LECTURE III

The reign of Paul I. – His place in history. – Biographical information. – The general nature of Paul’s government activities. – The peasant question under Paul. - Paul's attitude towards other classes. – Society’s attitude towards Pavel. – The state of finances during the reign of Paul and his foreign policy. - Results of the reign.

Significance of Paul's reign

Portrait of Emperor Paul. Artist S. Shchukin

At the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries lies the four-year reign of Paul.

This short period, which until recently was in many respects under censorship ban, has long incited the curiosity of the public, like everything mysterious and forbidden. On the other hand, historians, psychologists, biographers, playwrights and novelists were naturally attracted to the original personality of the married psychopath and the exceptional setting in which his drama took place, which ended so tragically.

From the point of view from which we consider historical events, this reign is, however, of secondary importance. Although it lies at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries. and separates the “age of Catherine” from the “age of Alexander”, it in no case can be considered as transitional. On the contrary, in the historical process of development of the Russian people that interests us, it is some kind of sudden invasion, some unexpected squall that came from outside, confused everything, turned everything temporarily upside down, but could not interrupt for a long time or deeply change the natural progress of the ongoing process. In view of the significance of the reign of Paul and Alexander, as soon as he ascended the throne, there was nothing left to do but to cross out almost everything that his father had done and, having quickly healed the shallow but painful wounds inflicted by him on the state body, take the matter from the place where Catherine’s hand, weakened and wavering with age, stopped.

This view of this reign does not at all prevent us, of course, from being fully aware of the profound influence that its horrors had on Emperor Alexander personally and on the final formation of his character. But more on that later. We also do not deny the significance of some individual government acts of Paul and do not deny the unfortunate influence on Alexander, and then on Nicholas, of that court-military parade-ground system that has since been established at the Russian court. But these circumstances, of course, do not convey to Paul’s reign the significance of a transitional, connecting era between two adjacent reigns...

In any case, the reign of Paul itself is interesting for us not for its tragicomic phenomena, but for the changes that at that time nevertheless occurred in the situation of the population, and for the movement in the minds that the terror of government power caused in society. Even more important for us are international relations, which were determined, on the one hand, by the characteristics of Paul’s character, and on the other, by the great events that took place in the West.

Personality of Emperor Paul

We will therefore not engage here in a detailed presentation of Paul’s biography and refer everyone interested in it to the well-known work of Schilder, who dealt specifically with the personal biography of Paul, and to another, shorter biography, compiled largely according to Schilder by Mr. Shumigorsky. Actually, for our purposes, the following brief biographical information will suffice. Pavel was born in 1754, eight years before Catherine's accession to the throne. His childhood passed in completely abnormal conditions: Empress Elizabeth took him away from his parents as soon as he was born and began raising him herself. As a child, he was surrounded by different mothers and nannies, and his entire upbringing was of a greenhouse nature. Soon, however, he was assigned a man who was an outstanding personality in his own right, namely Count. Nikita Ivanovich Panin. Panin was a statesman with a very broad mind, but he was not a thoughtful teacher and was not attentive enough to his work.

Catherine was distrustful of Panin, and it was clear to her that he was a bad teacher, but she was afraid to eliminate him, since, having taken the throne wrongly, she was afraid of the rumors that were circulating in certain circles that she wanted to eliminate Paul completely . Afraid of giving rise to these rumors and knowing that public opinion such is that Pavel is intact while he is in Panin’s care, Catherine did not dare to eliminate Panin, and he remained Pavel’s educator with her. Pavel grew up, but Catherine did not feel any closeness to him; she had a low opinion of his mental and spiritual qualities. She did not allow him to participate in government affairs; she even removed him from matters of military administration, to which he had a great inclination. Paul's first marriage was short-lived and unsuccessful, and his wife, who died from childbirth, managed to further ruin the already bad relationship between Paul and Catherine. When Paul married for the second time the Württemberg princess, who received the name Maria Feodorovna upon converting to Orthodoxy, Catherine gave Gatchina to the young couple and left them to lead the life of private people in it; but when they had children, she acted towards Paul and his wife in the same way as Elizabeth herself had previously acted towards her, that is, she selected the children from the very moment they were born and raised them herself. The removal of Paul from state affairs and the disrespectful treatment of him by the empress's favorites, especially Potemkin, constantly added fuel to the fire and aroused in Paul hatred of the entire Catherine's court. He had been waiting impatiently for thirty years when he would finally have to reign and rule in his own way.

Portrait of Maria Feodorovna, wife of Emperor Paul. Artist Jean-Louis Voile, 1790s

It should be added that at the end of Catherine’s reign, Paul even began to fear that Catherine would remove him from the throne; It is now known that such a plan was indeed outlined and did not come true, apparently only because Alexander did not want or did not dare to ascend the throne besides his father, and this circumstance made it difficult to implement Catherine’s already mature intentions.

When Paul ascended the throne, then the hatred that had accumulated in his soul for everything that his mother did began to be realized. Without a clear idea of ​​the real needs of the state, Pavel began to indiscriminately undo everything that his mother had done, and with feverish speed to carry out his semi-fantastic plans, developed by him in the solitude of Gatchina. In appearance, in some respects, he was returning to his old ways. Thus, he restored almost all the old economic boards, but did not give them correctly delimited competence, and meanwhile their old competence was completely destroyed by the establishment of state chambers and other local institutions. He had long ago come up with a special plan for the reorganization of the entire central administration; but this plan boiled down, in essence, to the abolition of all state institutions and to the concentration of the entire administration directly in the hands of the sovereign himself and could hardly be implemented in practice.

Reign of Emperor Paul

At the beginning of Paul's reign, however, two serious government measures were taken, the significance of which remained in the future. The first of these measures was the law on succession to the throne, which Paul developed while he was still heir and which was published by him on April 5, 1797. This law was intended to eliminate the arbitrariness in the appointment of the heir to the throne, which had dominated in Russia since the time of Peter and thanks to which happened in the 18th century. so many palace coups. The law issued by Paul, which was in force with minor additions until recently, introduced a truly strict order in the succession to the imperial throne in Russia, mainly through the male line. In connection with this, a detailed regulation was issued about the imperial family, and in order to provide material support for its members, a special economic institution was formed called “ustalov”, under whose jurisdiction were those palace peasants who had previously been exploited for the needs of the imperial court and to whom were listed Individual estates belonging to members of the royal family were now also included. All these peasants received the name “appanage”, and special institutions and special rules were created to manage them, thanks to which their position subsequently turned out to be more satisfactory than the position of ordinary serfs and even state-owned peasants, who were managed by the zemstvo police, who unscrupulously exploited them.

Paul especially persistently sought to destroy all those rights and privileges that were granted by Catherine to individual classes. Thus, he abolished letters of grant to cities and the nobility and not only destroyed the right of noble societies to submit petitions about their needs, but even abolished the exemption of nobles from corporal punishment in court.

There is an opinion that Paul, having a completely negative attitude towards the privileges of the upper classes, was sympathetic to the people and even allegedly sought to free the people from the tyranny of the landowners and oppressors.

Emperor Paul's measures regarding peasants

Perhaps he had some good intentions, but one can hardly attribute to him any seriously thought-out system in this regard. Usually, as proof of the correctness of this view of Paul, they point to the manifesto of April 5, 1797, which established Sunday rest and a three-day corvee, but this manifesto is not entirely accurately conveyed. They were categorically forbidden only to work on holidays for the landowner, and then, in the form of a maxim, it was said that three days of corvee was enough to maintain the landowner's economy. The very form of expression of this wish, in the absence of any sanction, indicates that it was not, in essence, a definite law establishing a three-day corvee, although it was subsequently interpreted as such. On the other hand, it must be said that, for example, in Little Russia, a three-day corvee would not be beneficial for the peasants, since a two-day corvee was practiced there according to custom. Another law, issued by Paul on the initiative of Chancellor Bezborodko in favor of the peasants, prohibiting the sale of serfs without land, applied only to Little Russia.

The position that Paul took in relation to peasant unrest and complaints from serfs about the oppression of landowners is extremely characteristic. At the beginning of Paul's reign, peasant unrest broke out in 32 provinces. Paul sent entire large detachments with Field Marshal Prince General to pacify them. Repnin at the head. Repnin very quickly pacified the peasants, taking extremely drastic measures. During the pacification of 12 thousand peasants in the Oryol province, the landowners Apraksin and Prince. Golitsyn, a whole battle took place, with 20 peasants killed and up to 70 wounded. Repnin ordered the murdered peasants to be buried behind the fence of the cemetery, and on a stake placed over their common grave he wrote: “Here lie criminals before God, the sovereign and the landowner, justly punished according to God’s law.” The houses of these peasants were destroyed and razed to the ground. Paul not only approved all these actions, but also issued a special manifesto on January 29, 1797, which, under the threat of such measures, ordered the uncomplaining obedience of serfs to the landowners.

In another case, the courtyard people of some landowners living in St. Petersburg tried to complain to Pavel about the cruelty and oppression they suffered from them. Pavel, without investigating the case, ordered the complainants to be sent to the square and punished with a whip “as much as their landowners themselves want.”

In general, Pavel is hardly guilty of striving to seriously improve the situation of the landowner peasants. He looked at the landowners as free police chiefs - he believed that as long as there were 100 thousand of these police chiefs in Russia, the peace of the state was guaranteed, and he was not averse to even increasing this number as much as possible, handing out state-owned peasants to private individuals with a wide hand: in four years he managed thus distribute 530 thousand souls of both sexes of state-owned peasants to various landowners and officials, seriously asserting that he was doing these peasants a favor, since the position of the peasants under state government, in his opinion, was worse than under the landowners, with which, of course, it was impossible to agree. The significance of the given figure of state-owned peasants distributed into private hands can be judged from the data given above on the number of peasants of different categories; but this figure is even more striking if we remember that Catherine, who willingly rewarded her favorites and other persons with peasants, nevertheless, during the entire 34 years of her reign, managed to distribute no more than 800 thousand souls of both sexes, and Paul distributed 530 in four years. thousand.

To this it should be added that at the very beginning of Paul’s reign, another act was issued against the freedom of the peasants: by decree of December 12, 1796, the transfer of peasants who settled on private lands among the Cossack lands in the Don region and in the provinces of Ekaterinoslav, Voznesenskaya, Caucasian and Tauride.

Russian enlightenment and clergy during the reign of Paul

Of the other classes, the clergy, whom Paul favored or at least wanted to favor, had the most reason to be pleased with Paul. Being a religious man and considering himself also the head of the Orthodox Church, Paul cared about the position of the clergy, but even here the results were sometimes strange. These concerns of his were sometimes of an ambiguous nature, so that one of his former mentors, his teacher of the law - and at that time already the Moscow Metropolitan - Plato, whom Paul treated with great respect in his youth, and even later, after his accession to the throne, found himself among those protesting against some of the measures that Paul took. The protest that Plato had to make concerned, among other things, a strange innovation - the awarding of orders to clergy. Plato thoroughly believed that, from a canonical point of view, it is completely unacceptable for civil authorities to reward church ministers, not to mention the fact that in general the wearing of orders does not at all correspond to the meaning of the priestly, and especially the monastic rank. The Metropolitan, on his knees, asked that Paul not award him the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called, but in the end he had to accept it. In itself, this circumstance does not seem to be particularly important, but it is characteristic precisely of Paul’s attitude towards the class that he most revered.

Much more important in a positive sense is Paul’s attitude towards religious educational institutions. He did quite a lot for them - he allocated a significant amount of money for them from the income from estates that formerly belonged to bishops' houses and monasteries and were confiscated by Catherine.

Under him, two theological academies were reopened - in St. Petersburg and Kazan - and eight seminaries, and both the newly opened and the previous educational institutions were provided with regular amounts: the academies began to receive from 10 to 12 thousand rubles. per year, and seminaries on average from 3 to 4 thousand, i.e. almost twice as much as what was allocated to them under Catherine.

Here we should also note Paul’s favorable attitude towards the heterodox clergy, even non-Christian ones, and especially his favorable attitude towards the Catholic clergy. This can be explained, perhaps, by his sincere religiosity in general and his high concept of pastoral duties; as for the Catholic clergy proper, there was also great importance his relation to the Maltese Spiritual Order of Knighthood. Paul not only took upon himself the supreme patronage of this order, but even allowed the formation of its special priory in St. Petersburg. This circumstance, explained by Paul’s strange fantasies, later led, as we will see, to very important consequences in the field of international relations.

Portrait of Paul I wearing the crown, robe and insignia of the Order of Malta. Artist V. L. Borovikovsky, around 1800

Another important fact in the sphere of church life under Paul was his rather peaceful attitude towards schismatics. In this one respect, Paul continued the policy of Catherine, the traces of whose reign he tried with such energy to destroy with all his other measures. At the request of Metropolitan Platon, he agreed to take a rather important measure - namely, he allowed the Old Believers to publicly worship in the so-called churches of the same faith, thanks to which, for the first time, a serious opportunity opened up for the reconciliation of the most peaceful groups of the Old Believers with the Orthodox Church.

As for Paul's attitude to secular education, his activity in this direction was clearly reactionary and, one might say, downright destructive. Even at the end of Catherine’s reign, private printing houses were closed, and then the publication of books was extremely reduced. Under Paul, the number of books published was reduced, especially in the last two years of his reign, to an absolutely insignificant number, and the very nature of the books also changed greatly - almost exclusively textbooks and books of practical content began to be published. The import of books published abroad was completely prohibited at the end of the reign; from 1800, everything printed abroad, regardless of content, even musical notes, did not have access to Russia. Even earlier, at the very beginning of the reign, the free entry of foreigners into Russia was prohibited.

Another measure was even more important - namely, the summoning to Russia of all young people who studied abroad, of whom there were 65 in Jena, 36 in Leipzig, and the prohibition of young people from traveling to foreign lands for educational purposes, in return for which it was proposed to open a university in Dorpat.

Government oppression during the reign of Paul

Out of hatred for revolutionary ideas and liberalism in general, Pavel, with the persistence of a maniac, pursued all external manifestations of liberalism. Hence the war against round hats and boots with cuffs, which were worn in France, against tailcoats and tricolor ribbons. Completely peaceful persons were subjected to the most serious penalties, officials were expelled from service, private individuals were arrested, many were expelled from the capitals and even sometimes to more or less remote places. The same penalties were imposed for violating that strange etiquette, the observance of which was mandatory when meeting with the emperor. Thanks to this etiquette, a meeting with the sovereign was considered a misfortune, which they tried in every possible way to avoid: when they saw the sovereign, their subjects hurried to hide behind gates, fences, etc.

Under such circumstances, those exiled, imprisoned in prisons and fortresses, and generally those who suffered under Paul for trifles committed were counted in the thousands, so that when Alexander, upon ascending the throne, rehabilitated such persons, according to some sources there were 15 thousand of them, according to others - more than 12 thousand people.

The oppression of Pavlovsk's reign had a particularly heavy impact on the army, starting with the soldiers and ending with the officers and generals. Endless drills, severe punishments for the slightest errors in the fruit, senseless teaching methods, the most uncomfortable clothing, extremely embarrassing for the common man, especially during marching, which should then have been brought almost to the art of ballet; finally, the mandatory wearing of curls and braids, greased with lard and sprinkled with flour or brick powder - all this complicated the difficulty of the already difficult soldier's service, which then lasted 25 years.

Officers and generals had to tremble hourly for their fate, since the slightest malfunction of one of their subordinates could entail the most severe consequences for them if the emperor was out of sorts.

Assessment of Paul's reign by Karamzin

These were the manifestations of government oppression, which developed under Paul to its highest limits. An interesting review of Pavel was made 10 years after his death by the strict conservative and staunch supporter of autocracy N.M. Karamzin in his “Note on Ancient and New Russia,” presented to Alexander I in 1811 as an objection to the liberal reforms that Alexander then planned. Being an antagonist of the liberal emperor, Karamzin, however, characterized the reign of his predecessor as follows: “Paul ascended the throne at a time favorable for autocracy, when the horrors of the French Revolution cured Europe of dreams of civil liberty and equality; but what the Jacobins did in relation to the republics, Paul did in relation to the autocracy; made me hate its abuses. Through a pitiful delusion of mind and as a result of many personal displeasures he suffered, he wanted to be John IV; but the Russians already had Catherine II, they knew that the sovereign, no less than his subjects, must fulfill his sacred duties, the violation of which destroys the ancient covenants of power with obedience and overthrows the people from the level of citizenship into the chaos of private natural law. Catherine's son could be strict and earn the gratitude of the fatherland; to the inexplicable surprise of the Russians, he began to reign in universal horror, not following any regulations except his own whim; considered us not subjects, but slaves; executed without guilt, rewarded without merit, took away the shame of execution, the beauty of reward, humiliated ranks and ribbons with wastefulness in them; frivolously destroyed the long-term fruits of state wisdom, hating his mother’s work in them; killed in our regiments the noble military spirit raised by Catherine, and replaced it with the spirit of corporalism. He taught heroes, accustomed to victories, to march, and turned nobles away from military service; despising the soul, he respected hats and collars; having, as a person, a natural inclination to do good, he fed on the bile of evil: every day he invented ways to frighten people and he himself was more afraid of everyone; thought to build himself an impregnable palace - and built a tomb... Let us note, - adds Karamzin, - a feature that is curious for the observer: during this reign of horror, according to foreigners, the Russians were even afraid to think; No! they spoke and boldly, falling silent only from boredom and frequent repetition, believed each other and were not deceived. A certain spirit of sincere brotherhood prevailed in the capitals; a common disaster brought hearts closer together and a magnanimous frenzy against the abuse of power drowned out the voice of personal caution.” Similar reviews are available in the notes of Vigel and Grech, also people of the conservative camp...

It should, however, be said that the “magnanimous frenzy” did not at all translate into action. Society did not even try to express its attitude towards Paul through any public protest. It hated in silence, but, of course, it was precisely this mood that gave the few leaders of the coup of March 11, 1801 the courage to suddenly eliminate Paul.

Economic and financial situation of Russia during the reign of Paul

The economic situation of the country could not change too much under Paul, due to the shortness of his reign; the financial situation of Russia under him was strongly dependent on his foreign policy and the bizarre changes that took place in it. Paul began by making peace with Persia and canceling the recruitment appointed under Catherine; refused to send 40 thousand army against the French Republic, which Catherine agreed to in 1795 thanks to the insistence of the English ambassador Whitworth, and demanded back the Russian ships sent to help the English fleet. Then the repayment of the assigned debt began. The government decided to withdraw part of the banknotes issued to the market; A ceremonial burning of banknotes worth 6 million rubles took place in the presence of Paul himself. Thus, the total number of issued banknotes decreased from 157 million rubles. to 151 million rubles, i.e. by less than 4%, but in this area, of course, any, even small, decrease is significant, because it indicates the government’s intention to pay off debts, and not increase them. At the same time, measures were taken to establish a stable exchange rate for the silver coin; a constant weight of the silver ruble was established, which was recognized as equal to the weight of four silver francs. Then the restoration of the relatively free customs tariff of 1782 was important. At the same time, Paul was not guided by sympathy for free trade, but did so out of a desire to destroy the tariff of 1793 issued by Catherine.

The introduction of a new tariff was supposed to promote the development of trade relations. The discovery of coal in the Donetsk basin was of great importance for large-scale industry. This discovery, made in the south of Russia, in a country poor in forests, immediately affected the state of industry in the Novorossiysk region. The digging of new canals under Paul, partly begun under Catherine, was important for the development of internal trade relations and for the delivery of certain products to the ports. In 1797, the Oginsky Canal was started and completed under Paul, connecting the Dniester basin with the Neman; Sievers dug a canal to bypass the island. Ilmen; One of the Ladoga Canal, the Syassky Canal, was started and work continued on the construction of the Mariinsky Canal. Under him, a porto franco was established in Crimea, beneficial for the revitalization of the southern region.

Foreign policy of Emperor Paul

But the improvement in the country's economic situation did not last long, and public finances soon had to experience further fluctuations. In 1798, the peaceful course of affairs suddenly stopped. Just at this time, Napoleon Bonaparte set off on his campaign to Egypt and casually captured the island of Malta in the Mediterranean Sea. Malta, which belonged to the Order of Malta, had an impregnable fortress, but the grand master of the order, for unknown reasons (treason was suspected), surrendered the fortress without a fight, took the archive, orders and jewelry and retired to Venice. The St. Petersburg Priory, which was under the patronage of Paul, declared the grand master deposed, and through for some time, to everyone's surprise, Paul, who considered himself the head of the Orthodox Church, personally took upon himself the grandmastership of this Catholic order, subordinate to the pope. There was a tradition that this strange step in Paul's mind was connected with a fantastic enterprise - with the widespread destruction of the revolution at its roots by uniting all the nobles of all countries of the world in the Order of Malta. Whether this was so is difficult to decide; but, of course, this idea was not realized. Having declared war on France and not wanting to act alone, Paul helped the English minister Pete create a fairly strong coalition against France. He entered into an alliance with Austria and England, which were then in hostile or strained relations with France, then the Kingdom of Sardinia and even Turkey, which suffered from Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt and Syria, were brought into the coalition. The alliance with Turkey was concluded on very favorable terms for Russia and, with a consistent policy, could be of great importance. Due to the fact that various Turkish lands were occupied by French troops (among other things, the Ionian Islands), it was decided to expel the French from there with united forces, and for this, the Porte agreed to allow and in the future to allow not only Russian merchant ships, but also warships, while at the same time undertaking the obligation not to allow foreign warships into the Black Sea. This treaty was to last for eight years, after which it could be renewed by mutual agreement of the contracting parties. The Russian fleet immediately took advantage of this right and, having carried a significant landing force through the straits on military ships, occupied the Ionian Islands, which were then under Russian rule until the Peace of Tilsit (i.e. until 1807).

On the continent of Europe it was necessary to act against the French armies in alliance with the Austrians and the British. Paul, following the advice of the Austrian emperor, appointed Suvorov to command the united armies of Russia and Austria. Suvorov was in disgrace at that time and lived on his estate under police supervision: he had a negative attitude towards Pavel’s military innovations and knew how to make him feel it under the guise of jokes and tomfoolery, for which he paid with disgrace and exile.

Now Pavel turned to Suvorov on his own behalf and on behalf of the Austrian emperor. Suvorov happily accepted command of the army. This campaign was marked by brilliant victories in Northern Italy over French troops and the famous crossing of the Alps.

But when northern Italy was cleared of the French, Austria decided that enough was enough and refused to support Suvorov in his further plans. Thus, Suvorov could not carry out his intention to invade France and march on Paris. This “Austrian treason” led to the defeat of the Russian detachment of General Rimsky-Korsakov by the French. Paul became extremely indignant, recalled the army, and thus the war between Russia and France actually ended here. The Russian corps sent against the French in Holland was not sufficiently reinforced by the British, who did not pay timely and monetary subsidies, to which they were obliged by the treaty, which also caused the indignation of Paul, who recalled his troops from this point.

Meanwhile, Napoleon Bonaparte returned from Egypt to carry out his first coup d'état: on the 18th Brumaire he overthrew the legitimate government of the Directory and became first consul, i.e., essentially the de facto sovereign in France. Paul, seeing that things were thus moving towards the restoration of monarchical power, albeit on the part of the “usurper,” changed his attitude towards France, expecting Napoleon to deal with the remnants of the revolution. Napoleon, for his part, cleverly pleased him by sending all Russian prisoners to their homeland without exchange at the French expense and providing them with gifts. This touched the knightly heart of Paul, and, hoping that Napoleon would be like-minded in all other matters, Paul entered into negotiations with him about peace and an alliance against England, to which Paul attributed the failure of his troops in Holland. It was all the easier for Napoleon to restore it against England because at that time the British took Malta from the French, but did not return it to the order.

Immediately, ignoring all sorts of international treatises, Paul imposed an embargo (arrest) on all English merchant ships, introduced drastic changes in the customs tariff and, in the end, completely prohibited the export and import of goods into Russia not only from England, but also from Prussia, since Prussia was in relations with England. With these measures directed against the British, Paul shocked all Russian trade. He did not limit himself to customs restrictions, but even ordered the arrest of all English goods in shops, which had never been done in such circumstances. Encouraged by Napoleon and not content with this series of hostile actions against England, Paul finally decided to sting her where it hurt most: he decided to conquer India, believing that he would do it easily by sending only Cossacks there. And so, on his orders, 40 regiments of Don Cossacks suddenly set off to conquer India, taking with them a double set of horses, but without fodder, in winter, without the right maps, through impassable steppes. Of course, this army was doomed to destruction. The senselessness of this act was so obvious to Paul’s contemporaries that Princess Lieven, the wife of Paul’s close adjutant general, even claims in her memoirs that this idea was undertaken by Paul with the aim of deliberately destroying the Cossack army, in which he suspected a freedom-loving spirit. This assumption, of course, is incorrect, but it shows what thoughts could be attributed to Paul by his associates. Fortunately, this campaign began two months before the removal of Paul, and Alexander, having barely ascended the throne, already on the very night of the coup, hastened to send a courier to return the ill-fated Cossacks; It turned out that the Cossacks had not yet reached the Russian border, but had already lost a significant part of their horses...

This fact especially clearly depicts the madness of Paul and the terrible consequences that the measures he took could have had. All these campaigns and wars of the last two years of Paul's reign, of course, had a most detrimental effect on the state of finances. At the beginning of his reign, Paul burned, as we have seen, 6 million banknotes, but the war required emergency expenses. Paul had to again resort to issuing banknotes, since there were no other means for waging war. Thus, by the end of his reign, the total amount of issued banknotes rose from 151 million to 212 million rubles, which finally dropped the exchange rate of the paper ruble.

Results of Paul's reign

Summing up now the results of Paul's reign, we see that the boundaries of the state territory remained under him in the same form. True, the Georgian king, pressed by Persia, in January 1801 declared his desire to become a Russian citizen, but the final annexation of Georgia took place under Alexander.

As for the situation of the population, no matter how harmful many of the measures taken by Paul were, they could not produce deep changes in four years. The saddest change in the situation of the peasants was, of course, the transfer from state-owned peasants to serfs of those 530 thousand souls that Paul managed to distribute to private individuals,

As for trade and industry, despite a number of favorable conditions at the beginning of the reign, by the end of its reign foreign trade was completely destroyed, while domestic trade was in the most chaotic state. Even greater chaos resulted in the state of higher and provincial government.

This was the state of the state when Paul ceased to exist.

See Paul's note about this, found in 1826 in the papers of the Emperor. Alexandra. It is printed in volume 90. “Collection. Rus. ist. general,” pp. 1–4. Currently, Paul's government activities have been subjected to new study and revision in the book prof. V. M. Klochkova, treated her very favorably. Despite the significant material collected by Mr. Klochkov in support of his apologetic attitude towards this activity, I cannot consider his conclusions convincing and, in general, remain with my previous view of the reign of Paul. I expressed my opinion about Mr. Klochkov’s work in a special review published in Russian Thought for 1917, No. 2.

Here, however, it should be mentioned that among the cancellations of the measures taken by Catherine there were also good deeds. These include: the release of Novikov from Shlisselburg, the return of Radishchev from exile to Ilimsk and the ceremonial release from captivity with special honors of Kosciuszka and other captured Poles held in St. Petersburg.

Pavel really tried to regulate and improve the situation of the state-owned peasants, as can be seen from the study of Mr. Klochkov, but all assumptions related to this remained, in essence, only on paper until the formation under the imp. Nicholas of the Ministry of State Property with gr. Kiselev at the head.

The first volume of op. Storch's "Gemälde des Russischen Reichs" was published in 1797 in Riga, the remaining volumes were published abroad; but Storch was persona grata at Paul's court: he was the emperor's personal reader. Maria Feodorovna and dedicated his book (volume 1) to Pavel.

“Russian Archive” for 1870, pp. 2267–2268. There is a separate publication edited by. Mr. Sipovsky. St. Petersburg, 1913.

S.S. Shchukin "Portrait of Emperor Paul I"

Pavel I Petrovich, Emperor of All Russia, son of Peter III and Catherine II, was born on September 20, 1754 in the Summer Palace of Elizabeth Petrovna in St. Petersburg.

Childhood

Immediately after birth, he came under the full care of his grandmother, Elizaveta Petrovna, who took upon herself all the worries about his upbringing, effectively removing his mother. But Elizabeth was distinguished by her fickle character and soon lost interest in the heir, transferring him to the care of nannies who were only concerned that the child would not catch a cold, get hurt or play naughty. In early childhood, a boy with a passionate imagination was intimidated by nannies: subsequently he was always afraid of the dark, flinched when there was a knock or an incomprehensible rustle, and believed in omens, fortune telling and dreams.

In the fifth year of his life, the boy began to be taught grammar and arithmetic, his first teacher F.D. Bekhteev used an original method for this: he wrote letters and numbers on wooden and tin soldiers and, lining them up in ranks, taught the heir to read and count.

Education

From 1760, Count N.I. became Pavel’s main educator. Panin, who was his teacher before the heir’s marriage. Despite the fact that Pavel preferred military sciences, he received a fairly good education: he could easily speak French and German, knew Slavic and Latin, read Horace in the original, and made extracts from books while reading. He had a rich library, a physics office with a collection of minerals, and a lathe for physical labor. He knew how to dance well, fencing, and was fond of horse riding.

O.A. Leonov "Paul I"

N.I. Panin, himself a passionate admirer of Frederick the Great, raised the heir in the spirit of admiration for everything Prussian at the expense of the national Russian. But, according to the testimony of contemporaries, in his youth Paul was capable, striving for knowledge, romantically inclined, with an open character, sincerely believing in the ideals of goodness and justice. After their mother's accession to the throne in 1762, their relationship was quite close. However, over time they worsened. Catherine was afraid of her son, who had more legal rights to the throne than herself. Rumors about his accession to the throne spread throughout the country; E. I. Pugachev appealed to him as a “son”. The Empress tried to prevent the Grand Duke from participating in discussions of state affairs, and he began to evaluate his mother’s policies more and more critically. Catherine simply “did not notice” her son’s coming of age, without marking it in any way.

Maturity

In 1773, Pavel married the Hesse-Darmstadt princess Wilhelmina (baptized Natalya Alekseevna). In this regard, his education was completed, and he was to be involved in government affairs. But Catherine did not consider this necessary.

In October 1766, Natalya Alekseevna, whom Pavel loved very much, died in childbirth with a baby, and Catherine insisted that Pavel marry a second time, which he did, going to Germany. Paul's second wife is the Württemberg princess Sophia-Dorothea-Augusta-Louise (baptized Maria Feodorovna). The encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron says this about the further position of Paul: “And after that, during the entire life of Catherine, the place occupied by Paul in government spheres was that of an observer, aware of his right to supreme management of affairs and deprived of the opportunity to use this right for changes in even the smallest details in the course of business. This situation was especially conducive to the development of a critical mood in Paul, which acquired a particularly sharp and bilious hue thanks to the personal element that entered him in a wide stream...”

Russian coat of arms during the reign of Paul I

In 1782, Pavel Petrovich and Maria Fedorovna went on a trip abroad and were warmly received in European capitals. Pavel even received a reputation there as the “Russian Hamlet.” During the trip, Pavel openly criticized his mother’s policies, which she soon became aware of. Upon the return of the grand ducal couple to Russia, the Empress gave them Gatchina, where the “small court” moved and where Paul, who had inherited from his father a passion for everything military in the Prussian style, created his own small army, conducting endless maneuvers and parades. He languished in inactivity, made plans for his future reign and made repeated and unsuccessful attempts to engage in state activities: in 1774 he submitted a note to the Empress, drawn up under the influence of Panin and entitled “Discussion on the state regarding the defense of all borders.” Catherine assessed her as naive and disapproving of her policies. In 1787, Pavel asks his mother for permission to go as a volunteer to the Russian-Turkish war, but she refuses him under the pretext of Maria Feodorovna’s approaching birth. Finally, in 1788, he took part in the Russian-Swedish war, but even here Catherine accused him of the fact that the Swedish Prince Charles was looking for rapprochement with him - and she recalled her son from the army. It is not surprising that gradually his character becomes suspicious, nervous, bilious and tyrannical. He retires to Gatchina, where he spends almost continuously for 13 years. The only thing that remains for him is to do what he loves: organizing and training “amusing” regiments, consisting of several hundred soldiers, according to the Prussian model.

Catherine hatched plans to remove him from the throne, citing his bad character and inability. She saw her grandson Alexander, son of Paul, on the throne. This intention was not destined to come true due to the sudden illness and death of Empress Catherine II in November 1796.

On the throne

The new emperor immediately tried to erase, as it were, everything that had been done during the 34 years of Catherine II’s reign, to destroy the order of Catherine’s reign that he hated - this became one of the most important motives of his policy. He also tried to suppress the influence of revolutionary France on the minds of Russians. His policy was developed in this direction.

First of all, he ordered the remains of Peter III, his father, who were buried in the Peter and Paul Fortress along with the coffin of Catherine II, to be removed from the crypt of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra. On April 4, 1797, Paul was solemnly crowned in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. On the same day, several decrees were promulgated, the most important of which were: the “Law on Succession to the Throne,” which assumed the transfer of the throne according to the principle of pre-Petrine times, and the “Institution on the Imperial Family,” which determined the order of maintenance of persons of the reigning house.

The reign of Paul I lasted 4 years and 4 months. It was somewhat chaotic and contradictory. He's been kept on a leash for too long. And so the leash was removed... He tried to correct the shortcomings of the former regime that he hated, but he did it inconsistently: he restored the Peter's colleges liquidated by Catherine II, limited local self-government, issued a number of laws leading to the destruction of noble privileges... They could not forgive him for this.

In the decrees of 1797, landowners were recommended to perform a 3-day corvee, it was forbidden to use peasant labor on Sundays, it was not allowed to sell peasants under the hammer, and Little Russians were not allowed to sell them without land. The nobles who were fictitiously enrolled in them were ordered to report to the regiments. From 1798, noble societies became under the control of governors, and nobles again began to be subjected to corporal punishment for criminal offenses. But at the same time, the situation of the peasants was not alleviated.

Transformations in the army began with the replacement of “peasant” uniforms with new ones, copied from Prussian ones. Wanting to improve discipline among the troops, Paul I was present every day at exercises and training sessions and severely punished the slightest mistakes.

Paul I was very afraid of the penetration of the ideas of the Great French Revolution into Russia and introduced some restrictive measures: already in 1797, private printing houses were closed, strict censorship was introduced for books, a ban was imposed on French fashion, and the travel of young people to study abroad was prohibited.

V. Borovikovsky "Paul I in the uniform of Colonel of the Preobrazhensky Regiment"

Upon ascending the throne, Paul, in order to emphasize the contrast with his mother, declared peace and non-interference in European affairs. However, when in 1798 there was a threat of Napoleon re-establishing an independent Polish state, Russia took an active part in organizing the anti-French coalition. That same year, Paul assumed the duties of Master of the Order of Malta, thus challenging the French Emperor who had seized Malta. In this regard, the Maltese octagonal cross was included in the state coat of arms. In 1798-1800, Russian troops successfully fought in Italy, and the Russian fleet in the Mediterranean Sea, which caused concern on the part of Austria and England. Relations with these countries completely deteriorated in the spring of 1800. At the same time, rapprochement with France began, and a plan for a joint campaign against India was even discussed. Without waiting for the signing of the corresponding agreement, Pavel ordered the Don Cossacks, who were already stopped by Alexander I, to set out on a campaign.

V.L. Borovikovsky "Portrait of Paul I in the crown, dalmatic and insignia of the Order of Malta"

Despite the solemn promise to maintain peaceful relations with other states, given upon accession to the throne, he took an active part in the coalition with England, Austria, the Kingdom of Naples and Turkey against France. The Russian squadron under the leadership of F. Ushakov was sent to the Mediterranean Sea, where, together with the Turkish squadron, it liberated the Ionian Islands from the French. In Northern Italy and Switzerland, Russian troops under the command of A.V. Suvorov won a number of brilliant victories.

The last palace coup of the passing era

Mikhailovsky Castle in St. Petersburg, where Paul I was killed

The main reasons for the coup and death of Paul I were the infringement of the interests of the nobility and the unpredictability of the emperor’s actions. Sometimes he exiled or sent people to prison for the slightest offense.

He planned to declare Maria Feodorovna’s 13-year-old nephew heir to the throne, adopting him, and imprison his eldest sons, Alexander and Konstantin, in the fortress. In March 1801, a ban on trade with the British was issued, which threatened to damage the landowners.

On the night of March 11-12, 1801, Pavel I Petrovich was killed by conspiratorial officers in the newly built Mikhailovsky Castle: the conspirators, mostly guards officers, burst into the bedroom of Paul I demanding that he abdicate the throne. When the emperor tried to object and even hit one of them, one of the rebels began to strangle him with his scarf, and the other hit him in the temple with a massive snuff box. It was announced to the people that Paul I had died of apoplexy.

Paul I and Maria Feodorovna had 10 children:

There is a historical anecdote about how Alexander III instructed Chief Prosecutor Pobedonostsev to find out who the father of Paul I was: Catherine II’s lover Sergei Saltykov or her legal husband Peter III. First, the dignitary informed the emperor that the rumors about Saltykov’s paternity were confirmed, to which he replied: “Thank God, we are Russians!” When Pobedonostsev later found evidence in favor of Peter III, Alexander III no less joyfully declared: “Thank God, we are legitimate!”

Save Russia!

The aging Elizaveta Petrovna increasingly realized that in choosing Peter III (grandson of Peter the Great) as heir to the throne, she had made a mistake. The scion of the Holstein-Gottorp dynasty stubbornly showed no interest in state affairs; moreover, he worshiped the Prussians, was idle and drank heavily.

The only thing that remained for Elizabeth was to wait for the birth of an heir from the crowned couple in order to formally remove Peter from power. But here another problem arose. After 8 years of marriage, Peter and Catherine still had no children.

Chancellor Bestuzhev-Ryumin, realizing that this could wait until the end of the century, frankly reported to the Empress that Peter and Catherine did not have an intimate relationship. Elizabeth allegedly responded to this: “Save Russia, save the state, save everything, figure out what to do - act as you see fit.”

The cunning chancellor came up with a simple solution. He proposed bringing the handsome chamberlain Sergei Saltykov closer to Catherine, who was languishing alone, and moving her husband to the far part of the palace. Elizabeth moved on. In order to finally separate Catherine and Peter into different bedrooms, she gave the latter the Lyubertsy estate near Moscow.

“Sergei Saltykov made me understand the reason for his frequent visits,” Ekaterina recalled. “I continued to listen to him, he was as beautiful as day, and, of course, no one could compare with him at court. He was 25 years old, and in general both by birth and by many other qualities he was an outstanding gentleman. I didn’t give in all spring and part of the summer.”

Next, Catherine describes in detail all the stages of her romance, right up to her rapprochement with Saltykov in the summer of 1752. In December of the same year she became pregnant, but on the way to Moscow she had a miscarriage. The second pregnancy also ended in miscarriage in May 1753. Subsequently, the lovers separated, and in April 1754 Saltykov was removed from the court. And in September 1754, the Grand Duchess gave birth to her long-awaited first child.

Incriminating evidence

Catherine’s notes, albeit indirectly, still hint that Peter III has nothing to do with Paul. Emperor Alexander II was so impressed by the revelations of his great-grandmother that he tried to shed light on his ancestry in conversations with old courtiers.

Rumors that Paul was Catherine’s illegitimate son were also fueled by the fact that the heir appeared only in the 10th year of the fruitless union. In addition, from Catherine’s diaries we know that her husband suffered from phimosis before the surgery, and this could seriously interfere with the intimate contacts of the spouses.

Peter was more interested not in the charms of young Catherine, but in military maneuvers. He was also partial to the weaker sex, but he gave preference to stupid ugly girls. Until the summer of 1752, Catherine was still an involuntary virgin.

On Easter 1752, the maid of honor Choglokova introduced the Grand Duchess to two handsome men - Sergei Saltykov and Lev Naryshkin, who immediately began to vigorously court the unapproachable Catherine. In order to somehow stir her up, Choglokova, in communicating with her, implanted the idea that adultery, of course, is a condemned thing, but there are “positions of a higher order for which an exception should be made.” And Catherine made her choice.

In addition to Catherine's memoirs, another document - the report of Chancellor Bestuzhev-Ryumin to Empress Elizabeth - may also indicate that the mission entrusted to Saltykov was completed. There are the following lines:

“What was drawn, according to the wise consideration of Your Majesty, took on a good and desired beginning - the presence of the executor of Your Majesty’s highest will is now not only not necessary here, but even to achieving perfect fulfillment and concealing the secret for eternal times would be harmful. Based on these considerations, you are pleased, most gracious empress, to command Chamberlain Saltykov to be Your Majesty’s ambassador in Stockholm to the King of Sweden.”

In other words: “The Moor has done his job, the Moor can leave.” At that time, an honorary exile was awarded to someone who did their job well in the interests of the state.

The version about the paternity of Sergei Saltykov was supported by the Soviet historian Nikolai Pavlenko, who, in particular, wrote: “Some courtiers who observed the family life of the grand ducal couple whispered that the baby should be called Sergeevich, not Petrovich, according to the priest. That's probably what happened."

Chukhon version

The mystery surrounding the birth of Paul I was never resolved. Over time, new rumors began to appear. There was a rumor spread by the writer Alexander Herzen in 1861 during his “London sitting”. In the 20th century, it was resurrected by the writer Nathan Eidelman, who published the historical essay “Reverse Providence” in the New World magazine.

According to this version, the third child, whom Catherine conceived from Saltykov, was also born dead and desperate Elizabeth ordered an urgent replacement of the baby. A living child was found nearby, in the village of Kotly, in a Chukhon family.

So that Catherine would not suspect a substitution, the Empress did not allow her to look at her son for more than a month. Exhausted by childbirth, the Grand Duchess was abandoned to the mercy of fate, left without proper care. According to Herzen, the “empty and evil Empress Elizabeth” wanted the woman in labor to die.

No matter how fantastic this story looks, there were witnesses to it. At that time, near the village of Kotly there was the estate of Karl Tizenhausen. The young aristocrat remembered very well that in one night the village was wiped off the face of the earth, and its inhabitants were loaded onto carts and taken to Kamchatka.

In the early 1820s, an event occurred that can also confirm the “Chukhon legend.” A certain Afanasy arrived from Kamchatka to St. Petersburg, declaring himself the brother of the late Paul I. The too talkative old man, of course, was sent to the Peter and Paul Fortress.

However, a member of the State Duma, Dmitry Lanskoy, told his nephew, the writer Alexander Odoevsky, that Emperor Alexander Pavlovich secretly visited an old man at night who looked like his late father, talked to him for a long time about something and often sighed.

Doubts remain

Many researchers, including Sergei Aldanov, are confident that Catherine in her notes deliberately created the impression that Pavel’s father was not her husband. Not everyone trusts what Ekaterina wrote. Thus, the historian Yakov Barskov believed: “Lies were the queen’s main tool: all her life, from early childhood to old age, she used this tool, mastered it like a virtuoso.”

According to historians, Catherine had to justify her seizure of power in various ways. Since her husband's overthrow, she has made up so many stories about him and their relationship that it is extremely difficult to separate fact from fiction. Catherine benefited from the bad reputation of her son - a direct competitor in the struggle for the throne. And fueling rumors about his illegitimacy in this sense was an effective weapon.

Alexander Mylnikov, the author of a book about Peter III, notes that Catherine was afraid of potential supporters of Paul, who could demand the throne for a ruler of royal blood and get rid of the foreigner who had usurped power. The historian has no doubt that Catherine knew very well who Paul’s real father was, which is why she behaved very formally and coldly towards him.

Peter III himself considered Paul his son. And if he declared this so confidently, it means that there was still an intimate relationship between him and Catherine. Melnikov in his book compares the notice of the birth of his son, sent by Peter to Frederick II, with a similar notice of the birth of his daughter Anna, who was from Catherine’s next lover, Stanislav Poniatovsky. There is a huge difference between them.

Paul repeatedly heard gossip about his origins, and this left an indelible mark on his soul. Chulkov in the book “Emperors: Psychological Portraits” wrote: “He himself was convinced that Peter III was really his father.”

It is enough to compare the portraits of Peter III and Sergei Saltykov to understand who Pavel is more like. Many of Paul's contemporaries claim that Ekaterina and Saltykov, “both beautiful as day,” could not give birth to such an ugly offspring, whom Admiral Chichagov called “a snub-nosed Chukhon with the movements of a machine gun.”

There is one more thing. As can be seen from the date of birth (September 20), Paul was most likely a product of the New Year holidays. And, as you know, the spouses celebrated them together. However, the final verdict on this pressing issue could be made by a genetic examination of the remains of our courtiers. However, it is unlikely that they will do it as long as there is even the slightest suspicion that Paul I was not of Romanov blood.

Emperor Paul I and his sons