The role of the guard and the aristocracy in public life. Summary: Russia in the XVIII century
Ministry of Education and Science Russian Federation
Branch of NOU HPE "Moscow Institute of Entrepreneurship and Law" in Norilsk
Discipline: History of the Fatherland
Subject: Palace coups. The role of the guard. Expansion of the privileges of nobles.
Fulfilled by F.I.O. Cheban E.V.
Norilsk, 2012
Introduction
power struggle
The reasons palace coups
Conclusion
List of sources used
Introduction
According to most historians, the reasons for palace coups are as follows:
moving away from the national political tradition, according to which the throne passed only to the direct heirs of the tsar, Peter himself prepared a crisis of power (by not implementing the decree of 1722 on the succession to the throne, without appointing himself an heir);
a large number of direct and indirect heirs claimed the Russian throne after the death of Peter;
the existing corporate interests of the nobility and tribal nobility manifested themselves in their entirety.
Speaking about the era of palace coups, it should be emphasized that they were not state coups, that is, they pursued the goals of radical changes in political power and state structure(the events of 1730 were an exception)
When analyzing the era of palace coups, it is important to pay attention to the following points.
Firstly, the initiators of the coups were various palace groups that sought to elevate their protege to the throne.
Secondly, the most important consequence of the coups was the strengthening of the economic and political positions of the nobility.
Thirdly, the guards were the driving force behind the coups.
Indeed, the guard, a privileged part of the regular army created by Peter (these are the famous Semyonovsky and Preobrazhensky regiments, in the 30s two new ones, Izmailovsky and Horse Guards, were added to them) was a decisive force. Her participation decided the outcome of the case: on whose side the guard, that group won. The guard was not only a privileged part of the Russian army, it was a representative of the whole class (nobles), from whose midst it was almost exclusively formed and whose interests it represented.
In general, it would be most correct to assess the time of palace coups as a period of development of the noble empire from the formations of Peter the Great to a new major modernization of the country under Catherine 2. In the second quarter - the middle of the 18th century, there were no major reforms the reign of Elizabeth Petrovna is estimated as a period of counter-reforms).
1. Struggle for power
Dying, Peter did not leave an heir, having only time to write with a weakening hand: “Give everything ...”. The opinion of the leaders about his successor was divided. "Chicks of Petrov's Nest" (A.D. Menshikov, P.A. Tolstoy, I.I. Buturlin, P.I. Yaguzhinsky and others) spoke for his second wife Ekaterina, and representatives of the noble nobility (D.M. Golitsyn , V.V. Dolgoruky and others) defended the candidacy of their grandson - Peter Alekseevich. The outcome of the dispute was decided by the guards, who supported the empress.
The accession of Catherine 1 (1725-1727) led to a sharp strengthening of the position of Menshikov, who became the de facto ruler of the country. Attempts to somewhat curb his lust for power and greed with the help of the Supreme Privy Council (VTS) created under the Empress, to which the first three colleges, as well as the Senate, were subordinate, did not lead to anything. Moreover, the temporary worker decided to strengthen his position by marrying his daughter to Peter's young grandson. P. Tolstoy, who opposed this plan, ended up in prison.
In May 1727, Catherine I died and, according to her will, 12-year-old Peter II (1727-1730) became emperor under the regency of the military-technical cooperation. Menshikov's influence at court increased, and he even received the coveted rank of generalissimo.
But, pushing away old allies and not acquiring new ones among the noble nobility, he soon lost influence on the young emperor and in September 1727 was arrested and exiled with his whole family to Berezovo, where he soon died.
A significant role in discrediting the personality of Menshikov in the eyes of the young emperor was played by the Dolgoruky, as well as a member of the military-technical cooperation, the tutor of the tsar, nominated for this position by Menshikov himself - A.I. Osterman is a clever diplomat who, depending on the alignment of forces and the political situation, was able to change his views, allies and patrons. The overthrow of Menshikov was, in essence, an actual palace coup, because the composition of the military-technical cooperation has changed. In which aristocratic families began to prevail (Dolgoruky and Golitsyn), and A.I. began to play a key role. Osterman; the regency of the MTC was put an end to, Peter II declared himself a full-fledged ruler, who was surrounded by new favorites; a course was outlined aimed at revising the reforms of Peter I.
Soon the court left St. Petersburg and moved to Moscow, which attracted the emperor by the presence of richer hunting grounds. The sister of the tsar's favorite, Ekaterina Dolgorukaya, was betrothed to Peter II, but while preparing for the wedding, he died of smallpox. And again the question arose about the heir to the throne, because with the death of Peter II, the male line of the Romanovs was cut short, and he did not have time to appoint a successor.
In the conditions of a political crisis and timelessness, the military-technical cooperation, which by that time consisted of 8 people (5 seats belonged to the Dolgoruky and Golitsyns), decided to invite the niece of Peter I, the Duchess of Courland Anna Ioannovna, to the throne. It was also extremely important that she had no supporters and no connections in Russia.
As a result, this made it possible, beckoning with an invitation to the brilliant St. Petersburg throne, to impose their own conditions and get her consent to limit the power of the monarch.
The reign of Anna Ioannovna (1730-1740)
From the very beginning of her reign, Anna Ioannovna tried to erase even the memory of "conditions" from the consciousness of her subjects. She liquidated the military-technical cooperation, creating instead the Cabinet of Ministers headed by Osterman.
Gradually, Anna went to meet the most urgent requirements of the Russian nobility: their service life was limited to 25 years; that part of the Decree on Uniform Succession, which limited the right of the nobles to dispose of the estate when it was inherited, was canceled; easier to get an officer's rank. Not trusting the Russian nobility and not having the desire, and even the ability to delve into state affairs herself, Anna Ioannovna surrounded herself with people from the Baltic states. Key role at court passed into the hands of her favorite E. Biron.
Some historians call the period of the reign of Anna Ioannovna "Bironism", believing that his main feature was the dominance of the Germans, neglecting the interests of the country, demonstrating contempt for everything Russian and pursuing a policy of arbitrariness in relation to the Russian nobility. After the death of Anna Ioannovna in 1740, according to her will, the Russian throne was inherited by the great-grandson of Ivan Alekseevich, the son of Anna Leopoldovna and Anton Ulrich of Braunshveisky - Ivan Antonovich. Anna's favorite E.I. was appointed regent until he came of age. Biron, who was arrested less than a month later by the guards on the orders of Field Marshal B.K. Minikhin.
His mother, Anna Leopoldovna, was proclaimed regent for the royal child. The unsinkable A.I. began to play the leading role with her. Osterman, who survived five reigns and all temporary workers.
On November 1741, the tsar who never ruled was overthrown by Elizaveta Petrovna with the help of the guards. Taking advantage of the weakness of the government and her popularity, Elizabeth, the daughter of Peter I, dressed in a man's dress, appeared in the barracks of the Preobrazhensky Regiment with the words: "Guys, you know whose daughter I am, follow me. Do you swear to die for me?" - the future empress asked and, having received an affirmative answer, she led them to the Winter Palace. On the night of November 25, 1741, the grenadier company of the Preobrazhensky Regiment made a palace coup in favor of Elizabeth - the daughter of Peter I - (1741-1761)
Despite the similarity of this coup with similar palace coups in Russia in the 18th century. (apical character, strike force guard), he had a number distinctive features. The striking force of the coup on November 25 was not just the guards, but the lower guards - people from the taxable estates, expressing the patriotic sentiments of the broad sections of the capital's population. The coup had a pronounced anti-German, patriotic character. Wide sections of Russian society, condemning the favoritism of the German temporary workers, turned their sympathies towards Peter's daughter, the Russian heiress.
A feature of the palace coup on November 25 was the fact that the Franco-Swedish diplomacy tried to actively intervene in the internal affairs of Russia and, for offering help to Elizabeth in the struggle for the throne, to obtain certain political and territorial concessions from her, which meant a voluntary rejection of the conquests of Peter I.
Empress Elizaveta Petrovna reigned for twenty years, from 1741 to 1761. The most legitimate of all the successors of Peter I, raised to the throne with the help of the guards, she, as V.O. Klyuchevsky, "inherited the energy of her father, built palaces in twenty-four hours and traveled from Moscow to St. Petersburg in two days, peaceful and carefree, she took Berlin and defeated the first strategist of that time, Frederick the Great ... her courtyard turned into a theater foyer - everyone was talking about the French comedy, the Italian opera, but the doors would not close, the windows were blowing, the water flowed along the walls - such a “gilded poverty”.
The core of her policy was the expansion and strengthening of the rights and privileges of the nobility. The landlords now had the right to exile recalcitrant peasants to Siberia and dispose of not only land, but also the person and property of serfs. Under Elizabeth Petrovna, the Senate, the Chief Magistrate, and the Collegia were restored in their rights. In 1755 Moscow University was opened - the first in Russia.
An indicator of Russia's increased influence on international life was its active participation in the pan-European conflict of the second half of XVIII in. - in the Seven Years' War 1756 - 1763.
Russia entered the war in 1757. In the very first battle near the village of Gross-Egersdorf on August 19, 1757, Russian troops inflicted a serious defeat on the Prussian troops. At the beginning of 1758, Russian troops captured Koenigsberg. The population East Prussia swore allegiance to the Empress of Russia - Elizabeth. The culmination of the military campaign of 1760 was the capture of Berlin on September 28 by the Russian army under the command of Chernyshov. (Frederick II was on the verge of death, but he was saved by a sharp turn in Russian foreign policy caused by the accession to the throne of Peter III, who immediately broke off the military alliance with Austria, stopped military operations against Prussia, and even offered Frederick military assistance).
Elizabeth Petrovna's successor was her nephew Karl-Peter-Ulrich - Duke of Holstein - the son of Elizabeth Petrovna's older sister - Anna, and therefore on the mother's side - the grandson of Peter I. He ascended the throne under the name of Peter III (1761-1762) February 18, 1762 The Manifesto was published on the award of "liberty and freedom to the entire Russian noble nobility", i.e. for exemption from compulsory service. The "Manifesto", which removed the age-old duty from the class, was received with enthusiasm by the nobility.
Peter III issued Decrees on the abolition of the Secret Chancellery, on the permission to return to Russia to schismatics who had fled abroad with a prohibition to prosecute for a split. However, soon the policy of Peter III aroused discontent in society, restored the metropolitan society against him.
Particular dissatisfaction among the officers was caused by the refusal of Peter III from all conquests during the victorious Seven Years' War with Prussia (1755-1762), which was led by Elizaveta Petrovna. A conspiracy to overthrow Peter III matured in the guard.
As a result of the last palace coup in the 18th century, carried out on June 28, 1762, the wife of Peter III, who became Empress Catherine II (1762-1796), was elevated to the Russian throne. During the palace coup, Catherine was supported by influential representatives of the aristocracy: Count K. G. Razumovsky, educator of Paul I N. I. Panin, Prosecutor General I. A. Glebov, Princess E. R. Dashkova, and many guards officers. Catherine, like Peter, whom she idolized, surrounded herself devoted people. She generously rewarded her associates and favorites.
An attempt by Peter III to enter into negotiations did not lead to anything, and he was forced to personally sign the act of "spontaneous" oath abdication sent by Catherine.
Thus ended the era of "palace coups".
. Causes of palace coups
palace coup imperial throne
The general prerequisites for palace coups can be called:
Contradictions between various noble groups in relation to the Peter's heritage. It would be a simplification to consider that the split occurred along the lines of acceptance and rejection of reforms.
Both the so-called "new nobility", which had come to the fore in the years of Peter the Great thanks to their service zeal, and the aristocratic party tried to soften the course of reforms, hoping in one form or another to give a respite to society, and first of all, to themselves.
But each of these groups defended its narrow class interests and privileges, which created a fertile ground for internal political struggle.
The sharp struggle of various groups for power, most often reduced to the nomination and support of one or another candidate for the throne.
active position guard, which Peter brought up as a privileged "support" of the autocracy, who, moreover, assumed the right to control the conformity of the personality and policy of the monarch to the legacy that her "beloved emperor" left.
The passivity of the masses, who are absolutely far from political life capital Cities.
Exacerbation of the problem of succession to the throne in connection with the adoption of the Decree of 1722, which broke the traditional mechanism for the transfer of power.
The spiritual atmosphere emerging as a result of the emancipation of the noble consciousness from traditional norms of behavior and morality, pushed for an active, often unprincipled political activity, inspired hope in good luck and "omnipotent chance", opening the way to power and wealth.
Conclusion
The stormy reform activity, which penetrated into all pores of economic, social, political, public and cultural life, with the death of Peter the Great, as it were, froze, taken by surprise. The sudden death of the head of the absolutist state paralyzed, first of all, the initiative of the supreme bodies of state government. The so-called era of palace coups began.
Indeed, from 1725 to 1762, eight coups took place in the country, each of which elevated a new sovereign to the throne, after which, as a rule, there was a change in the personal composition of the ruling elite.
At the top of the reformer of the noble state erected by gigantic efforts, mouse fuss began in the form of a struggle for power by the hastily formed palace parties. Not surprisingly, the main content domestic policy these years was the expansion and strengthening of the privileges of the nobility. This was sometimes done contrary to the decrees of Peter the Great, and the state reserves accumulated through his efforts were mediocrely squandered.
Palace coups did not entail changes in the political, and even more so social system society and were reduced to the struggle for power of various noble groups pursuing their own, most often selfish interests. At the same time, the specific policy of each of the six monarchs had its own characteristics, sometimes important for the country. In general, socio-economic stabilization and foreign policy successes achieved during the reign of Elizabeth created the conditions for accelerated development and new breakthroughs in foreign policy that would occur under Catherine II.
List of used literature
1.Orlov A.S., Polunov A.Yu., Shestova T.L., Shchetinov Yu.A. A manual on the history of the Fatherland for applicants to universities? electronic edition, 2005.
.Orlov A.S., Georgiev V.A., Georgieva N.G., Sivokhina T.A. History of Russia: textbook, 3rd ed.? M .: Prospekt, 2008.
.Vernadsky G.V. Russian history: [Textbook] - M .: Agrad, 2001.
.History of Russia, the end of the XVII-XIX century: a textbook for 10 cells. / IN AND. Buganov, P.N. Zyryanov; ed. A.N. Sakharov. - 11th ed. - M.: Enlightenment, 2005. - 304 p.
Tutoring
Need help learning a topic?
Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
INTRODUCTION
1. Characteristics of palace coups and the role of the guard in their implementation
2. The meaning of the guard for Russia
3. The course of events during the main palace coups
CONCLUSION
Extract from the text
The correspondence of participants in the events and their diaries that have come down to us became direct and direct sources for studying the history of the era of palace coups. Among them I. Lefort, B.K. Minich, K.G. Manstein. But each of these sources has its own characteristics. So, Minich was a lieutenant colonel of the Preobrazhensky Life Guards Regiment, and then a field marshal general, was of German origin, his active period of activity fell on the reign of Anna Ioannovna. While Lefort came from the lower classes (born into the family of a merchant), he achieved his position by serving in the "amusing regiment" of Tsar Peter and was little aware of the history of Russia, the intrigues between the boyars and the new nobility. At the same time, Minich was noble, had a title of nobility, and for some time was the governor of St. Petersburg. However, his work is not without flaws. The description of events is too pretentious, some details are missed. His main achievements as a politician and commander fell on the reign of Anna Ioannovna, so he continued to remain loyal to the new ruler Anna Leopoldovna. For which he paid: Elizabeth the First, who came to power as a result of another coup, deprived him of all his posts and sent him to a long-term exile in the town of Pelm. He returned from exile and again took part in the political life of the country, he only on the orders of Catherine II.
First of all, it should be noted the article by S. M. Troitsky "Historiography of the "palace revolutions" in Russia in the 18th century", published in the journal "Questions of History" in 1966. In it, the author examines in detail the works that cover the period from 1725 to 1762. S. M. Troitsky begins his historiographic review with the works of the second half of the 18th century and ends with the beginning of the 60s of the 20th century. He also expresses an opinion about the illegitimacy of the fixed term "palace coups". In his work, he comes to the following conclusions. Firstly, pre-revolutionary historians were unable to give the correct scientific explanation the causes and nature of the "palace coups", as well as their significance for the historical development of Russia. They were unable to reveal the complex, contradictory nature political history Russia of the eighteenth century.
and to show the connection between chance and regularity, which also manifested itself in the "palace coups". The true causes of the "palace coups" lurked in the aggravation of intra-class contradictions among the ruling class of feudal lords, which was associated with its consolidation into a single privileged estate and the aggravation of the anti-feudal struggle of the working masses. Secondly, the author explains the insufficient research of this phenomenon in Marxist historiography by the increased attention of historians to the economy, social relations and class struggle. In conclusion, S. M. Troitsky adds an in-depth understanding of the internal and foreign policy of this period, it is necessary to develop a monographic history of the ruling class of feudal lords, who at that time consolidated into a privileged estate.
This process is the opposite of language extinction, when its speakers gradually move to use another language in the majority. life situations and stop teaching the old language to their children. explore the role of Hebrew in development literature XVIII XX century; to explore the role of the religion of the Jewish nation;
The term "era of palace coups" appeared in scientific literature with the filing of Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov. Kareev: “The whole history of this era did not know anything like the enthronement of new sovereigns by military riots like those that took place in the ancient Roman or medieval Byzantine Empire, or those Russian state coups of the XVIII century, in which the noble guard played such a role.” The purpose of the study is to identify the main problems of studying the era of palace coups in Russian historical science.
Senate The highest legislative and executive judicial body subordinate to the emperor. He controlled the work public institutions in the center and locally. Senators were appointed by the king. The head of the Senate was the Attorney General "the eye of the sovereign"
events (higher nobility, guards), other, most active social developments in Russia in the 17th - 18th centuries, the establishment of autocracy, the nature of palace coups caused in the past and cause at the present time
Structure term paper. The work consists of an introduction, four main chapters, eleven paragraphs, a conclusion, a list of references and an appendix.
It is worth noting that during this period, the Guard began to play an active role in the political life of the country, whose role during this period was the right to control the conformity of the personality and policy of the monarch to the legacy of Peter. Alienation from politics and the passivity of the masses served as fertile ground for palace intrigues and coups. In addition, the unresolved problem of succession to the throne, in connection with the adoption of the Decree of 1722, which abolished the traditional mechanism for the transfer of power, in to a large extent provoked palace coups.
The degree of knowledge of the problem. The origins of the study of this period in the history of Russia were V.O. Klyuchevsky and S.M. Solovyov. AT modern science the era of palace coups is studied by E.V. Anisimov, M.A. Boytsov, T.V. Smirnova. V. V. Kerov, R. A. Arslanov, M. N. Moseykina. and etc.
During this period, the policy of the state was determined by separate groups of the palace nobility, which actively intervened in resolving the issue of the heir to the throne, fought among themselves for power, and carried out palace coups. The decisive force in the palace coups was the guard, a privileged part of the regular army created by Peter. In this paper, we will consider the principles by which palace coups took place, their features and distinctive features, as well as their impact on socio-economic and political development.
LIST OF USED SOURCES
1. Anisimov E.V. State transformations and autocracy of Peter the Great in the first quarter of the 18th century. - St. Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin 1997. - 331 p.
2. Zuev M.N. History of Russia: Textbook for universities. — M.: PRIOR, 2000. — 688 p.
3. Kamensky A.B. From Peter I to Paul I: Reforms in Russia in the 18th century. Holistic analysis experience. — M.: RGGU, 2001. — p. 575.
4. Klyuchevsky V.O. Russian history course. T. 5. - M.: Direct-Media, 2004. - 479 p.
5. Klyuchevsky V.O. Russian history course. T. 4. - M.: Direct-Media, 2004. - 394 p.
6. Kuznetsov I.V. National history: Textbook for universities. — M.: Dashkov i K, 2006. — 812 p.
7. Nefedov S.A. Demographic-structural analysis of the socio-economic history of Russia. End of the XV-beginning of the XX century. - Yekaterinburg: USGU, 2005. - 543 p.
8. Smolin M.B. Secrets of the Russian Empire. — M.: Veche, 2003. — 432 p.
9. Shevelev V.N. The history of homeland: Tutorial for university students. - Rostov n / D: Phoenix, 2007. - 604 p.
bibliography
The role of the guard in palace coups
After Peter I, his wife Catherine I ruled for two years, and after her death, the grandson of Peter I, Peter II.
Peter I did not have time to decide who would be his heir. Most of all the rights to the throne had his grandson (the son of the executed Alexei), the young Peter. But among the nobles, parties were formed that tried to put on the throne a king that was beneficial to them. Menshikov, Yaguzhinsky and others contributed to the coming to power of Catherine I. The troops gathered around the palace were especially convinced by the Senate, the Synod and the generals. Catherine was an intelligent, but uneducated woman, according to one foreign ambassador, when she ascended the throne, she could neither read nor write. But three months later she learned to sign government papers. In fact, Menshikov was the ruler under her, while the empress herself spent time in magnificent feasts and festivities. important event her reign was the establishment of the Supreme Privy Council to decide the most important state affairs.
Catherine died in 1727 and appointed Peter II Alekseevich as his successor. Passions boiled around the 11-year-old Emperor Peter II. Initially, he was greatly influenced by Menshikov, who wanted to marry him to his daughter. Then he annoyed the boy with his strictness and, on the advice of his enemies, was exiled to distant Berezovo. The huge fortune of Prince and Generalissimo Alexander Danilovich was taken away. The princes Dolgoruky now had a strong influence on the tsar, who agreed on the wedding of Peter II and Catherine Dolgoruky. But suddenly the monarch fell ill with smallpox. In January 1730, on the day of the planned wedding, Peter II died.
Among the candidates for the throne was the daughter of Peter I, Elizabeth, but she was born before the official marriage to Catherine and was considered illegitimate. Therefore, they settled on the daughter of Ivan V, brother of Peter I, Anna. In addition, court groups sought to establish on the throne a ruler that was beneficial to them in order to receive some benefits, privileges, strengthen their position, etc. Among the members of the Supreme Privy Council (“supreme leaders”), an idea arose to limit the power of the king, “to make yourself feel better”, “ give yourself the will." They offered the throne to Anna, but with the condition that they sign an agreement - not to decide the most important matters without the consent of the "supreme leaders". On the one hand, theoretically, the limitation of autocracy could be positive. But a very narrow, oligarchic circle of advisers was appointed. The danger would be too great to use the Council as an instrument for narrowly selfish purposes. This body had very little support among the nobles. And Anna soon abandoned the obligation.
After the death of Peter II in 1730, the niece of Peter I, Anna Ivanovna, who lived in the Baltics, ascended the throne. The guards began to play an increasing role in the appointment (and then overthrow) of emperors and empresses, as well as influential dignitaries. These privileged troops consisted of nobles, even the rank and file here were nobles. To a certain extent, they reflected the mood of the upper class of the whole country, but, mainly, they began to turn into a force supporting this or that party, a person capable of carrying out a palace coup.
From the Baltics, Anna brought her entourage, among which her favorite (favorite) Biron was the main one. Anna's reign is inextricably linked with the growing influence of foreigners ("Germans"), many of whom were distinguished by rudeness, arrogance, greed, and disregard for everything Russian. Arbitrariness increased, political arrests and executions increased. This whole regime caused great discontent among the Russians, both the aristocracy and ordinary people. However, Anna happily reigned for ten years. After her death, palace coups began again. Formally, the baby Ivan Antonovich (Ivan VI), the great-grandson of Ivan V (brother of Peter I), was the tsar for almost a year. Then he was deposed, and the daughter of Peter I, Elizabeth, ascended the throne.
Anna, dying, left herself a successor: the infant son of her niece Anna Leopoldovna, who was married to the German prince Anton-Ulrich of Brunswick. But the regent, i.e. the actual ruler until the king came of age, should have been the same hated Biron. For the nobles, who were looking forward to the departure of the temporary worker, it was unbearable. It didn’t even help that Biron began his reign by favors: he canceled a number of death sentences, reduced taxes, etc. A conspiracy arose, the soul of which was another “German”, Field Marshal Minich. Biron was arrested and in April 1741 exiled forever to Pelym. His young mother Anna became the regent under the tsar. But she didn't have long to rule. At the end of November 1741, the guards again made a coup and elevated their beloved Elizabeth to the throne (Ivan VI Antonovich was imprisoned in a fortress). Unlike her mother, Elizabeth received an education, but she herself understood that she was not prepared to govern the state. She was not a particularly distant woman, sometimes rude and using a strong word. The queen was very fond of fun and balls. After her death, 15 thousand (!) Dresses that belonged to her remained. However, she was also distinguished by great piety, very strictly observing fasts. During the conspiracy, she gave her word not to execute anyone by death and kept it. It is believed that she was married in secret to Alexei Razumovsky.
The reign of Elizabeth lasted a long time, 20 years. She did a lot for the development of Russian industry and culture, greatly reduced the influence of foreigners at court. She was succeeded by her nephew, the grandson of Peter I from his daughter Anna and the German Duke of Holstein, Peter III. This was a stupid person. He turned down the opportunity to gain benefits for Russia as a result of victories in a difficult war with Prussia. German influence again increased. As a result, the guards again made a coup and in 1762 put his wife Catherine II on the throne. Unlike previous coups, for the first time a conspiracy arose not after the death of the king, but with a living adult emperor. For the first time, the emperor was also killed.
Peter III considered the Prussian king Frederick II a model for himself, did not recognize anything Russian. He put the benefits of his tiny state in Germany above the interests huge Russia. His development is evidenced by the fact that one of his favorite pastimes was playing with soldiers. One day, Catherine, entering his room, saw with horror that he had hung a rat, which, according to him, committed a criminal offense: it ate the heads of two soldiers. Peter tyrannized his wife and humiliated in every possible way. The latter, although she was also German, but with early years imbued with the life of Russia, was much more intelligent and educated. The guards loved her. Having managed to wean themselves from the dominance of foreigners, many officers could not restrain their indignation at the new order. The Orlov brothers became the center of the conspiracy. Peter III was overthrown and later killed.555
In the history of Russia of the XVIII century there is a phenomenon that has no analogues in life European countries the same period. This phenomenon is a special political role of the Russian. It is not possible to fully understand the period Russian history from Peter I to Paul I, and even to Nicholas II, without examining the political history of the guard. Meanwhile, this work has not yet been done. The social composition of the guard, the nature and dynamics of its change have not been studied with sufficient accuracy. And this lack of knowledge gives rise to historical myths.
We are talking about political history, because after Poltava victory and the Prut defeat for many decades of the 18th century, the guard did not take any active part in hostilities. The sphere of activity of the guards regiments was politics.
The decisive force in the palace coups turned out to be the guards, a privileged part of the regular army created by Peter (these are the famous Semenovsky and Preobrazhensky regiments, in the 1730s two new ones, Izmailovsky and Horse Guards, were added to them). Her participation decided the outcome of the case: on whose side the guard was, that group won. The guard was not only a privileged part of the Russian army, it was a representative of the whole class (nobles), from whose midst it was almost exclusively formed and whose interests it represented.
Creating a guard in 1692, Peter wanted to oppose it to the archers - privileged infantry regiments Moscow tsars, who by the end of the 17th century began to interfere in politics. "Janissaries!" Peter called them so contemptuously. He had reasons for hatred - forever he, a ten-year-old boy, remembered the terrible Streltsy revolt of 1682, when his closest relatives died on the spears of the archers. The guard is the first and, perhaps, the most perfect creation of Peter. These two regiments - six thousand bayonets - could compete with the best regiments of Europe in combat training and military spirit. Guards for Peter was a support in the struggle for power and in the retention of power. According to contemporaries, Peter often said that among the guards there was not a single one to whom he would not dare to entrust his life. The guard for Peter was a "forge of personnel." Guards officers and sergeants carried out any orders of the king - from the organization of the mining industry to control over the actions of the highest generals. The Guard has always known its duty - it was brought up that way. It seemed to Peter that ideal model, focusing on which he dreamed of creating his own "regular" state - a clear, obedient, strong militarily, working smoothly and conscientiously. And the guards idolized their creator. And for good reason. It was not only about honors and privileges. Peter managed to inspire the Semenovites and Preobrazhenians with a sense of participation in the construction of a new state. The guardsman not only was, but also realized himself as a statesman. And this self-awareness, completely new for an ordinary Russian person, gave the Petrine guardsman extraordinary strength.
Sagittarius of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich was also. But he stood for tradition, for the inviolability or slow evolution of the state life, merging for him with the life of the home, his ideal was the preservation of the life around him, its reference values. The Petrovsky Guardsman felt like a creator of something new and unprecedented. Unlike the archer, he was much less connected with everyday life. He was committed to the future. He lived with a feeling of constant impulse, movement, improvement. He was a man of reform as a life principle. It was this attitude and self-awareness, and not a shaved chin and a European uniform, that fundamentally distinguished the Peter's guardsman from the pre-Petrine soldier.
But before the founder and first colonel of the Preobrazhensky Regiment closed his eyes, his favorites in green uniforms turned into new Janissaries.
Perfectly equipped, exemplarily armed and trained guardsmen have always been the pride and support of the Russian throne. Their courage, steadfastness, selflessness many times decided the fate of battles, campaigns, entire wars in favor of Russian weapons.
But there is another, less heroic page in the annals of the imperial guard. The guardsmen, these handsome men, duelists, red tape, spoiled by the attention of metropolitan and provincial ladies, constituted a special privileged military unit Russian army with its traditions, customs, psychology. The main duty of the guard was to protect the peace and security of the autocrat, royal family and yard. Standing on the clock outside and inside the royal palace, they saw the wrong side of court life. Favorites sneaked past them into the royal bedrooms, they heard gossip and saw ugly quarrels, without which the court could not live. The guardsmen did not experience reverent awe of the courtiers sparkling with gold and diamonds, they missed the magnificent ceremonies - for them all this was familiar, and they had their own, often impartial, opinion about everything.
It is also important that the guardsmen had an exaggerated idea of their role in the life of the court, the capital, and Russia. Peter I created a force that throughout the 18th century acted as the main arbiter of the destinies of monarchs and pretenders to the throne. Guards regiments, noble in composition, were the closest support of the throne. They represented that real armed force at the court, which could contribute to both the enthronement and the deposition of kings. Therefore, the rulers tried in every possible way to enlist the support of the guard, showered her with signs of attention and favors. A special relationship was established between the guards and the monarch: the guards barracks and royal palace were closely related to each other. Service in the guard was not profitable - it required a lot of money, but it opened up good career prospects, the road to political ambition and adventurism, so typical of the 18th century with its dizzying ups and downs of "random" people.
Nevertheless, it often turned out that the "fierce Russian Janissaries" could be successfully controlled. With flattery, promises, money, clever court businessmen were able to direct the red-hot stream of the Guards in the right direction, so that the mustachioed handsome men did not even suspect their miserable role as puppets in the hands of intriguers and adventurers. However, like a double-edged sword, the guard was also dangerous for those who used its services. Emperors and the first nobles often became hostages of an unbridled and capricious armed crowd of guardsmen. And this ominous role in Russian history of the guard was shrewdly understood by the French envoy in St. Petersburg, Jean Campredon, who wrote to his master Louis XV immediately after the accession to the throne of Catherine I: "The decision of the guard is the law here." And it was true, the 18th century entered Russian culture as "the century of palace coups." And all these coups were made by the hands of the guards.
On January 28, 1725, the guardsmen played their political role for the first time in the drama of Russian history, immediately after the death of the first emperor, they brought the widow of Peter the Great to the throne, bypassing other heirs. This was the first independent performance of the guard as a political force.
When Catherine I fell dangerously ill in May 1727, officials of the highest government institutions gathered to resolve the issue of a successor: the Supreme Privy Council, the Senate, the Synod, and the presidents of the collegiums. Majors of the guards appeared among them, as if the guards officers constituted a special political corporation, without whose assistance such a situation could not be resolved. important question. Unlike other guard corporations - Roman Praetorians, Turkish Janissaries - the Russian Guard turned into political sk corporation .
The historian Klyuchevsky, who did not specifically deal with this issue, sensed the essence of the phenomenon. Having given in a few sentences a cursory overview of the "epoch of palace coups", he further formulates the fundamental provisions: "This is the participation of the guard in public affairs was extremely important, having a powerful influence on its political mood. Initially an obedient tool in the hands of its leaders, it then becomes an independent mover of events, intervening in politics on its own initiative. The palace coups were a preparatory political school for her, they developed certain political tastes in her, instilled in her a certain political way of thinking, created a mood. The Guards barracks is a counterbalance and sometimes an open opponent of the Senate and the Supreme Privy Council.
This is a wise passage. However, there is something to object to here. Firstly, the guards went through a certain political school under Peter. By the era of palace coups, she came already as a "political corporation." Her claims to resolve issues within the competence of government institutions - the Senate and the Supreme Council, were based on memories of the role that Peter assigned to her in the last decade of his reign, the role of a controlling and regulating force, accountable only to the king.
Secondly, it is unlikely that in 1725 and 1727 the Guard was an “obedient tool” in the hands of Menshikov and Buturlin. She was an "obedient instrument" - an ideal instrument - in the hands of her creator, and with his death immediately became a force in her own right. The guards followed Menshikov and Buturlin because their program at that moment was really organically close to the guards: Catherine appeared to the Preobrazhenians and Semenovites as a guarantor of literally following the plans of the first emperor.
The guard chose not just a reigning person, she chose a principle. Moreover, the guard did not choose between Peter the Great and pre-Petrine Russia, but it made its choice in January 1725 between two trends in the country's political reform - a moderate but undoubted movement towards limiting autocracy and the inevitable increase in freedom in the country, on the one hand, and further development and strengthening the military-bureaucratic state based on total slavery, on the other.
Guards in 1725 chose the second option.
"History of mankind. Russia / graphic designer O. N. Ivanova.”: Folio; Kharkiv; 2013