coups"

History of Russia in the second quarter of the 18th century. characterized by a sharp struggle of noble groups for power. From 1725 to 1762, seven people changed on the Russian throne, and V.O. Klyuchevsky called this period "the era of palace coups."

The Russian Guard began to play a special role in the political life of the country, including in the change of monarchs. It is characteristic that this role was largely predetermined by Peter 1 not only by the creation of guards regiments in Russia, but also by the problem of succession to the throne that arose through his fault.

Tsarevich Alexei, Peter's son from his first wife, Evdokia Lopukhina, was opposed to his father's transformations. For participation in a conspiracy against the king, he was sentenced to death and died under unclear circumstances on June 26, 1718.

From his second wife, Marta Skavronskaya (born 1684 in the family of a Lithuanian peasant), Peter had children. In 1719, son Pyotr Petrovich, the minor heir, died.

In total, by this time, out of 11 children, only two daughters survived - Anna (b. 1708) and Elizabeth (b. 1709).

In 1722, Peter abolished the previous order of succession (from father to eldest son) and established that the sovereign is free to appoint his own successor.

But his choice was extremely narrow. Grandson - Peter Alekseevich, son of Tsarevich Alexei (born in 1715) was still small. In addition, the king was afraid that he would follow the path of his father.

Peter loved his daughters Anna and Elizabeth, but did not consider them capable of governing Russia, where a firm and experienced hand was needed. In addition, Anna was declared the bride of the Duke of Holstein, and Peter wanted to marry Elizabeth to the French King Louis XV.

Therefore, Peter stopped his choice on his wife, Ekaterina Alekseevna. In May 1724 she was proclaimed empress. It is likely that Peter I would have transferred the Russian throne to her. But in November, he found out that his wife was cheating on him with 28-year-old chamberlain Willim Mons, the brother of Peter's former favorite. On November 16, V. Mons was executed on charges of “tricking, illegal actions and bribery”.

On January 28, 1725, the first Russian emperor died without appointing an heir. (The tsar had a rather serious illness - uremia, kidney failure, but it cannot be ruled out that his death was hastened by Catherine and Menshikov.)

The real contenders for the Russian throne were Catherine and Tsarevich Peter Alekseevich. Behind each of them were representatives of warring factions who sought to put their own candidate on the throne.

Catherine was supported by Prince Menshikov, Count Tolstoy, Admiral General Apraksin, Archbishop Feofan Prokopovich. All of them at one time signed the death warrant for Tsarevich Alexei, and the accession to the throne of his son did not promise them bright prospects.

10-year-old Peter was supported by representatives of the old boyar families - princes Dolgorukov, prince Golitsyn, Saltykov, Field Marshal Nikita Ivanovich Repnin. They also thought little about the interests of the state, they needed power that could be used in their own interests.

The outcome of the controversy over the imperial crown was decided very simply. Guards officers entered the hall where the question of a successor was being discussed. They behaved modestly and respectfully, politely promising to break the head of everyone if Catherine was not proclaimed empress. Under the windows of the palace in the ranks were both guards regiments - Preobrazhensky and Semenovsky. At the suggestion of Count Tolstoy, it was unanimously decided to consider Catherine the Empress.

Thus, the main force influencing power in Russia was the guard, which would influence the succession to the throne more than once.

Catherine I was empress from 1725 to 1727. But the struggle over the throne continued. A split also arose among Catherine's supporters - A.D. Menshikov and P.A. Tolstoy.

Menshikov's desire to use the benefits of his position and his influence on the empress (he wanted to become the duke of Courland and receive the rank of generalissimo) caused strong discontent among other nobles.

In order to extinguish the discontent that had arisen and reach a compromise, it was decided to establish a new supreme government body - the Supreme Privy Council, to which the Senate and all collegiums were subordinate. Its members were A.D. Menshikov, P.A. Tolstoy, G.I. Golovnin, A.I. Osterman, F.M. Apraksin, D.M. Golitsyn.

At the beginning of 1727, Catherine fell ill. HELL. Menshikov comes up with a clever move: he persuades Catherine to give her blessing for the marriage of his daughter with Pyotr Alekseevich. At the same time, he sets the queen against his recent allies Tolstoy, Buturlin and Devier, who wanted to put Anna or Elizabeth on the throne. The main organizers of the conspiracy were sent into exile (Tolstoy - to Solovki, Devier - to Siberia, Buturlin - to the village). Menshikov felt like a winner.

But on May 6, at the age of 43, Catherine I died, and on May 7, 11-year-old Peter II became king. At first, Menshikov played the role of the chief adviser to Peter II. He even, unable to bear it, appointed himself Generalissimo. But Menshikov's impatience, his desire to become the king's father-in-law as soon as possible played a cruel joke on him. His opponent, Vice Chancellor A.I. Osterman, turned the tsar against Menshikov. On September 8, 1727, Menshikov was arrested, exiled to Chaplygin, and then to Berezov, where he died on November 12, 1729.

Gradually, the clan of princes Dolgorukov, primarily Prince A.G., acquires influence at court. Dolgorukov and his son Ivan. The yard moved to Moscow. Almost all the time the tsar spent either hunting (from February 1728 to November 1729 - 243 days) or on the estate of Alexei Grigorievich Dolgorukov, who planned to marry 14-year-old Peter to his 17-year-old daughter Catherine. The wedding was scheduled for January 18, 1730, but Peter caught a cold while hunting, fell ill with smallpox and died on the planned day of his wedding. The Dolgorukovs made a will, according to which Peter II allegedly appointed his bride as his successor on the throne, but they failed to sign it.

On the night of January 18-19, 1730, the Supreme Privy Council discussed the question of the heir to the throne.

The “Verkhovniki” decided to invite Anna Ivanovna, the fourth daughter of Tsar Ivan Alekseevich, the half-brother of Peter I, to the Russian throne.

She was born in 1693. In autumn 1710, Peter I married her to the Duke of Courland Friedrich Wilhelm. On January 9, 1711, the duke died, and the widow lived in Mitau as a middle-class landowner.

In an effort to limit the power of the empress, the "supreme leaders" drew up the conditions that Anna Ivanovna had to sign before accession to the throne, the so-called "Conditions". According to them, the future empress pledged not to resolve issues of war and peace without the consent of the Supreme Council, not to appoint senior officials, not manage finances, etc. Having ascended the throne, Anna Ivanovna soon broke the "Conditions" and became formally sovereign queen. But in reality, her favorite Ernest Biron was in charge of all the internal affairs of the empire, and Count Andrei Ivanovich Osterman played the main violin in foreign policy. A significant role at the court was also played by Russian aristocrats - relatives of Tsarina Saltykov and her associates - Bestuzhev Ryumin and Ushakov.

During this period, a completely wild form of political investigation spread in Russia, the so-called "word and deed of the sovereign." It was enough to say this phrase and point to any person to be sent to the Secret Chancellery. The investigation always began with torture.

Anna Ioannovna had no direct heirs, and she did not want to cede the throne to the descendants of Peter I. On the advice of Osterman, even in the first years of her reign, she declared one of the future children of her niece Anna Leopoldovna to be the heir.

Anna Leopoldovna, daughter of Anna Ivannovna's sister Ekaterina, was born in 1718 in Mecklenburg. In 1722 she returned to Russia with her mother. In May 1733, she converted to Orthodoxy and received a new name (instead of Elizabeth, she became Anna Leopoldovna). Before that, in February 1733, she was engaged to Prince Anton Ulrich of Brunswick. Anna Leopoldovna did not like the ugly groom (and he was the nephew of the wife of the Austrian emperor), and she continued to meet with her lover, the Saxon ambassador Moritz Linar. In the summer of 1735, the tsarina personally whipped her niece on the cheeks, the ambassador was sent to Dresden, but the wedding took place only on July 3, 1739. On August 12, 1740, the spouses had a son, Ivan, who was a short time Russian tsar and a life-long prisoner of Shlisselburg, which fortress.

On October 5, 1740, Anna Ioannovna declared Ivan Antonovich her heir. Biron was appointed regent. On October 6, Anna Ioannovna died. Biron was arrested 22 days later (he spent 22 years in exile in Yaroslavl). In 1762, Peter III returned him from exile, and Catherine II transferred him the actual power in Courland. Biron died in 1772 at the age of 82.

Anna Leopoldovna was proclaimed ruler. First of all, she returned Moritz Linar to St. Petersburg. Field Marshal Munnich became the first minister in the empire.

The strengthening of the pro-German orientation of the government caused discontent in Russian society. Around the daughter of Peter Elizabeth in 1741 a circle of people arose who planned to put her on the throne. Anna Leopoldovna became aware of the conspiracy, but she hesitated to arrest Elizabeth and decided to first send the guards regiments to the Swedish front. On November 24, 1741, the regiments were announced to be sent to the front. On the night of November 25, officers and soldiers of the Life Guards of the Preobrazhensky Regiment carried out a bloodless palace coup. On November 25, 1741, a manifesto was issued on the accession to the throne of Elizabeth Petrovna.

From the first days of her reign, she decided not to cede the crown to any of the descendants of Ivan V. On November 15, 1742, she announced her nephew, the son of Anna's elder sister, Karl-Peter-Ulrich, as his successor. Anna was married to the Duke of Holstein-Gottorp Karl-Friedrich, the son of the sister of Charles XII. Thus, Karl-Peter-Ulrich could formally claim both the Russian and the Swedish throne.

Karl-Peter-Ulrich was born in 1728. In 1742 he arrived in Russia. In 1744, the 15-year-old Princess Anhalt-Zerbstskaya Sophia-Augusta-Frederica (Ekaterina Alekseevna in Orthodoxy) was invited to Russia as his bride. The wedding took place on August 21, 1745. But the desired heir was not there for a long time. Elizabeth was tired of this, and in 1752 two young men were assigned to the court of the Grand Duchess - Sergei Saltykov and Lev Naryshkin. Ekaterina chose Saltykov. After two unsuccessful pregnancies, she gave birth in September 1754 to a son, who was named Pavel. (Judging by his appearance, he could not be the son of Saltykov, most likely, his father is still Peter III.)

After the death of Elizabeth on December 25, 1761, Peter III was proclaimed emperor. On June 30, 1762, as a result of a coup d'état, Catherine II became empress. After her death on November 6, 1796, Paul I was on the throne. In March 1801, he was strangled by conspirators and his eldest son Alexander I became emperor.

- 173.50 Kb

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..3
The struggle for the legacy of Peter I. The era of palace coups……….4
The reign of Catherine II. "Enlightened absolutism"…………….11

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………….11
What is "Enlightened absolutism"?....................................................12
Establishment of the Statutory Commission………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
"Instruction" of Catherine the Great……………………………………………………………………15
Functioning of the commission………………………………………………………… ……18
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………21

Russia at the end of the 18th century Pavel I………………………………………………………..23

Personality of Emperor Paul I. Domestic policy………………23
Foreign policy………………………………………………………. .25
CONSPIRACY. The murder of Paul I……………………………………………....26

References………………………………………………………………………………27

Introduction.

Formation of the Russian Empire. Russian Empire in the 18th century.

Tsar Peter I carried out radical changes in the domestic and foreign policy of the state. As a result of the Northern War of 1700-1721, the powerful Swedish army was defeated and the Russian lands captured by Sweden at the end of the 16th century were returned. At the mouth of the Neva, the port city of St. Petersburg was built, where in 1712 the capital of Russia was moved.

The reforms of Peter I led to the modernization of the army, the state apparatus and education. An absolute monarchy was established in Russia, headed by the emperor, to whom even the church was subordinate (through the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod). The boyars lost the remnants of their independence and turned into nobility. After the death of Peter I, the era of palace coups began, characterized by a noble oligarchy and frequent changes of emperors.

Under Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, power in Russia stabilized. Moscow University was founded. The Russian army successfully fought against Prussia in the Seven Years' War (1756-1763).

Under Empress Catherine the Great, Russia successfully fought with Turkey for access to the Black Sea, paper money (banknotes) appeared, many foreigners settled in Russia, and the development of America began. The lands of modern Ukraine and Belarus were finally annexed as a result of the divisions of the Commonwealth.

In 1796, Catherine II dies and Paul I ascends the throne. He began his reign by breaking the rules of Catherine's rule. Paul established a new order of succession to the throne that excluded women from the throne. Dissatisfaction with his policies grew in noble circles, which led to his assassination in 1801.

The struggle for the legacy of Peter I. The era of palace coups.

The overexertion of the country's forces during the years of Peter the Great's reforms, the destruction of traditions, and the violent methods of reform caused an ambiguous attitude of various circles of Russian society towards the Peter's heritage and created the conditions for political instability.

From 1725, after the death of Peter I and until Catherine II came to power in 1762, six monarchs and many political forces behind them were replaced on the throne. This change did not always take place in a peaceful and legal way, which is why this period of V.O. Klyuchevsky is not entirely accurate, but figuratively and aptly called “ era of palace coups". This era includes several stages of development associated with the rule of a particular person.

The main reason that formed the basis of the palace coups was the 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.

Palace coups were generated by a sharp struggle of various factions for power. As a rule, it came down most often to the nomination and support of one or another candidate for the throne.

At that time, the guards began to play an active role in the political life of the country, 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 alienation of the masses from politics and their passivity served as fertile ground for palace intrigues and coups.

To a large extent, palace coups were provoked by the unresolved 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,

Dying, Peter did not leave an heir, having only managed to write with a weakening hand: “Give everything ...”. The opinion of the leaders about his successor was divided. “Petrov's Nest Chicks” spoke out for his second wife Ekaterina, and representatives of the well-born defended the candidacy of their grandson, Pyotr Alekseevich. The outcome of the dispute was decided by the guards, who supported the empress.

accession 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. Furthermore, temporary worker decided to strengthen his position through the marriage of his daughter with the young grandson of Peter. P. Tolstoy, who opposed this plan, ended up in prison.

In May 1727, Catherine 1 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 to this position by Menshikov himself - A.I. Osterman - 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 changed, in which aristocratic families (Dolgoruky and Golitsyn) began to predominate, 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 of the heir to the throne arose, because. with the death of Peter II, the male line of the Romanovs ended, 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 Golitsyn), decided to invite the niece of Peter I, the Duchess of Courland Anna Ioannovna, to the throne, since back in 1710 she was married off by Peter to the Duke of Courland , early widowed, lived in cramped material conditions, largely at the expense of the Russian government.

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.

D.M. Golitsyn took the initiative to draw up really limiting the autocracy " conditions ", according to which:

1) Anna undertook to rule together with the military-technical cooperation, which actually turned into the highest governing body of the country.

2) Without the approval of the military-technical cooperation, it could not legislate, impose taxes, dispose of the treasury, declare war or make peace.

3) The empress did not have the right to grant estates and ranks above the rank of colonel, to deprive her of estates without trial.

4) The Guard was subordinate to the military-technical cooperation.

5) Anna undertook not to marry and not to appoint an heir, but in case of non-fulfillment of any of these conditions, she was deprived of the “Russian crown”.

There is no consensus among scholars in assessing the nature and significance of the "Verkhovniki's idea". Some see in the “conditions” a desire to establish, instead of autocracy, an “oligarchic” form of government that met the interests of a narrow layer of the noble nobility and led Russia back to the era of “boyar self-will”. Others believe that it was the first constitutional draft to limit the arbitrary rule of the despotic state created by Peter, from which all segments of the population, including the aristocracy, suffered.

Anna Ioannovna after meeting in Mitava with V.L. Dolgoruky, sent by the military-technical cooperation for negotiations, accepted these conditions without any hesitation. However, despite the desire of members of the military-technical cooperation to hide their plans, their contents became known to the guards and the general masses. nobility ”.

From this environment, new projects for the political reorganization of Russia began to emerge (the most mature one belonged to the V.N. Tatishchev ), which gave the nobility the right to elect representatives of the highest authorities and expanded the composition of the military-technical cooperation. Specific requirements were also put forward aimed at facilitating the conditions of service of the nobles. D.M. Golitsyn, realizing the danger of isolating the military-technical cooperation, met these wishes and developed a new project, which envisaged limiting autocracy by a system of elected bodies. The highest of them remained the military-technical cooperation of 12 members. Previously, all issues were discussed in the Senate of 30 people, the Chamber of Nobility of 200 ordinary nobles and the Chamber of Citizens, two representatives from each city. In addition, the nobility was exempted from compulsory service.

The supporters of the inviolability of the principle of autocracy, led by A. Osterman and F. Prokopovich, who attracted the guards, managed to take advantage of the disagreements between the adherents of the constitutional restriction of the monarchy. As a result, having found support, Anna Ioannovna broke the “conditions” and restored the autocracy in full.

The reasons for the failure of the “supreme leaders” were the short-sightedness and selfishness of the majority of the members of the military-technical cooperation, who sought to limit the monarchy not for the sake of the interests of the whole country, or even the nobility, but for the sake of preserving and expanding their own privileges. The inconsistency of actions, political inexperience and mutual suspicion of individual noble groups, who were supporters of the constitutional order, but feared by their actions to strengthen the military-technical cooperation, also contributed to the restoration of autocracy. The bulk of the nobility was not ready for radical political change.

The decisive word belonged to the Guard, which, after some hesitation, finally supported the idea of an unlimited monarchy.

Finally, the far-sightedness and unscrupulousness of Osterman and Prokopovich, the leaders of the party of supporters of the preservation of autocracy, played an important role.

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. Since 1735, the signature of the 3rd cabinet of ministers, according to her decree, was equated with the signature of the empress. Dolgoruky, and later Golitsyn were repressed.

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. For these purposes, a cadet noble corps was created, at the end of which an officer rank was awarded; it was allowed to enlist the nobles for service from infancy, which gave them the opportunity, upon reaching the age of majority, to receive an officer rank “by length of service”.

An accurate description of the personality of the new empress was given by V.O. Klyuchevsky: “Tall and obese, with a face more masculine than feminine, callous by nature and even more hardened by early widowhood ... among court adventures in Courland, where she was pushed around like a Russian-Prussian-Polish toy, she, having already 37 years , brought to Moscow an evil and poorly educated mind with a fierce thirst for belated pleasures and gross entertainment”.

Short description

Content

1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..3
2. The struggle for the legacy of Peter I. The era of palace coups……….4
3. The reign of Catherine II. "Enlightened absolutism"…………….11
1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………….11
2. What is "Enlightened absolutism"? .............................................. 12
3. Creation of the Legislative Commission………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
4. “Instruction” of Catherine the Great…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………15
5. Functioning of the Commission………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………21
4. Russia at the end of the XVIII century. Pavel I………………………………………………………..23
1. Personality of Emperor Paul I. Domestic policy………………23
2. Foreign policy………………………………………………………..25
3. Conspiracy. The murder of Paul I……………………………………………....26
5. References…………………………………………………………………………27

The legacy of Peter I and the era of palace coups (1725-1762)

The era of palace coups is a time period in the political life of Russia in the 18th century, when the transfer of supreme state power took place through the commission of palace coups by guardsmen or courtiers. There are no clear time limits for this phenomenon. Usually, the era of palace coups is dated from the death of Peter I in 1725 to the accession to the throne of Catherine II in 1762. Responsible for the instability of the supreme power in Russia in the 18th century turned out to be Peter I, who in 1722 issued the "Decree on Succession to the Throne", which greatly expanded the circle of possible contenders for the throne. In fact, the monarch could appoint anyone as his heir. If for some reason he did not have time to do this, the question of the legitimate heir turned out to be open. Already on the eve of the death of Peter I, on January 25-26, 1725, a split arose among the highest ranks of the empire. One group (Apraksin, Golitsyn, Repnin, Dolgoruky) advocated the enthronement of the grandson of Peter I - Tsarevich Peter Alekseevich and the establishment of a regency system - the reign of Peter I's wife Ekaterina Alekseevna together with the Senate. Another group (Menshikov, Yaguzhinsky) defended the candidacy of Catherine as an autocratic empress. The dispute went far, but assertiveness, skillful maneuvering and, most importantly, reliance on the Guards (Preobrazhensky and Semyonovsky) regiments at a critical moment ensured the enthronement of Ekaterina Alekseevna after the death of Peter the Great on January 28, 1725. After her, women were at the head of the state in the course of the 18th century four more times. Women's rule in Russia came to an end only in 1796. List of palace coups in the Russian Empire

1725 - Menshikov's party enthroned Catherine I

May 1727 - The Supreme Privy Council transfers the throne to Peter II, bypassing other applicants

September 1727 - overthrow of Menshikov

1730 - the throne was transferred to Anna Ioannovna, subject to the signing of conditions limiting her autocracy
1740 - overthrow of Biron by the Munnich group
1741 - enthronement of Elizabeth Petrovna
1762 - enthronement of Catherine II and assassination of Peter III
1801 - the assassination of Paul I
1825 - succession crisis and Decembrist uprising

To embellish your own story by covering up the ugly truth, to keep silent about the true motives and facts, which, it would seem, are accompanied by irrefutable evidence, to put what is happening in the right light ... This is perhaps the main rule when writing history textbooks. Academic science has long ceased to be irrefutable for people who are accustomed to think independently, analyze facts and seek the truth in their own, albeit not always easy, way. There are many controversial points in history in which the lines of textbooks diverge from actual events, but perhaps one of the most discussed is the substitution of Peter I, the last tsar and first emperor of Russia.

Legacy of Peter the Great

The trace left by Peter the Great is truly striking in its scale: few of the rulers were able to change the course of events so much, turning over the usual way of Russians, completely changing all the foundations, habits and even the mentality of the people. Scientific, cultural and social achievements are attributed to him, and the progress achieved by society at that time seems indisputable ... But all this is only on the papers of academic textbooks, which, as you know, prefer to present everything in a rosy light, believing in the disinterest and lack of enlightenment of people . At the same time, the methods of Peter I, as well as the motives that he pursued, are far from being as rosy as historians imagine: for whom did he “cut a window to Europe”, what goals did he seek to achieve by imposing exorbitant taxes and planting a culture alien to the Russian soul ? The question is moot.

The only reasonable and logical response to such a change in behavior can be the substitution of Peter the Great. This opinion not only explains all his reforms and atypical behavior, but also resonates in the traces that the tsar left behind: numerous portraits that are strikingly different before and after the trip, hints at a completely different origin of the false Peter and the conscious alienation of relatives.

Healthy doubts about the authenticity of Peter I, supported by facts, appeared among the people during the reign of the tsar. For such speeches at that time it was possible to earn big troubles, starting with public flogging and ending with a reference to hard labor and even execution. Nevertheless, such rumors could not be eradicated: people whispered, coming up with new and new versions. Some believed that the newborn prince was replaced by German ambassadors right in the cradle, others believed that Tsarina Natalya herself gave the born baby girl to be raised, replacing her with an heir of German origin, allegedly fearing Alexei's dissatisfaction with her daughter. However, the most logical, consistent and justified version is still the substitution of the king during his trip to Western Europe, which ended in a completely different way than Peter I assumed when setting off.

Peter the Great before his trip to Europe

What was Peter I like before that ill-fated journey, and for what purpose did he go to Western Europe at all? Gathering the truth bit by bit, the easiest way is to turn to portrait painters, whose work at that time was akin to today's photography: to distort something for them was a manifestation of unprofessionalism and bad form. Looking at the early images of Peter, we can conclude that he was a rather stocky man of medium height who honored Russian life and culture. In most of the paintings, the king is depicted in national costumes, traditional caftans, and on occasion he wore solemn royal vestments. The same was with his speech: according to the annals, he was fluent in Russian, which is not surprising for representatives of his family. In addition, the tsar visited the library of Ivan the Terrible, improving his knowledge in the fields of science and art.

With his legal wife Evdokia Lopukhina, Peter the Great lived soul to soul for about 8 years. Being married, as well as before him, the king adhered to strict canons, was always restrained and was never seen in debauchery: at that time this was unacceptable for representatives of the royal family. They had two sons - Alex and Alexander. Alexander died in infancy, and Alexei was to become the official heir to the throne. Perhaps everything would have turned out just like that, if not for that ill-fated trip that turned the way of life not only of the royal family, but of all of Russia ...

Being on excellent terms with the German Lefort, Peter I often heard his stories about Western Europe. Curiosity drove the king to look at the distant lands, about which his friend spoke with such inspiration, if not for one “but”: the king was terribly afraid of sea travel. The fact is that earlier he had already survived a shipwreck, almost saying goodbye to his life. This incident left an imprint on his behavior, so Peter tried his best to avoid water. Nevertheless, curiosity overpowered, and the king decided on a two-week visit to Western Europe.

Going on a trip, Peter the Great equipped with him a large retinue of 200 families (about 450-500 people). At the same time, the tsar called himself Peter Alekseev Mikhailov: in Europe at that time there was no concept of patronymics, so “Alekseevich” became the second surname. But the autocrat failed to return either after the planned two weeks, or even a year later: Peter reappeared in St. Petersburg only after a little less than two years. And did you return?

New Peter

The man who returned from Europe bore little resemblance to the former Peter the Great. And if small changes in behavior could be attributed to new habits and more “progressive” views that the Tsar adopted in the West, then what about appearance and blatant personality changes? The portrait of the tsar, painted in Holland at the very beginning of his visit, strikingly resembles the facial features of his son Alexei. And this is not surprising: the similarity of such close relatives is easily explained by genetics. Here are just the subsequent portraits of the autocrat, which we are used to seeing in textbooks and other historical literature, have nothing to do with the original picture. Of course, the changes could be attributed to age, however, even after 50 years, moles and the very structure of the face cannot be corrected. Yes, and the complexion of the king changed: after his arrival, he became thinner and stretched out by 15 cm, but the size of his legs became surprisingly miniature (about the modern size 37). And if weight loss could be explained by a new diet, then such an increase in growth and a change in the shape of the foot is simply impossible in adulthood.

In addition, portrait painters used to leave signatures depicted on the canvas. So, on one of the later paintings of Peter I, the inscription is clearly visible: "Anatoly from Ankara." So Peter or is it Anatoly? Digging deeper and evaluating the manners of the newly-born tsar, one can put forward an assumption about the Dutch origin of the above-named Anatoly, who later became the false Peter the Great. However, there are many versions as to who took the throne, however, the arguments of Professor Chudinov look the most convincing: it was the monk who came from Ankara.

The impostor king returned, accompanied by only one person. Where the rest of the retinue went is a mystery. This is not surprising: it is much easier to convince one person of the correctness of the substitution than five hundred. The newly-appeared Peter broke off communication with relatives and relatives who could suspect a substitution, and exiled his wife to a monastery, having never seen her after a long separation. Moreover, the pure Russian speech of the ruler was replaced by an indistinct dialect with a pronounced European accent: it was clear that complex verbal constructions were difficult for him. And the tsar stopped visiting the famous library of Ivan the Terrible: apparently, its location was simply unknown to the impostor, because this secret was transmitted only to crowned persons. There is an assumption that the false Peter subsequently engaged in excavations in order to discover the repository of Russian literature, however, apparently, he did not succeed.

Having exiled his wife to a monastery, Peter-Anatoly found himself a new companion who did not belong to a princely, noble, or even count family. In fact, he took her away from his subordinate - Menshikov, who, in turn, recaptured the woman from a representative of the lower ranks in the same way. Such behavior was not typical for the king, moreover, it ran counter to the notions of honor and dignity of the royal family, but did this mean anything to a European monk? As a result of his actions, not the most decent Baltic lady became Empress Catherine I, which is insulting in itself for the royal family.

However, after the arrival of the false Peter, his views changed not only on family values, but also on military craft. If earlier the tsar avoided the fleet in every possible way, now he has become a true professional in boarding combat. Of course, it can be assumed that in two years he learned to conduct battles on the water, but where did his hydrophobia go? And why should the king do this, even if the officers abhorred boarding battles - this was an occupation for the lower ranks. But Anatoly, apparently, was well acquainted with this technique and did not fail to use his own experience and knowledge.

Where is the real king

The fate of the real Peter the Great, apparently, was disappointing. Comparing the chronology of historical events in Russia and in the West, one can notice that during the disappearance of the tsar in the Bastille, a legendary prisoner appeared, the “Iron Mask”, whose face no one had ever seen. The cartoonists who replace photographers in the modern press depicted him in a leather mask that completely hid all facial features, however, “Pyotr Alekseev Mikhailov” was carved on the camera - the name under which the autocrat went on a trip. The prisoner was kept in decent conditions, however, in 1703 he was nevertheless executed.

Imposter activity

What trace did the false Peter the Great leave behind? It is believed that it was he who contributed to the progress in Russia and "cut a window to Europe", however, in reality everything looked a little different. In his new activity there is a lot of evidence that the interests of the Russian people have become secondary for the tsar, since the Western trend has come to the fore. However, this is not surprising for an impostor. What did the false autocrat remember?

The culture of Russia has become more and more like Western. Modesty as the greatest feminine virtue was replaced by vulgarity and cheeky behavior. Instead of classical dresses, the king ordered to wear low-cut ball gowns that attract the attention of the opposite sex. Such defiant outfits were offensive to women and their families, however, no one dared to argue with the decision of the false Peter.
The appearance of men was not left without attention. Now the primordially Russian beards with a “shovel” became objectionable: they had to be shaved off. Those who refused had to pay an exorbitantly high tax to the treasury.
Severity and restraint in entertainment gave way to frequent mass balls, the promotion of alcohol, coffee and tobacco. In fact, the promiscuity that came from the West began to flourish precisely during the reign of the newly-minted Peter I.
The reforms also affected the army. So, the archers closest to the king, who always followed the real Peter the Great and his sister Sophia, were mostly executed. This event, remembered in history as the "suppression of the archery rebellion", marked another oddity: the coin issued that year contained the image of a typical Western knight and a Latin inscription.
Taking Europe as a model, the tsar founded in Russia the Academy of Sciences, characteristic of the West. The Russian people used to live with science, which was closely intertwined with Vedic knowledge, however, this form was abolished. This was done not at all in order to promote knowledge to the masses: in this case, Russian scientists would become representatives of the scientific community. However, there were much more Western scientists in the Academy of Sciences - about a hundred people against three domestic representatives, among whom was Lomonosov. That is why all meetings were held in German: most of the representatives of the Russian Academy of Sciences did not even know Russian!

To list the “achievements” of the false Peter I, which more resembled the destruction of the state, even a three-volume book would not be enough: he changed the alphabet, numbers, chronology ... After his reign, Russia could no longer become the same: the reforms completely destroyed the habitual way of people, changed their mentality and worldview. At the cost of tens of thousands of lives, the tsar forcibly implanted European culture, instead of going his own way. Is this not the main evidence that the true representative of the Romanov family was brazenly substituted. The answer to this question is not to be found in academic textbooks.

The material is based on numerous videos on this topic.

CONTENT

Introduction………….…….…….……..…………..…………….……….….…..…….3
1. The legacy of Peter 1 and the era of palace coups. ………………...………..4
2. The policy of "Enlightened absolutism". Catherine II. ……….….……….eight
3. The main goals and directions of Russia's foreign policy. Russian-Turkish wars. …….…….…….…….…….…….…….…………..……….………..………sixteen
Conclusion. …….…….…….…………..…….…….…….…….…….…….…........nineteen
Bibliography. …….…………………...….…….…….…….…………..……21

Introduction
The middle and second half of the 18th century went down in the history of Russia as a continuation of the "Petersburg period", as the time of our country's transformation into a great European power. The reign of Peter the Great ushered in a new era. Russia acquired Europeanized features of the state system: administration and jurisdiction, the army and navy were reorganized in a Western way. This time was a period of great upheavals (mass unrest of peasants in the middle of the century, the Plague Riot, the Pugachev uprising), but also of serious transformations. The need to strengthen the social basis of "autocratic absolutism" forced the Russian monarchs to change the forms of cooperation with estate structures. As a result, the nobility was given estate management and guarantees of property.
The history of Russia in the second quarter and the middle of the 18th century was characterized by a sharp struggle of noble groups for power, which led to frequent changes in the reigning persons on the throne, to rearrangements in their immediate environment. With a light hand, V.O. Klyuchevsky, the term "the era of palace coups" was assigned to this period. IN. Klyuchevsky associated the onset of political instability after the death of Peter I with the "autocracy" of the latter, who, in particular, decided to break the traditional order of succession to the throne. The throne turned out to be given "to the will of chance and became his toy" - it was not the law that determined who should sit on the throne, but the guard, which at that time was the "dominant force."
The era was characterized by the transition to the path of gradual elimination of the general enslavement of the population by the state (initially, this process affected the nobility); a departure from the idea of the omnipotence of the king; recognition of certain rights for a person; strengthening the positions of both the local bureaucracy and the local nobility in the local administration and courts; strengthening the idea of cooperation, activation of local forces. An essential place in the ideology of the Enlightenment was occupied by the concept of an "enlightened sovereign" who cares about the welfare of his subjects. In an "enlightened" state, laws established for the good of the people were to be placed at the forefront in state institutions and in politics. The ruler, recognizing unlimited and free in his powers in relation to society, had to follow the laws of his society and be guided by them.

1. The legacy of Peter 1 and the era of palace coups.
By the law of 1722, the usual order of succession to the throne, which was in force in Muscovite Russia, was abolished, and the monarch was given the right to appoint heirs. In this order, the will of the monarch was of great importance. But Peter died of an accidental cold that broke his health, shattered by labors, died only 52 years old and did not leave any will. The nobles and "gentlemen of the Senate", who gathered in the palace on the night of January 28, 1725 in view of the imminent death of Peter, learned from Makarov's office secretary that Peter had not expressed his will about the heir. I had to think about who to replace the dying emperor ..........

Conclusion
What were the main results of the 18th century for Russia?
In the XVIII century, the Russian autocracy was at the peak of its historical development, having defended the monopoly on power in the fight against the oligarchic claims of the aristocracy and subordinating the Church to direct state control. In the second half of the 18th century, church land ownership was virtually eliminated: its share was reduced from 12% to 2%.
A powerful economic base became one of the factors in establishing a certain independence of the autocracy from all classes. At the same time, this independence, which allowed the autocracy to maneuver between the estates, exercising, so to speak, a “above-class function”, certainly had its limits, which was clearly shown by the repeated palace coups that various factions of the nobility arranged in St. Petersburg without much difficulty between 1725 and 1801. for years.
By its feudal nature, the Russian autocracy was most obscurely associated with the nobility, on which it largely depended and in which it saw its main support. Petersburg autocrats, to a much greater extent than their Muscovite predecessors, cared about strengthening this social support. According to the established tradition, this was done by distributing populated lands to the nobles who distinguished themselves before the throne, as well as by deliberately expanding the nobility at the expense of distinguished military men, the most capable officials and wealthy entrepreneurs. During the 18th century, more than 2.5 million peasants were transferred from the state fund to private ownership. Often, lands and peasants were given to the "new" nobles in addition to the noble title they received for service or other merits. By the end of the 18th century, the Russian nobility was renewed by more than 20% due to people from other classes, which, of course, strengthened the social base of the autocracy.
At the same time, it was in the 18th century, or rather, at the end of it, that the legitimacy of the Russian autocracy and its moral viability were first called into question. This was the inevitable logical result of the penetration into Russia of the ideology of the Enlightenment and the ideas of the French Revolution.
The 18th century was the time of the establishment of secular culture in Russia, which, however, spread only to the privileged and educated part of society. A new Russian culture, a national language are being formed, professional theatrical, musical and visual arts are emerging. Russian science reaches a high level of scientific knowledge for those times.
But all these innovations only to a very minimal extent affected 90% of the population of peasant Russia, who continued to live according to the customs of their ancestors. As a result of forced Europeanization, it was precisely in the 18th century that a cultural and civilizational split occurred in Russian society, which finally separated its top from the masses, defining a mutual misunderstanding between them that would worsen for a century ahead.
One way or another, but in the 18th century, on the site of the equally original, as well as archaic Muscovite Russia, a semi-Europeanized Russian Empire arose - an authoritarian-bureaucratic state that established itself as a result of numerous wars as a great European power. Russia, with short breaks, fought for almost the entire duration of the 18th century. No one knows how many human and material losses she suffered in these wars. The expansionism of the Russian Empire inspired serious concern in Europe, nourishing anti-Russian sentiments there.
Regardless of the motives for the sharp intensification of Russia's external expansion since the beginning of the 18th century, generated by the need to gain access to the Baltic and Black Seas, Russian foreign policy objectively turned into a factor destabilizing the existing balance in Europe, which caused inevitable opposition to this expansion from the leading European powers. True, by the end of the 18th century, a new “violator” of the European balance appeared on the political map of Europe - revolutionary, and then Napoleonic France, against which all the legitimate monarchies of the Old World, including the Russian Empire, united.
The one-sided political and cultural orientation of St. Petersburg towards Western Europe throughout the 18th century was not unconditionally positive, since Russia at that time lost some of its traditional spiritual values. In this sense, the XVIII century for Russia can be considered a transitional and even a turning point in its historical development.

Bibliography
1. History of political and legal doctrines. Textbook for high schools. Under the general editorship of Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. S. Nesesyants. M.: 1996 - 736 p.
2. History of Russia from the beginning of the XVIII to the end of the XIX century / L.V. Milov,
P.N. Zyryanov, A.N. Bokhanov, M.: OOO Publishing House AST-LTD, 1997-554s
3. Klyuchevsky V.O. Course of lectures on Russian history,
collected works, M.: 1979. (Vol. No. 3)
4. Tatishchev V.N. Russian History, M.: 1986. (Vol. No. 7)
5. Cherkasov P.P., Chernyshevsky D.V. History of Imperial Russia,
M.: Intern. relations, 1994. - 448s.
6. Yurganov A.L., Katsva L.A. History of Russia XVI-XVIII centuries: Textbook for
institutions of higher education, M.: Miros, 1994. - 424 p.
7. Kamensky A.B. Russian Empire in the 18th century: traditions and modernization. M., 1999
8. Ionov I.N. Russian civilization, IX - early XX centuries: Textbook. book. for 10-11 cells. general education institutions. M., 1995