accusations in detail.

Most likely, Alexander did not suspect Speransky of treason, otherwise he would hardly have returned him to public service and made him governor of Penza and governor of Siberia. Speransky's resignation was a political gesture, a demonstrative sacrifice of public opinion, and it greatly strengthened Alexander's popularity before the war.

5. Patriotic War, Foreign Campaign and Partisan Myth

Panorama Museum "Battle of Borodino"

In a nutshell: The “People’s” War of 1812 is a myth: in fact, luring the enemy into the interior of the country was part of Barclay’s original plan, implemented by Kutuzov, and the partisans were led by officers. Due to the propaganda of the war as a “patriotic” one, the phenomenal achievement of the Russian army - the march to Paris - was forgotten.

In June 1812, France attacked Russia, and by September Napoleon occupied Moscow. At the same time, this period of hostilities was not a time of defeats, as, for example, the first months after Hitler’s invasion were. Barclay’s “Scythian” plan included drawing the enemy into the country’s territory and depriving him of normal supplies. This was an exceptionally carefully thought out and carried out military operation by the Russian General Staff to break the most powerful army in the world.

At the same time, of course, there was a massive expectation of a decisive battle: “We retreated silently for a long time, / It was annoying, we were waiting for a battle...” There was enormous psychological pressure on Barclay: according to the majority, he had to fight a general battle. Finally, Barclay could not stand it anymore and began to prepare for battle. At this moment, Alexander, unable to withstand the same public pressure, removed Barclay and appointed Kutuzov in his place. Arriving at the army, Kutuzov immediately continued to retreat further.

State Hermitage Museum

Kutuzov was in a simpler position than Barclay. He, as the new commander, had credibility, as well as a Russian surname, which was important at that moment. The new commander-in-chief managed to win a few more weeks and several hundred kilometers. There is a lot of debate about whether Kutuzov was such a great commander as national mythology describes him? Maybe the main credit goes to Barclay, who developed the right plan? It is difficult to answer, but in any case, Kutuzov managed to brilliantly implement the military action plan.

Tver Regional Library named after. A. M. Gorky

After the end of the war, historiography began to massively develop the myth of the people's guerrilla war. Although the partisan movement was never spontaneous, the volunteer detachments in the rear were led by officers of the active army. As Dominique Lieven showed in his recent book “Russia against Napoleon,” thanks to the same historiographical legend, the most incredible achievement of the Russian army—the campaign in Paris—was completely erased from national memory. This did not become part of the myth of the war, which we still call “the war of the twelfth year,” although the war was 1812-1814. The European campaign did not provide an opportunity to play out the idea of ​​the “club of the people’s war”: what kind of people are they if this is all happening in Germany and France?

6. Mystic Emperor

State Hermitage Museum

In a nutshell: Alexander was not alien to the mysticism that was fashionable at that time. The Emperor convinced himself that his father was killed because Providence wanted it. He saw the victory over Napoleon as a divine sign that he had done everything right in life. Alexander did not complete the reforms also for mystical reasons: he was waiting for instructions from above.

The emperor's mystical hobbies began very early. Alexander was a profound mystic at least from his accession to the throne, and perhaps even earlier. This determined not only the tsar’s personal life, his circle of friends and interests, but also state policy. Perhaps the murder of his father, which Alexander at least did not interfere with, also played a role. It was very difficult for a nervous and conscientious man like the emperor to live with such a burden. He needed to find an excuse for his action, but how? The answer is simple: Providence ordered it so. Perhaps this is where the fascination with mysticism stems.

Alexander saw some higher meaning in every incident. Here is an episode that the emperor repeatedly retold to his entourage. At a church service in 1812, at the most difficult historical moment, the Bible fell out of his hands - he opened it to the 90th Psalm A thousand shall fall at your side, and ten thousand at your right hand; but it will not come near you: you will only look with your eyes and see the retribution of the wicked. For you said: “The Lord is my hope”; You have chosen the Most High as your refuge; no evil will befall you, and no plague will come near your dwelling; for He will command His angels about you - to guard you in all your ways: they will carry you in their hands, lest you dash your foot against a stone; you will step on the asp and basilisk; You will trample upon the lion and the dragon (Ps. 9:7-13).
and saw that it fit perfectly into the current situation. It was then that Alexander realized that Russia would win the war.

According to the mystical teachings of that time, in order to read and understand such signs, a person must work on himself. As moral purification occurs, one becomes familiar with ever higher wisdom, and at the highest level of this esoteric wisdom, faith turns into evidence. That is, you no longer need to believe, because divine truth is open to direct contemplation.

Alexander was not the first mystic in Russia: in the 18th century there was a strong mystical movement in Russia. Some Moscow Freemasons entered the circle of the world esoteric elite. The first Russian book that had a worldwide resonance, apparently, was “Some Features of the Inner Church” by Ivan Lopukhin, one of the main Russian mystics. The treatise was originally published in French, and only then was published in Russian. Speransky, Alexander’s closest associate, who shared the emperor’s hobbies and collected a mystical library for him, actively corresponded with Lopukhin. The Emperor himself often met and corresponded with many of the greatest mystics of his era - both Russian and Western European.

Of course, these views could not but affect politics. Hence, Alexander’s reluctance to complete many reforms and projects is growing: someday the Lord will reveal the truth to me, then he will overshadow me with his sign, and I will carry out all the reforms, but for now it is better to wait and wait for the right moment.

Alexander spent his whole life looking for secret signs, and, of course, after the victory over Napoleon, he was finally convinced that he was doing everything right: there were terrible trials, defeats, but he believed, waited, and then the Lord was with him, suggested the right decisions, indicated that he is the chosen one who will restore peace and order in Europe after the Napoleonic wars. The Holy Alliance and all subsequent policies were part of this idea of ​​​​the coming mystical transformation of the whole world.

7. The Holy Alliance and the Destiny of Alexander

Wikimedia Commons

In a nutshell: After the victory over Napoleon, Alexander believed that his life’s destiny was realized in the Holy Alliance: by concluding an alliance with Catholic Austria and Protestant Prussia, Orthodox Russia seemed to have created a united Christian Europe. The task of the union was to maintain peace and prevent the overthrow of the legitimate government.

The war is won, the Russian army is in Paris, Napoleon is in exile - in Vienna the victors decide the fate of Europe. Alexander finds his destiny in uniting Europe after the victory over Napoleon. This is how the Holy Alliance is born. It is led by three European emperors - the Orthodox Russian Tsar (Alexander I), the Catholic Austrian Emperor (Franz II) and the Protestant Prussian King (Frederick Wilhelm III). For Alexander, this is a mystical analogue of the biblical story of the worship of kings.

Alexander believed that he was creating a single European union of peoples, this was his purpose and it was for this that there was a gigantic war; for this he had to send his own father to the next world; This was the reason for all the failed reforms of the first half of his reign, because his historical role was that of a man who would create a united Christian Europe. Even if not through formal unification into one denomination - this is completely unimportant; as Ivan Lopukhin wrote, the Church exists within a person. And within all Christians it is one. What church you go to - Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox - does not matter. The formal task of the union is to maintain peace in Europe, guided by the idea of ​​​​divine origin and the unconditional legitimacy of the existing government.

Historisches Museum der Stadt Wien

When the Austrian Foreign Minister Metternich saw the draft union treaty written by Alexander, he was horrified. Metternich was completely alien to all this mystical mentality and carefully edited the document in order to cross out completely odious things, but then he still advised the Austrian emperor to sign it, because the alliance with Alexander was too important for Austria. The emperor signed - however, under Alexander’s strict promise not to publish the treaty. Perhaps he was afraid that all of Europe would think that the monarchs had lost their minds. Alexander made a corresponding promise - and a few months later he published the document.

At first, the Holy Alliance worked in many ways. One of the most striking examples is the Greek uprising of 1821. Many were confident that Russia would help the Orthodox brothers in their fight against the Turks. The Russian army was stationed in Odessa, the expeditionary force in other places in the south: they were waiting for a signal to set off to liberate the Greeks of the same faith. The whole history of both Russia and the world could have gone differently, but Alexander, relying on the principles of the Holy Alliance, refused to enter into conflict with the legitimate Turkish government, and the dream of a liberated Greece was sacrificed to the ideology of the Holy Alliance. About the Greek uprising, Alexander said that this was the instigation of the “synagogues of Satan” hidden in Paris. They allegedly planned to induce Russia to violate the rules of the Holy Alliance, the main work of his life, and throw up such temptations that the Russian emperor would go astray.

Until 1848, the Holy Alliance remained a truly functioning political mechanism. It was useful primarily for Austria: it helped the state, torn apart by ethnic and religious contradictions, survive for more than 30 years.

8. Arakcheev and Arakcheevism

State Hermitage Museum

In a nutshell: It is incorrect to describe the reign of Alexander by the opposition “good Speransky - bad Arakcheev.” The emperor's two main assistants respected each other, and at the same time drew all the hatred from him onto themselves. In addition, Arakcheev is only an effective executor, but not the initiator of the creation of military settlements: it was Alexander’s idea.

Arakcheev was from a poor noble family; since childhood he dreamed of artillery service. Artillery officers were the military elite - to get into the corresponding school, you had to have strong patronage. The Arakcheev family could not afford their son’s education; they needed him not only to be accepted into the corps, but also to be enrolled there on a government fee. And one can imagine what kind of willpower the teenager must have had if he persuaded his father to go with him to St. Petersburg. The two of them stood at the door of the office of the director of the Artillery Corps, Pyotr Melissino, and did not leave: they did not eat, did not drink, they got wet in the rain, and every time Melissino left, they fell at his feet. And in the end the director broke down.

Having no connections or money, Arakcheev became a very large artillery general. He did not have any outstanding military qualities, apparently he was a bit of a coward, but he became a brilliant organizer and engineer. By the War of 1812, Russian artillery was superior to French. And after the war, Alexander, seeing such a self-made man in his environment, began to trust him very much; perhaps he decided that he had found a second Speransky. In addition, Arakcheev’s incredible success was due to the fact that Alexander’s entourage, who knew about the regicide, avoided talking to the emperor about his father, and Arakcheev, who was very close to Paul, kept his portrait, and constantly began communication with Alexander with a toast “To your health.” the late emperor! - and this style of communication gave the emperor the opportunity to believe that the person close to Paul did not suspect his terrible crime.

Alexander had an idea on how to maintain a combat-ready army in the conditions of the Russian economy. The permanent conscript army was a heavy burden on the budget: it was impossible to either partially demobilize it or properly maintain it. And the emperor decided to create military units that, during periods of peace, would spend part of the time engaged in combat training, and part of the time in agriculture. Thus, people would not be torn off the ground and at the same time the army would feed itself. This idea was also connected with Alexander’s mystical sentiments: military settlements are extremely reminiscent of the utopias of Masonic towns.

Arakcheev, who headed the Imperial Chancellery, was categorically against it - now we know this. But he was a servant of the sovereign and took up this idea with his usual business acumen and efficiency. He was a cruel, domineering, strong and absolutely ruthless person and with an iron hand he carried out an assignment in which he himself did not believe. And the result exceeded all expectations: the military settlements were economically justified, and military training in them did not stop.

From the book “Historical description of clothing and weapons of Russian troops.” St. Petersburg, 1857

Military settlements were abandoned only after Alexander's death due to resistance from both officers and peasants, who perceived it as slavery. It’s one thing when you’re a soldier: the recruiting process is terrible, but at least you’re a soldier. And here you live at home with your wife, and at the same time you walk in formation, wear a uniform, your children wear a uniform. For Russian peasants this was the kingdom of the Antichrist. One of Nicholas’s first orders was the removal of Arakcheev, who had previously retired after the murder of his mistress Nastasya Minkina by serfs, from all positions and the abolition of military settlements: the new emperor, like everyone else, hated Arakcheev and, moreover, was a pragmatist, not a utopian .

There is a contrast between “the evil Arakcheev and the good Speransky,” two faces of Alexander’s reign. But anyone who begins to understand more deeply in the Alexander era notes with amazement that these two statesmen deeply sympathized with each other. They probably felt a kinship as bright people who had made their own careers among well-born envious people. Of course, Speransky considered himself an ideologist, a reformer, partly Napoleon, and Arakcheev - an executor of the sovereign's will, but this did not prevent them from respecting each other.

9. The beginning of Russian literature

In a nutshell: According to the romantic concept, in order for a nation to become great, it needs a genius who will express the people's soul. The older generation of poets unanimously appointed young Pushkin to the role of the future genius, and it is amazing that he fully justified this trust.

Russian literature in the form in which we know it began in the 18th century - but during Alexander’s reign it reached maturity. The main difference between the literature of the Alexander period and the literature of the 18th century is the idea of ​​the national spirit. A romantic idea appears that a nation, a people are a single organism, a single personality. Like every individual, this nation has a soul, and its history is like the destiny of a person.

The soul of a people is primarily expressed in its poetry. Echoes of these thoughts can be found in Radishchev. In “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” he says that good legislation can be created based on the composition of folk songs: “Whoever knows the voices of Russian folk songs admits that there is something in them that signifies spiritual sorrow.<…>Know how to establish the reins of government on this musical disposition of the people's ear. In them you will find the formation of the soul of our people.” Accordingly, before writing laws, go to a tavern and listen to songs.

State Tretyakov Gallery

Of course, in Alexander’s time literature did not become truly mass-produced; peasants did not begin to read it. Already in the 1870s, after the abolition of serfdom, Nekrasov will ask: “When will a man carry not Blucher / And not my stupid lord - / Belinsky and Gogol / From the market?” But nevertheless, there is a huge growth in readership. Karamzin’s “History” becomes a milestone. It is very important that the position of court historiographer appears, who must write the history of the Russian state, and it is no less important that the most famous writer in the country is hired for this position. In 1804, Karamzin was the face of national literature and far surpassed everyone else in terms of fame and recognition. Of course, there was Derzhavin, but he was perceived as an old man, and Karamzin was only 38 years old. In addition, the odes for which Derzhavin became famous were popular only in a narrow circle, and Karamzin was read by every educated person in the country. And throughout his entire life, Karamzin wrote history, forming a national identity.

Later, among Karamzin’s admirers, the literary and political circle “Arzamas” arose, one of the goals of which was the formation of a reformist ideology and assistance to Alexander in the fight against retrogrades. Therefore, “Arzamas,” as Maria Lvovna Mayofis showed in her recent study, was a natural union of a new generation of statesmen and a new generation of writers, who should be the language and embodiment of this ideology. Zhukovsky, who was the literary voice of the Holy Alliance, enters the circle, Vyazemsky, Batyushkov enters, and young Pushkin appears. Nothing is clear about him yet, he is very young - but everyone already knows that he is a genius, he acquires this fame as a child.

All-Russian Museum of A. S. Pushkin

The idea of ​​a genius, in which the national spirit is embodied, swept Europe at the beginning of the 19th century. A nation is great only when it has a great poet to express its collective soul—and all countries are busy searching for or nurturing their own geniuses. We have just defeated Napoleon and occupied Paris, but we still don’t have such a poet. The uniqueness of the Russian experience is that all the older generation of leading poets unanimously appoint the same and still very young person to this position. Derzhavin says that Pushkin “even at the Lyceum outdid all writers”; Zhukovsky writes to him: “To the victorious student from the defeated teacher” after the release of the rather student poem “Ruslan and Lyudmila”; Batyushkov visits the sick Pushkin in the Lyceum infirmary. Five years later, Karamzin saves him from exile to Solovki, despite the fact that Pushkin tried to seduce his wife. Pushkin has not yet had time to write almost anything, but they are already saying about him: this is our national genius, now he will grow up and do everything for us. One had to have amazing character traits not to break under the yoke of such responsibility.

If we resort to mystical explanations, then we can say that this was all correct, because Pushkin lived up to all expectations. Here he is 19 years old, he has just graduated from the Lyceum, wanders around St. Petersburg, plays cards, goes to see girls and falls ill with a venereal disease. And at the same time he writes: “And my incorruptible voice / Was the echo of the Russian people.” Of course, at the age of 19 you can write anything about yourself, but the whole country believed it - and for good reason!

In this sense, the Alexander era is the Pushkin era. It is a rare case when a school definition is absolutely correct. It turned out worse with world fame: for this we had to wait two more generations - until Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, and then Chekhov. Gogol was famous in Europe, but did not achieve great world fame. Another person was needed who was able to travel to Europe and act as an agent of Russian literature. He was Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev, who first, with his own works, explained to the European public that Russian writers were worth reading, and then it turned out that in Russia there are such geniuses as Europe had never even dreamed of.

10. Birth of the opposition

In a nutshell: The first opposition to the state's course in Russia were conservatives, dissatisfied with Alexander's reform initiatives. Opposed to them were officers who had just conquered Paris and believed that they could not be ignored—it was from them that the Decembrist societies were formed.

The idea that there is a society in a country that has the right to be heard and influence public policy originates in the 19th century. In the 18th century there were only loners like Radishchev. He considered himself an oppositionist, but most considered him crazy.

The first intellectual movement of the 19th century that was dissatisfied with power was the conservatives. Moreover, since these people were “greater monarchists than the monarch himself,” they could not refuse absolute support for the autocrat. Criticism of Alexander was impossible for them, because he was a positive alternative to Napoleon - the embodiment of world evil. And in general, their entire worldview was based on Alexander. They were unhappy that Alexander was undermining the centuries-old foundations of the Russian autocracy, but their aggression was taken out first on the Secret Committee, then on Speransky and never reached the emperor. After the Peace of Tilsit, a powerful movement arose within the elite, which found itself in opposition not so much to the sovereign himself as to his policies. In 1812, on the eve of the war, this group came into power: Admiral Shishkov became Secretary of State instead of Speransky. Conservatives hope that after victory they will begin to shape public policy.

Brown University Library

In opposition to them is another center of freethinking, emerging in the army and even more so in the guard. A significant number of free-thinking young officers are beginning to feel that the time has come to implement the reforms that they were promised throughout the 12 years of Alexander’s reign. Usually an important role is assigned to the fact that they saw Europe during the Foreign Campaign - but how beautiful Europe is, one could read from books. The most important thing is that these people's self-esteem increases greatly: we defeated Napoleon! In addition, in war, the commander generally enjoys great independence, and in the Russian army - especially: the commander of the unit, even in peacetime, was entirely entrusted with supplying and maintaining the combat readiness of the garrison, and the level of his personal responsibility was always huge, colossal. These people are accustomed to being responsible and feel that they can no longer be ignored.

Officers begin to form circles, the initial goal of which is to prevent conservatives from consolidating and prevent the sovereign from carrying out the reforms that he promised. At first there were few of them, for the most part they were guards and the noble elite; among them are such names as Trubetskoy and Volkonsky, the top of the aristocracy. But there was someone from the bottom. Let's say Pestel is the son of the Siberian governor-general, a terrible embezzler and criminal; Ryleev was from poor nobles.

At the beginning of the 19th century, secret societies were generally in fashion, but participants in these first secret societies in Russia applied for government positions under the current government. “Arzamas” was founded by major officials, and then future Decembrists joined it. At the same time, early Decembrist circles and other secret societies that arose and disappeared at that time were associated with Masonic lodges.

It's hard to say what Alexander thought about this. He is credited with the phrase “I am not their judge,” which was allegedly said when he learned about the proto-Decembrist societies. Later, Nikolai could not forgive his brother that, knowing about the existence of secret societies that were plotting a coup, he did not tell him anything.

One should not think that under Alexander there was no censorship and repression: censorship was fierce, there were arrests, there was a defeat after the riot in the Semenovsky regiment The Semyonovsky Life Guards Regiment rebelled in 1820 after the commander Yakov Potemkin, beloved by soldiers and officers, was replaced by Arakcheev’s protege Fyodor Schwartz. For this, the guardsmen were imprisoned in a fortress, subjected to corporal punishment, and the regiment was disbanded.. But the pressure was selective; it was Nikolai, taught by the bitter experience of his older brother, who first organized the Third Department The third department of His Imperial Majesty's Own Chancellery is the highest body of political investigation during the reign of Nicholas I and Alexander II., whose goal is to keep everything under control. Although those who retrospectively project their ideas about the NKVD and the KGB onto the Third Department are mistaken: the department was small, there were few people, control was not total.

11. Death, chaos of succession and the myth of Fyodor Kuzmich

State Hermitage Museum

In a nutshell: Alexander bequeathed the crown not to his second, but to his third brother, Nicholas, but hid the will so that he would not be killed like his father. This turned into chaos of succession and the Decembrist uprising. The version that Alexander did not die, but went to the people under the name of Fyodor Kuzmich, is nothing more than a myth.

In the second half of the 1810s, it became finally clear that Alexander would not have children - heirs to the throne. According to Paul's decree on succession to the throne, the throne should in this case pass to the next brother, in this case, Konstantin Pavlovich. However, he did not want to reign and actually excluded himself from the succession to the throne by marrying a Catholic. Alexander drew up a manifesto transferring the throne to his third brother, Nicholas. This will was kept in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin; Konstantin, Nikolai, Prince Golitsyn, Metropolitan Filaret and no one else knew about its existence.

Why the manifesto was not published was a mystery for a long time: after all, the catastrophe that occurred after the death of Alexander was largely due to this terrible ambiguity regarding the succession to the throne. This riddle was solved not by a historian, but by a mathematician - Vladimir Andreevich Uspensky. According to his hypothesis, Alexander well remembered the conditions under which he himself ascended the throne, and understood that the natural center of crystallization of a conspiracy is always the official heir - without relying on the heir, a conspiracy is impossible. But Constantine did not want to reign, and no one knew that the throne had been bequeathed to Nicholas - so Alexander eliminated the very possibility of consolidating the opposition.

Wikimedia Commons

On November 19, 1825, Alexander died in Taganrog and a succession crisis began with two emperors who refused to be emperors. The news of the death came to St. Petersburg, and Nicholas was faced with a choice: either to swear allegiance to Constantine, who was the governor-general of Warsaw, or to announce the hidden manifesto. Nicholas decided that the latter was too dangerous (he was suddenly bombarded with information about a possible conspiracy), and ordered everyone to swear allegiance to his elder brother, hoping that the further transfer of the throne would be soft: Constantine would come to St. Petersburg and abdicate the throne.

Nicholas writes to his brother: Your Majesty, they swore allegiance to you, reign - in the hope that he will say “I don’t want” and come to renounce. Constantine is horrified: he understands perfectly well that you cannot renounce the position of emperor if you are not an emperor. Konstantin writes in response: Your Majesty, it is I who congratulate you. He answered: if you don’t want to reign, come to the capital and abdicate the throne. He refuses again.

In the end, Nikolai realized that he could not get his brother out of Warsaw. He declared himself the heir and demanded a re-oath - and this is a completely outrageous situation with a living emperor, to whom everyone had just sworn allegiance and who did not abdicate. This situation gave the Decembrist conspirators the opportunity to explain to the soldiers that Nicholas went against the law.

Rumors that Alexander did not die, but went to walk around Rus', appeared much later than his death. They formed around Fyodor Kuzmich, a strange old man who lived in Tomsk, had a military bearing, spoke French and wrote in incomprehensible codes. Who Fyodor Kuzmich was is unknown, but it is obvious that he had nothing to do with Alexander I. Leo Tolstoy, who was very worried about the idea of ​​escaping, briefly believed in the legend of Alexander and Fyodor Kuzmich and began writing a novel about it. As a sensitive person who felt this era well, he quickly realized that this was complete nonsense.

Tomsk Regional Museum of Local Lore

The legend that Alexander did not die was the result of a combination of factors. Firstly, in the last year of his reign he was in severe depression. Secondly, he was buried in a closed coffin - which is not surprising, since the body was transported from Taganrog to St. Petersburg for about a month. Thirdly, there were all these strange circumstances of succession to the throne.

However, the last argument, if you think about it, speaks quite clearly against the hypothesis about the disappeared emperor. After all, then one must actually suspect Alexander of treason: the only person who can foresee the chaos of succession to the throne quietly leaves without appointing an heir. In addition, in Taganrog, Alexander was buried in an open coffin and more than 15 people were present at the funeral. There were also many people at his deathbed; It’s hard to imagine that every single one of these people could have been silenced.

There is also something completely indisputable. In 1825, Countess Edling, a former maid of honor to Empress Roksandra Sturdza, who had once been in a mystical alliance with Alexander, was in Crimea. Having learned that the sovereign was in Taganrog, she wrote to the empress asking permission to come and pay her respects. She replied that she could not allow her to do this without her husband, who had gone to review the troops. Then Alexander returned and Edling was allowed to come, but when she reached Taganrog, the emperor was already dead. The Countess was at the funeral service and could not help but recognize Alexander; her letter to her daughter contains the words: “His beautiful face was disfigured by traces of a terrible illness.” If Alexander was planning an escape, it would have been much easier for him to refuse her a visit than to invite a complete stranger and drag her into such an unthinkable scam.