Introduction

Chapter I. Biography of Emperors

Biography of Alexander I Napoleon Bonaparte

Chapter II. The policy of the emperors and their military actions

Reforms of Alexander I

Domestic policy of Napoleon

Relations between Russia and France

Patriotic War of 1812

Napoleon commander

Alexander I commander

Chapter I. Biography of Emperors Alexander I and Napoleon Bonaparte

Biography of Alexander I

Alexander I Pavlovich (December 12 (23), 1777 - November 19 (December 1), 1825) - Emperor of All Russia (from March 11 (23), 1801), the eldest son of Emperor Paul I and Maria Feodorovna. Alexander I Pavlovich - Russian Tsar. He issued a decree on free cultivators, opened gymnasiums, county schools, founded pedagogical institutes, opened universities in Kazan and Kharkov. Established the State Council and ministries. Victoriously ended the war with Napoleon, solemnly entering Paris. He was buried in St. Petersburg in the Peter and Paul Cathedral on March 18, 1826.

On the night of March 11-12, 1801, the conspirators entered the undefended Mikhailovsky Castle and demanded the emperor's abdication. But Paul I refused and was killed. The sons of Paul were so confused that night that the St. Petersburg Governor-General, Count Palen, had to take the eldest, Alexander, by the shoulders and tell him: “Sir, it’s enough to be a child, go reign.” The new king was not yet 24 years old. He was a young man of above average height, slightly stooped, reddish blond with a smile on his perfectly shaped lips and sad eyes. Even men admired the grandson of Catherine II, and women were ready to adore the crowned handsome man. Alexander Pavlovich used to get along with the same immediacy in the Catherine's kingdom and in the Pavlovsk. He learned to admire "the rights of man and citizen" while deriving the greatest pleasure from marching and yelling at the soldiers. His teacher La Harpe praised love of freedom, and Alexander took his lessons, but before him was the example of Catherine, freedom-loving and autocratic, and Paul, who was attracted only to the Prussian drill, and these examples inspired him with an unconscious tendency to combine in his heart what usually seems incompatible.

Alexander's family life almost immediately developed unhappily. When he was sixteen years old, Catherine married her grandson to the 14-year-old Princess Louise-Maria-August of Baden, who was named Elizabeth when she converted to Orthodoxy. He was handsome, she was charming, delicate and fragile, and there was something airy, elusive in her appearance. Shyness, self-doubt combined in her with great spiritual receptivity. She was smart, though somewhat superficial, and her mindset, and indeed her whole character, was colored by dreaminess, romanticism. From a young age she was looking for some kind of truth and at the same time, as if afraid to touch the truth, she loved her inner world, which she created for herself. In a word, the future Empress Elizaveta Alekseevna was, like her husband, a rather complex and not quite stable nature. But it happened, however, that they did not approach each other at all. Elizabeth, the young Grand Duchess, thoughtful and passionate, needed love, needed tenderness and outpourings of a close heart. Her husband did not pay attention to her, returning from Gatchina, where a soldier drilled with his father, so tired that he could hardly stand on his feet, and, having slept, again hurried to the guardhouse. From a young age, Alexander Pavlovich sought oblivion in women, rest from the doubts and contradictions that tormented his soul. Maria Antonovna Naryshkina, born Princess Svyatopolk-Chetvertinskaya, was his greatest passion.

About Alexander Pavlovich - Don Juan - can be judged exhaustively from the reports of informants of the Vienna police during the time when the congress was in session, that very famous congress at which the Russian emperor, in very difficult circumstances, was destined to once again stubbornly and brilliantly defend the interests of Russia. He is the liberator of Europe, he is the first among monarchs, there is no one in the world who would be more powerful than him. Alexander Pavlovich liked to show off, but usually he was a stranger to pomp, because his very famous elegance was just that perfect, that he never caught the eye. In Vienna, it became clear to him that at the moment when European diplomacy was trying to reduce his strength, it was necessary for him to dazzle with his splendor the capital of the heirs of the Caesars. After all, he is their heir: such is the will of the ancestors of his Muscovite tsars. The balls he gave, receptions, solemn ceremonies were more magnificent than the Austrian ones. To outshine everyone - such was the desire of a worthy grandson of Catherine. In Vienna, he decided to outshine everyone in love. However, his Viennese adventures are a consequence of the fact that by that time big politics had already brought him a lot of disappointment. So, Alexander Pavlovich spent his time in Vienna as if very carelessly. It would, however, be completely erroneous to believe that amorous entertainment, even in the least, prevented him from fulfilling his duties. He actually headed the Russian delegation at the congress: he was in charge of Russia's foreign policy, impressing with his perseverance and knowledge of the matter to all other monarchs who preferred to avoid direct participation in diplomatic strife.

The sudden death of Paul frightened Alexander for the rest of his life. The memory of this death tormented him so much throughout his life that at one time many were convinced that this death was not without the participation of Alexander. Alexander found salvation from these terrible memories in religious mysticism. And while Alexander gave himself up to religion, the administration of the state was entirely left to his favorites, in particular, Arakcheev. Worst of all, this same Arakcheev was not at all an independent person, but a puppet in the hands of his many mistresses, before whom, however, the highest-ranking officials of the empire were humiliated.

Ten years have passed. In the last period of his reign, before his mysterious departure to Taganrog, Emperor Alexander Pavlovich often asked himself what he had achieved, what had he accomplished? He increased the size of his empire, the population increased by twelve million souls, he led his people across Europe from end to end and broke the power of Napoleon, but what, besides glory and new lands, did he give Russia? Sadness probably seized him when he remembered that he was going to free the peasants, and almost two and a half decades after his accession to the throne, he did not do anything decisive for this - and knew that he could no longer do it.

People's rumor gave rise to rumors after his death in Taganrog in 1825 that the monarch did not die; instead of himself, he buried someone else, and he himself went to Siberia, where he led the life of a wanderer and died at a ripe old age.

Biography of Napoleon Bonaparte

French emperor (August 15, 1769 - May 5, 1821), from the Bonaparte dynasty. A native of Corsica. He began serving in the army with the rank of junior lieutenant of artillery; advanced during the French Revolution and under the Directory. In November 1799, he carried out a coup d'état, as a result of which he became the first consul, who actually concentrated all power in his hands; in 1804 he was proclaimed emperor. He established a dictatorial regime that met the interests of the French bourgeoisie. Thanks to victorious wars, he significantly expanded the territory of the empire, but the defeat in the war of 1812 against Russia marked the beginning of the collapse of the empire. After the troops of the anti-French coalition entered Paris, he abdicated. He was exiled to the island of Elba. He again occupied the French throne, but after the defeat at Waterloo he abdicated a second time. He spent the last years of his life on the island of St. Helena as a prisoner of the British.

Napoleon adored women. For their sake, he put things aside, forgot about his grandiose plans, soldiers and marshals. He spent billions to attract women, wrote thousands of love letters to seduce them. In his youth, Napoleon's love was reduced either to flirting, which had no consequences, or to banal adventures. With the exception of the young wife of the people's representative of the Convention, Madame Turrot, who herself threw herself on his neck, the other women did not pay any attention to the small, thin, pale and badly dressed officer.

Bonaparte gave the order to disarm the Parisians. A boy came to his headquarters with a request to be allowed to keep his sword in memory of his father. Bonaparte allows, and soon the boy's mother came to visit him to thank the general for his mercy. For the first time he was face to face with a noble lady, a former viscountess, elegant and seductive. A few days later, Bonaparte paid a return visit to the Vicomtesse de Beauharnais. She lived very modestly, but Bonaparte saw in her a beautiful woman. Fifteen days after the first visit, Napoleon and Josephine became close. He passionately fell in love. Bonaparte begs her to marry him. And she made up her mind. On March 9, 1796, the wedding took place. Two days later, General Bonaparte went to the Italian army, Madame Bonaparte remained in Paris. He sent her letters from every post station. He won six victories in fifteen days, but all this time the fever tormented him, the cough exhausted the body. Going to Egypt, Bonaparte agreed with Josephine that as soon as he conquered this country, his wife would come to him. But already on the way, anxiety seized him. He began to suspect her, asked friends whom he trusted about his wife. As soon as Bonaparte's eyes were opened, as soon as the illusions dissipated, he began to think about divorce.

Meanwhile, returning to France, Napoleon, greeted with enthusiasm by the people, really had firm intentions to break with Josephine. But this woman, having soberly weighed her situation, realized that a break with Bonaparte would deprive her of everything. And for almost a day she sought a meeting with him, sobbing at his door. When her children joined her, he gave in and let her in. Bonaparte forgave Josephine completely and generously, but drew his own conclusions: his wife should never be alone with another man. He paid all her debts - more than two million, and Madame Bonaparte understood that such generosity and position in society, bestowed on her by her husband, were worth it to behave impeccably, and henceforth she behaved like that.

As the power of Bonaparte increased, the number of petitioners and ambitious intriguers became more and more, all of them cannot be counted. In the decade between 1800 and 1810, Napoleon was at the height of his fame, his mental and physical strength, and his masculine temperament. He did not seek love adventures, but he did not avoid them either. He took what was at hand. At the same time, not a single woman interfered with his work, did not distract him from important thoughts, did not violate his plans. No preparatory steps were taken on his part, no hassle, no anxiety. As Napoleon rose, his wife's prestige in the world fell. Any carelessness on her part, a flash of the emperor's anger - and she could lose everything. After one of the ugly scenes of jealousy, Bonaparte announced to her that he intended to get a divorce. Josephine spent two days in tears, and the great Napoleon yielded to the weeping woman. He told her to prepare for the coronation. With the help of the Pope, she persuaded him to marry. And now Josephine, the empress, is married by a priest, and she is crowned emperor.

Having decided to divorce Josephine, Bonaparte could not take this step for a long time. Napoleon announced a divorce, and Josephine's tears and fainting no longer helped. She achieved only that he retained for her the Elysee Palace, Malmaison, the Navarre castle, three million a year, the title, coats of arms, security, escort. After the divorce, he was constantly interested in her, but met her only in public, as if he was afraid that this most unshakable, most powerful and blind love would flare up in him again with the same strength.

Napoleon was looking for a bride of royal blood. The Austrian Emperor himself offered him his eldest daughter Marie-Louise as his wife. This marriage satisfied his vanity, it seemed to him that, having become related to the Austrian monarchy, he would become on a par with them. March 11, 1810 in Vienna, in the Cathedral of St. Stefan, the marriage ceremony took place. On March 13, Marie Louise said goodbye to her family and left for France. Bonaparte himself ordered linen, negligees, bonnets, dresses, shawls, lace, shoes, boots, incredibly expensive and beautiful jewelry for her. He himself oversaw the decoration of apartments for his royal wife. Was looking forward to it. Napoleon saw his wife only in a portrait. She had blond hair, beautiful blue eyes, and pale pink cheeks. She was densely built, she did not differ in grace, but she had undoubted health - this was important for a woman preparing to become the mother of Napoleon's heir. Marie Louise gave birth to Napoleon's heir, Eugene, but unwittingly becomes the bait with which the old European monarchical aristocracy tried to trap him. He solemnly proclaimed Marie-Louise Regent of the Empire. But the empire collapsed. Napoleon was in exile. He made a desperate attempt to regain power. On March 1, 1815, he set foot on French soil. His return was greeted with enthusiasm by the Parisians. But the thought of Marie-Louise haunted Bonaparte. In vain did he send his people to Vienna, in vain did he write letters to his wife. Marie Louise never visited him.

Napoleon's star was rapidly setting. The Allies defeated the French at the Battle of Waterloo. The Emperor abdicated for the second time. On August 7, 1815, the frigate Northumberland with Napoleon and his retinue on board left Plymouth and headed for St. Helena, where he was to spend the last years of his stormy life.

In the spring of 1821, the mysterious illness from which the emperor suffered worsened. Napoleon died on May 5, 1821.

Chapter II The policy of the emperors and their military actions

Reforms of Alexander I.

In the mid-90s, a small circle of like-minded people formed around Alexander. They were V.P. Kochubey, Prince A.A. Czartoryski, Count A.S. Stroganov, N.N. Novosiltsev is Stroganov's cousin. In this circle of "young friends" the vices of Pavlov's reign were discussed and plans for the future were made.

Control over the activities of the monarch, the creation of a mechanism that protects against despotic tendencies, met Alexander's convictions, and therefore, on April 5, 1801, a decree appeared on the creation of an Indispensable Council - a legislative advisory body under the sovereign. Council members were given the opportunity to monitor the activities of the monarch and, in essence, protest those actions or decrees of the emperor with which they did not agree. Initially, the Council consisted of 12 people, mostly heads of the most important state institutions.

Alexander saw the main goal of the changes in the creation of a constitution that would guarantee his subjects the rights of a citizen. Meanwhile, without waiting for the reform plan to be created, in May 1801. Alexander submitted to the Permanent Council a draft decree prohibiting the sale of serfs without land. According to the emperor, this decree was to be the first step towards the elimination of serfdom. It was followed by the following - permission to purchase inhabited lands to non-nobles with the condition that the peasants living on these lands would become free. When a certain number of free peasants would appear as a result, it was planned to extend a similar procedure for selling land to the nobles. The most important consequence of Alexander's failure in trying to solve the peasant problem was the final transfer of the preparation of reforms to the circle of "young friends", and he agreed with their opinion that this work should be carried out in secret so as not to cause peasant unrest, constantly arising from the spread of rumors about changing laws. So the Unspoken Committee was created, which included Stroganov,

Kochubey, Czartorysky, Novosiltsev, and later Count A.R. Vorontsov.

As for the official Indispensable Council, the real result of the first months of its work was the draft “The most merciful letter to the Russian people complained”, which was supposed to be published on the day of the coronation of the emperor on September 15, 1801. The letter was supposed to reaffirm all the privileges of the nobility, philistinism and merchants, indicated in the Letters of Complaint of 1785, as well as the rights and guarantees of private property, personal security, freedom of speech, press and conscience common to all inhabitants of the country. A special article of the charter guaranteed the inviolability of these rights.

Another project prepared for the coronation was that of reorganizing the Senate. The Senate was to become the body of the supreme leadership of the country, combining the executive, judicial, control and legislative functions.

In September 1802, a series of decrees created a system of eight ministries: Military, Naval, Foreign Affairs, Internal Affairs, Commerce, Finance, Public Education and Justice, as well as the State Treasury as a ministry. The ministers and chief executives, as ministers, formed the Committee of Ministers, in which each of them undertook to submit for discussion their most submissive reports to the emperor. Simultaneously with the creation of the ministries, the Senate reform was also carried out. Decree on the rights of the Senate, he was defined as "the supreme seat of the empire", whose power was limited only by the power of the emperor. Ministers had to submit annual reports to the Senate, which he could protest before the sovereign.

February 20, 1803 issued a decree on free cultivators. In fact, a new social category of free cultivators was created, owning the land by the right of private property.

Along with attempts to resolve the most important issues in the life of Russia, the government of Alexander I carried out major reforms in the field of public education. January 24, 1803 The king approved a new regulation on the organization of educational institutions. The territory of Russia was divided into six educational districts, in which four categories of educational institutions were created: parish, district, provincial schools, as well as gymnasiums and universities. The first stage of the reforms of Alexander I ended in 1803, when it became clear that it was necessary to look for new ways and forms of their implementation.

1809-1812 This stage is associated with the activities of Speransky. According to his project, it was supposed:

Implement the principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial;

Create a system of representative institutions - elected volost, district, provincial dumas, which would be crowned by the State Duma, the country's highest legislative body;

Transfer the functions of the highest judicial authority to the Senate;

To clarify the functions and procedures for the activities of the ministries, to strengthen their responsibility as the highest bodies of executive power;

Establish a State Council - an advisory body under the emperor, a link between the monarch and the legislative, executive, judicial bodies of the empire;

The emperor retained full executive power, he had the exclusive right to initiate legislation, could dissolve the State Duma, and appoint members of the State Council;

Divide the entire population of Russia into three estates: the nobility, the "average condition", "the working people". All estates acquired civil rights, and the first two - political rights.

The question of the abolition of serfdom was not considered, the reform was supposed to be completed by 1811. Of the measures proposed by Speransky, one was implemented - in 1810 the State Council was created.

In 1818, the tsar instructed N.N. Novosiltsev to develop a constitution for its introduction in Russia. By 1820, the Charter of the Russian Empire was ready. According to this project, Russia became a federation, introduced civil rights and freedoms and limited popular representation. A constitutional monarchy was established.

In 1818, Alexander I was submitted to the draft of the abolition of serfdom prepared on his behalf. It was developed by the closest associate of the last decade of his reign, A.A. Arakcheev.

Both projects remained secret; Alexander I did not even begin to implement them. In 1820-1821. the reactionary course, usually called Arakcheevism, triumphed. The reform plans were over. The landlords were confirmed the right to exile peasants to Siberia. The military settlements created in 1815-1819 expanded. The settlers had to combine military service with agricultural labor. The drill on the parade ground was supplemented by the petty supervision of the chiefs who monitored the plowing and sowing. Military settlements became a kind of symbol of the last period of the reign of Alexander I.

Post-war reforms of Alexander I

Having strengthened his authority as a result of the victory over the French, Alexander I made another series of reform attempts in the domestic politics of the post-war period. As early as 1809, the Grand Duchy of Finland was created, which essentially became an autonomy with its own diet, without whose consent the tsar could not change legislation and introduce new taxes, and a senate. In May 1815, Alexander announced the granting of a constitution to the Kingdom of Poland, which provided for the creation of a bicameral Sejm, a system of local self-government, and freedom of the press.

In 1817-1818, a number of people close to the emperor were engaged, on his orders, in developing projects for the phased elimination of serfdom in Russia. In 1818, Alexander I gave the task to N. N. Novosiltsev to prepare a draft constitution for Russia. The draft "State charter of the Russian Empire", which provided for the federal structure of the country, was ready by the end of 1820 and approved by the emperor, but its introduction was postponed indefinitely. The tsar complained to his inner circle that he had no assistants and could not find suitable people for governorships. Former ideals more and more seemed to Alexander I only fruitless romantic dreams and illusions, divorced from real political practice. The news of the uprising of the Semyonovsky regiment, which he perceived as a threat of a revolutionary explosion in Russia, had a sobering effect on Alexander, to prevent which it was necessary to take tough measures. However, the dreams of reform did not leave the emperor until 1822-1823.

One of the paradoxes of the domestic policy of Alexander I of the post-war period was the fact that attempts to renew the Russian state were accompanied by the establishment of a police regime, later called "Arakcheevshchina". Military settlements became its symbol, in which Alexander himself, however, saw one of the ways to free the peasants from personal dependence, but which aroused hatred in the widest circles of society. In 1817, instead of the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education was created, headed by the Chief Procurator of the Holy Synod and head of the Bible Society A.N. Golitsyn. Under his leadership, the defeat of Russian universities was actually carried out, cruel censorship reigned. In 1822, Alexander I banned the activities of Masonic lodges and other secret societies in Russia and approved the proposal of the Senate, which allowed landowners to exile their peasants to Siberia for "bad deeds". At the same time, the emperor was aware of the activities of the first Decembrist organizations, but did not take any measures against their members, believing that they shared the delusions of his youth.

Domestic policy of Napoleon

Having become a full-fledged dictator, Napoleon radically changed the state structure of the country. The emphasis was solely on strengthening the position of Napoleon in politics, that is, personal power, which was the guarantor of consolidating the successes that the revolution had achieved: civil rights, the liberation of peasants from serfdom, and the right to preserve the land of those who managed to buy it during the revolution from those who left the country. The Napoleonic Code, that is, the civil code named after Napoleon, adopted in 1804, was intended to preserve all these achievements.

Napoleon organized the Administrative Reform, which led to the fact that departments and district prefects appeared in France. That is, the administrative division of the French lands has changed significantly. In cities or even villages, from that time there appeared managers - mayors.

A state-owned French bank was established to store gold reserves and issue paper money. Until 1936, no major changes were made to the management system of the French Bank created by Napoleon: the manager and his deputies were appointed by the government, and decisions were made jointly with 15 board members from shareholders - this ensured a balance between public and private interests. On March 28, 1803, paper money was liquidated: the franc, equal to a five-gram silver coin and divided into 100 centimes, became the monetary unit. To centralize the tax collection system, the Directorate of Direct Taxation and the Directorate of Reduced Taxation were created. Having taken over a state with a deplorable financial condition, Napoleon introduced austerity in all areas. The normal functioning of the financial system was ensured by the creation of two opposing and at the same time cooperating ministries: finance and treasury. They were led by the prominent financiers of the time Gaudin and Mollien. The Minister of Finance was responsible for budget revenues, the Minister of the Treasury gave a detailed report on the expenditure of funds, his activities were checked by the Accounts Chamber of 100 civil servants. She controlled the expenditures of the state, but did not pass judgment on their expediency.

The administrative and legal innovations of Napoleon became the foundation for the modern state, many of them work to this day. Just at that time, the education system was updated: secondary schools appeared - lyceums, and universities - the so-called Polytechnic School and Normal School. By the way, until now, these educational structures are the most prestigious literally throughout France. Printing also expected impressive changes. More than 90% of newspapers were closed, as Napoleon was aware of how dangerous and effective newspapers are in terms of influencing people's minds. A powerful police force and an extensive secret service were created. The church, too, was completely subject to the jurisdiction and control of the government and the emperor.

These and other measures forced Napoleon's opponents to declare him a traitor to the Revolution, although he considered himself a faithful successor to its ideas. The truth is that he managed to consolidate some revolutionary gains, but decisively dissociated himself from the principle of freedom.

Relations between Russia and France

Alexander I considered Napoleon a symbol of trampling on the legality of the world order. But the Russian emperor overestimated his capabilities, which led to the disaster near Austerlitz in November 1805, and the presence of the emperor in the army, his inept orders had the most disastrous consequences. Alexander refused to ratify the peace treaty with France signed in June 1806, and only the defeat near Friedland in May 1807 forced the Russian emperor to agree to an agreement. At his first meeting with Napoleon in Tilsit in June 1807, Alexander I managed to prove himself an outstanding diplomat. An alliance and an agreement on the division of zones of influence was concluded between Russia and France. As the further development of events showed, the Tilsit agreement turned out to be more beneficial for Russia, allowing it to accumulate forces. Napoleon sincerely considered Russia his only possible ally in Europe. In 1808, the parties discussed plans for a joint campaign against India and the division of the Ottoman Empire. At a meeting with Alexander I in Erfurt, Napoleon recognized Russia's right to Finland captured during the Russo-Swedish War, and Russia recognized France's right to Spain. However, already at this time, relations between the allies began to heat up due to the imperial interests of both sides. Thus, Russia was not satisfied with the existence of the Duchy of Warsaw, the continental blockade harmed the Russian economy, and in the Balkans, each of the two countries had their own far-reaching plans. In 1810, Alexander I refused Napoleon, who asked for the hand of his sister, Grand Duchess Anna Pavlovna, and signed a provision on neutral trade, which effectively nullified the continental blockade. There is an assumption that Alexander I was going to deliver a preemptive strike to Napoleon, but after France concluded allied treaties with Austria and Prussia, Russia began to prepare for a defensive war. On June 12, 1812, French troops crossed the Russian border. The Patriotic War of 1812 began.

Patriotic War of 1812

The invasion of the Napoleonic armies into Russia was perceived by Alexander not only as the greatest threat to Russia, but also as a personal insult, and Napoleon himself became from now on a mortal personal enemy for him. Not wanting to repeat the experience of Austerlitz and, submitting to the pressure of his entourage, Alexander left the army and returned to St. Petersburg. During the entire time that Barclay de Tolly carried out a retreat, which provoked sharp criticism from both society and the army, Alexander almost did not show his solidarity with the commander. After Smolensk was abandoned, the emperor gave in to the general demands and appointed M.I. Kutuzov. With the expulsion of the Napoleonic troops from Russia, Alexander returned to the army and was in it during the foreign campaigns of 1813-1814.

The victory over Napoleon strengthened the authority of Alexander I, he became one of the most powerful rulers of Europe, who felt like a liberator of its peoples, who was entrusted with a special mission determined by God's will to prevent further wars and devastation on the continent. He also considered the tranquility of Europe a necessary condition for the realization of his reformist plans in Russia itself. To ensure these conditions, it was necessary to maintain the status quo, determined by the decisions of the Congress of Vienna, according to which the territory of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw was ceded to Russia, and the monarchy was restored in France, and Alexander insisted on the establishment of a constitutional monarchy in this country, which should have served as a precedent to establish similar regimes in other countries. The Russian emperor, in particular, managed to enlist the support of his allies for his idea of ​​introducing a constitution in Poland. As a guarantor of compliance with the decisions of the Congress of Vienna, the emperor initiated the creation of the Holy Alliance on September 14, 1815. Alexander I directly participated in the activities of the congresses of the Holy Alliance in Aachen September-November 1818, Troppau and Laibach October-December 1820-January 1821, Verona October-December 1822. However, the strengthening of Russian influence in Europe provoked opposition from the allies. In 1825 the Holy Alliance essentially collapsed.

Chapter III Comparison of two emperors with each other

Napoleon commander

Napoleon was an unsurpassed commander-improviser. He carried out his main military thesis: "to achieve a decisive advantage in the most necessary place" in all battles from the beginning of his military career. Irrationality, spontaneity and exceptional abilities for a structural, holistic spatial assessment of the situation, Napoleon sent to short-term operations. The exceptional force of influence on the army and the advantage of the spirit of confidence could always be opposed to the superior number of enemy troops. In battles, he used a covert and sudden strike by attacking forces in that place and at a time where and when the enemy was not waiting for him. How to catch the right moment and how to determine the right place of attack, when cannons rumble, volleys of guns pour into their discordant roar, death and war cries are heard from everywhere? The factors of genius manifest themselves precisely in this reality. In the long-term war that he had to fight in Russia, Napoleon could not realize his military talent and lost the war, in fact, without losing specific battles. On the Berezina, using lightning speed and a structural vision of the situation, Napoleon, having deceived Chichagov, left an absolutely hopeless situation. Like Alexander the Great, Napoleon instilled unshakable confidence in the victory of his troops. This confidence was passed from marshal to marshal, from hussar to hussar, from corporal to corporal, from soldier to soldier - all were embraced by a single impulse of battle. Napoleon's entire attacking army acted as a single, coordinated human mechanism for the destruction of the enemy's force. Napoleon was cruel, that cruelty of any commander, when huge human sacrifices are made to sacrifice the goal. Encouraged by the magic of the commander, they marched in close ranks under continuous fire from the enemy, buckshot and bullets mowed down entire ranks, but, despising death, they again went forward.

In a brilliant commander, the images-structures of battles and campaigns are in periodic tension, because they are aimed at further development and are just waiting for this opportune moment. This is analogous to the same processes in the mind that are characteristic of geniuses. The semantic structures imprinted in the brain experience mental stress. Gaps and deformations associated with uncertainty appear in them. But in brilliant generals during the battle, the excitation of the entire nervous system is exceptionally strong, the force of influence of this mental focus is great and the influence of the personality itself is great. This psychic energy, this flow of confidence in victory, fascinates and hypnotizes the army. Throughout his military career, a special mental filter formed in the mind of Napoleon as a commander. The action of this filter suppresses one image of the battle, along with its fears and thirst for destruction, and enhances the other. Thanks to this mental filter, the entire war experience is imprinted in the memory. Covering the battle area with a single glance, the commander was inspired by future sensations. In these future sensations with insights, outbursts of emotions and inspiration, he saw his goal.

Alexander I commander

Alexander I cannot be called a brilliant ruler or commander. He won the Patriotic War thanks to the military genius of Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov. Also, a huge contribution to the victory of Russia over Napoleon was made by: Mikhail Bogdanovich Barclay de Tolly, Bagration Pyotr Ivanovich, Denis Vasilyevich Davydov, Alexei Petrovich Ermolov, Mikhail Andreevich Miloradovich.

What do Alexander and Napoleon have in common?

Alexander and Napoleon are contemporaries, from 1807 to 1811 they were allies, almost intermarried, and before and after that they were mortal enemies who invaded each other's capitals.

The scale of Alexander's personality and domestic and foreign historians are assessed low. It seems that this whole series of assessments is underestimated, it is necessary to judge Alexander by a whole octave higher, as A.Z. did. Manfred in a book about Napoleon: "Among the monarchs of the Romanov dynasties, not counting Peter I, Alexander I was, apparently, the most intelligent and skillful politician." Napoleon himself was inclined to this opinion, who, although he said about Alexander that “in everything and always he lacks something and what he lacks changes indefinitely”, he nevertheless concluded his statements about him on the island of St. Helena: "This is undoubtedly the most capable of all reigning monarchs." It is the comparison with Napoleon that prompts historians to underestimate Alexander, a comparison that Alexander, of course, does not stand up to. Even the official biographer of the tsar, his great-nephew, Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich was forced to admit: “As the ruler of a vast state, thanks to the genius of first his ally, and then the enemy, Napoleon, he will forever occupy a special position in the history of Europe at the beginning of the 19th century, having also received from the imaginary friendship and rivalry with Napoleon is the inspiration that is a necessary attribute of a great monarch. His appearance became, as it were, an addition to the image of Napoleon. The genius of Napoleon was reflected, as on water, on him and gave him the importance that he would not have had it not for this reflection.

With all the polarity of opinions of contemporaries and descendants about the individual qualities of Napoleon, almost all of them, with rare unanimity, recognized the unique scale of his personality as a genius and colossus. All of them put Bonaparte in the first rank of the greatest military leaders of the world and, in general, the most important figures in the history of mankind, seeing in him the most characteristic example of a "genius man" (Chernyshevsky) and even being carried away by him to such exaggerations as: "unprecedented genius" (Hegel), “the best offspring of the Earth” (Byron), “a deity from head to toe” (Heine), etc. The main historical merit of Napoleon is one of his Russian biographers N.A. Solovyov defined it this way: born of "revolutionary chaos", he "ordered this chaos." Indeed, having pacified the revolution, Napoleon preserved and clothed in legal norms its most important achievements: the abolition of feudal restrictions, the freedom to develop capitalist production, and the civil equality of the population. Moreover, he spread these conquests from France throughout Europe. Invading foreign countries, ruining them with indemnities, Bonaparte destroyed the feudal junk in them - he destroyed medieval regimes, abolished noble and church privileges, freed the peasants from the fetters of serfdom, introduced his own Civil Code.

The tragedy of Napoleon lay in the fact that he imposed his advanced laws and regulations on backward peoples by force. Having conquered Europe and benefiting it with his transformations, he turned it all against him. Since 1808, when Napoleon was forced to fight numerous opponents, and especially since 1812, when his "Great Army" perished in Russia, he was historically doomed.

In conclusion, it should be noted that there are similarities between Napoleon and Alexander: accession to the throne through coups; unhappy family life; many love stories. But the difference is that Napoleon was a more talented commander than Alexander. The historical role of Alexander I would have been played in his place by any of his many allies and associates, but only he alone could play the role of Napoleon.

List of used literature

1. Aksenova M., Ismailova S. World History - T.I, - M .: Avanta +, 1993 -618 p.

2. Chandler D. Napoleon's military campaigns. M.: Tsentropoligraf, 1999.

3. Tarle E.V. Napoleon. - M.: Gosizdat, 1941. - 562 p.

4. The work of N.A. Troitsky Alexander I and Napoleon M., 1994.

5. Sakharov A.N. Alexander I // Russian autocrats (1801-1917) . M., 1993.

6. Vandal A. Napoleon and Alexander I. Rostov-on-Don, 1995. T. 1-3.

About historical personalities, equipped with illustrations, portraits. The presented material helps students to create an idea about the era, about the life of historical figures of the past. CHAPTER 11. METHODS OF STUDYING PERSONALIES IN THE LESSONS OF THE HISTORY OF RUSSIA (GRADE 8) § 1 Results of the ascertaining experiment Pedagogical research took place in three stages. Each stage had its own goals and ...

About the fear of him) exiles... If he died the death of a warrior, and not the death of a pensioner - from an incomprehensible, long-term illness, which one would so much like to explain for the sake of completeness by the machinations of enemies. Chapter 2. Napoleon as the idol of generations The entire nineteenth century is permeated with echoes of the Napoleonic myth. Napoleon is the man of the century: he shook the imagination of several generations. To him - to his glory and destiny, ...

To war. Italy at that time was under Austrian rule. Like other European monarchical states, Austria waged military operations against revolutionary France. Napoleon Bonaparte was opposed by the Austrian army, which was four times larger than the French, was well armed, supported from the sea by an English squadron under the command of the famous admiral ...

The rest of the allies sent Napoleon to St. Helena (in the South Atlantic Ocean). Here he died in May 1821. After the second reign of Napoleon, which went down in history under the name "Hundred Days", the Bourbons again established themselves in France. 12. Convocation of the Vienna Congress. Final act. Creation of the Holy Alliance. Soon after the victory over Napoleon, representatives of all ...

LECTURE VII

The second period of the reign of Alexander (1805–1807). – The international position of Russia at the beginning of the 19th century. - The break with Napoleon. - Czartoryski's plans and Alexander's attitude towards the Poles in 1805 - Unsuccessful outcome of the 1805 campaign - War of 1806-1807 - Defeat of Prussia. - Emergency preparations for war with Napoleon in Russia, - Winter campaign of 1807 - Depletion of Russia's military means. - Peace of Tilsit. - Alliance with Napoleon. – Acute discontent in Russia caused by the Treaty of Tilsit and its consequences. – Manifestations and nature of the opposition mood in society.

Russia and Napoleon at the beginning of the reign of Alexander I

Turning to the consideration of the second period of the reign of Alexander, marked by the first two wars with Napoleon, it should be said that those relations that led to the war of 1805 began to take shape long before that.

At the time of Paul's death, a war was coming with England, and the English fleet was already on its way to bombard Kronstadt. Immediately after the accession of Alexander, peace was concluded with England, and those controversial issues of maritime law, which for quite a long time harmed the peaceful relations of Russia and other powers with England, were also resolved. Although all the sympathies of Alexander himself in his youth were on the side of France, nevertheless he submitted, as we have seen, to the pressure that was exerted on him by those around him, in favor of an alliance with England. At the very first meetings of the secret committee, it was decided in principle not to interfere in any internal affairs of foreign states, and although a suspicious attitude was established towards France due to the ambitious plans of Bonaparte, peaceful principles prevailed in external affairs. Russia, therefore, in the first years of Alexander's reign was freed from all external confusions and wars, and this was in full accordance with Alexander's own intentions to turn all his attention to internal affairs. These peace-loving relations were not then limited only to Western Europe, but also extended to the eastern outskirts, so that when Georgia, fleeing the onslaught of Persia, asked to be annexed to Russia, this issue, too, was initially resolved in the unspoken committee in the negative, and only in view of the insistence of the Indispensable Council, Alexander resolved this issue in the opposite sense, and, however, ordered that all income received from the population of Georgia annexed to Russia go to local needs and that Georgia be governed according to local customs. Unfortunately, these good intentions and instructions of the young sovereign did not prevent the unsuccessful representatives of the Russian authorities in Georgia - Knorring and Kovalensky - within a few months to excite the entire public opinion of Georgia against Russia with their outrageous abuses and violence.

Relations with Napoleon, which had developed quite favorably in the first months of Alexander's reign and were secured by a peace treaty concluded in the autumn of 1801, began to deteriorate from the end of 1801 - partly due to the hostile attitude towards Napoleon, which was taken up by our new ambassador in Paris - the arrogant c. Carrots, partly because of the Sardinian king, whom Napoleon wanted, contrary to the treaty concluded with Russia, to be wiped off the face of the earth, and Alexander considered himself obliged to protect as an old ally of Russia. In addition, Alexander himself became more and more inclined to think that it was necessary to limit the ambitious aspirations of Bonaparte, and from 1802 he gradually became convinced that sooner or later Napoleon would have to be curbed by an armed hand. At the same time, having become more familiar with international relations and personally entering into relations with representatives of foreign powers in St. propensity for direct diplomatic negotiations. He was apparently fascinated by the very technique of diplomatic relations. One can think, however, that even then he was guided by a vague desire to later liberate Europe from the growing despotism and boundless lust for power of Napoleon.

In spite of the warnings and misgivings of his co-workers, as early as the spring of 1802 Alexander decided to take an active part in the affairs of Europe and, for a start, arranged a meeting with the Prussian king in Memel. In the same year, 1802, he had to be finally convinced of the rudeness and vulgarity of Napoleon's ambition, when he, having made a new coup d'état, declared himself consul for life. “The veil has fallen,” Alexander wrote to La Harpe at the time, “he, that is, Napoleon, himself deprived himself of the best glory that a mortal can achieve and which he had to acquire, the glory of proving that he, without any personal views, worked solely for the good and the glory of his fatherland, and, being faithful to the constitution to which he himself swore, lay down in ten years the power that was in his hands. Instead, he preferred to imitate the courts, while violating the constitution of his country. From now on, this is the most famous of the tyrants that we find in history.

At the same time, the rights of the Sardinian king, whose possessions were annexed to France, were finally violated. In 1803, after the renewal of the war with England, Napoleon captured Hanover and clearly threatened to become the arbiter of the fate of Central Europe. Napoleon's personal relationship with Count Carrot so deteriorated that Napoleon demanded a change in the Russian ambassador. But Alexander did not immediately go towards this desire, and then, recalling Morkov, defiantly awarded him the highest Russian order of St. Andrew the First-Called, in which Morkov appeared to bow to Napoleon.

In Paris, the Russian emperor did not appoint an ambassador at all, but temporarily entrusted the administration of the affairs of the embassy to a minor official, Ubri. The proclamation of Napoleon as emperor and the murder of the Duke of Enghien that preceded this served as the last reason for the break.

Third coalition

From all the above, it is clear that the interests of Russia in this whole story were, in essence, nothing to do with it: in this whole affair, Alexander acted not as a representative of Russian state interests proper, but as the head of one of the great European powers. Having broken with Napoleon, he actively began to draw up a coalition against him.

The management of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at this time, after the retirement of Chancellor Count A.R. Vorontsov, whom Alexander did not like, was in the hands of Prince. Adam Czartoryski. Czartoryski was very sympathetic to the idea of ​​a coalition against Napoleon, he dreamed that one of the results of the war could be the restoration of Poland. He tried to convince Alexander that one armed force against Napoleon was not enough, that it was necessary, in view of his extraordinary genius and the prestige of invincibility, to arouse special enthusiasm in the peoples of Europe in the fight against him. As an idea that could create such enthusiasm, Czartoryski put forward the principle of restoring the trampled independence of nationalities, hoping that this would also lead to the restoration of the Polish nationality. Alexander, apparently, agreed with such a formulation of the question, although in the mouth of Czartoryski, the restoration of Polish nationality meant the rejection from Russia of such primordial Russian regions as Volhynia and Podolia, for Czartoryski dreamed of restoring Poland within the borders of 1772. With such a formulation of the question, the war against Napoleon in 1805 not only was not aroused by Russian interests, but even threatened to further complicate Russia with a new struggle for territory, a struggle that in past centuries determined all her backwardness and savagery. Pretending to share all the views of Czartoryski, Alexander took advantage, however in a very peculiar way, of the hopes of the Polish patriots. He encouraged them in every possible way, although he did not bind himself with definite promises, mainly, as one can now think, in order to force the wavering Prussian king to join the coalition against Napoleon and conclude an alliance with Russia by the threat of a Polish uprising in the regions of Prussian Poland; and as soon as he managed to force Friedrich Wilhelm to conclude a convention with him (which was later not even carried out), he abandoned all encouragement for the kindled hopes of the Poles and postponed the solution of the Polish question indefinitely. By this careless and incorrect behavior, he caused great disappointment in the Poles and pushed them into the arms of Napoleon, which the latter did not fail to take advantage of soon. In 1805, the war was thus decided, and the Russian people had to put up a sufficient armed force, since on the continent of Europe only Austrian and Russian troops actually opposed Napoleon. In order to muster this force, three successive recruits were required, with up to 150,000 recruits being recruited. recruits (10 recruits for every thousand male souls, but since recruits were then taken from persons aged 20 to 35 years, the ratio of the number of recruits to the size of this population group was already 10:225). Moreover, it was necessary to allow a new significant deficit in the budget, which was again covered by a new issue of banknotes.

In this case, Alexander acted like a true autocrat, whom no one could interfere with and who was not responsible to anyone. But it should be noted that Russian public opinion was already so armed against Napoleon that Russia's participation in the war with him almost no one - with the exception of Napoleon's direct admirers, whose number was getting smaller - did not seem inappropriate, and Czartoryski's views were known to few, the people are accustomed to endure without grumbling and much greater hardships.

As you know, the war of 1805 ended unhappily for Russia and Austria, mainly due to the inept conduct of the case by the Austrian generals, and partly due to the inexperience and arrogance of Alexander himself, who forced the Russian commander in chief Kutuzov to act contrary to his convictions, in accordance with the plan of the Austrian armchair strategist, doctrinaire Weyrothera. After the surrender of the Austrian army of Mack at Ulm and the subsequent terrible defeat of the Russian troops in the battle of Austerlitz, given to Napoleon against the will and advice of Kutuzov, the Russian army had to hastily retreat to the Russian borders, and the war ended there. Austria made a humiliating peace at Pressburg; Prussia also concluded with Napoleon at the same time a defensive and offensive treaty.

Nevertheless, Alexander began to prepare for the continuation of the war: the defeat of the Russian troops created a patriotic mood in society, which Alexander kindled by direct appeals to the people. Wanting these appeals to reach the masses of the people, he set in motion a powerful means in the form of appeals from the Holy Synod, which were read in all churches. In these appeals, Napoleon was declared an enemy of the human race, plotting to declare himself the Messiah and inciting the Jews to destroy the Christian church, and unprecedented blasphemy was attributed to him. Anticipating the transfer of the war within the borders of Russia, Alexander at the same time, regardless of the recruitment, convened a militia, which, according to the initial orders, was supposed to be a mass of 612 thousand warriors. One can imagine what the national economy cost in such preparations for war, accompanied, especially in the western provinces, by exhausting underwater service, with the help of which food and ammunition were brought to the theater of war.

Fourth Coalition

Although Prussia, after the first treaty of alliance with Napoleon, concluded a second treaty, apparently even more lasting, Alexander still did not lose hope of raising her against Napoleon, who kept his troops on German territory, refused to remove them and at the same time did not give his consent to the formation by the Prussian king of the North German Union from the German states not included in the Confederation of the Rhine formed by Napoleon himself. Alexander tried to persuade Friedrich Wilhelm to oppose Napoleon in every possible way, and the break between France and Prussia really did finally occur, moreover, it happened earlier than Alexander expected. Friedrich Wilhelm, as a man of weak character, hesitated for a long time, and then suddenly delivered an ultimatum to Napoleon, suggesting that he immediately remove his troops and not interfere with Prussia to form a North German alliance, otherwise threatening to break. All this happened so unexpectedly that Alexander did not have time to draw his troops to support Prussia. Napoleon, however, did not even respond to the Prussian ultimatum, but immediately began hostilities and eight days later inflicted a terrible defeat on Prussia at Jena. The main Prussian army here was destroyed and then, after the loss of the second battle of Auerstet, almost the entire Prussian territory was quickly occupied by the French. In the hands of the Prussians, only two fortresses remained in the northeastern corner of the kingdom - Danzig and Konigsberg; behind which Friedrich Wilhelm had to take refuge in the small town of Memel on the Neman near the Russian border. Poland became the theater of operations, and here Napoleon, wanting to oppose the hopes of the Polish population that were placed on Alexander, with his intentions, very cleverly took advantage of the disappointment that Alexander aroused in the Poles with his changeable behavior in 1805, and began to spread rumors that it is he, Napoleon, who intends to restore Poland as a bulwark of Europe against Russia.

The commander of the Russian army was the old field marshal Kamensky, who, having arrived in the army, suddenly went crazy and almost ruined it with his ridiculous orders; but, fortunately, he left without permission, having been in the army for only a week; upon departure, they were ordered to retreat, as best they could, to the borders of Russia. However, the generals decided not to listen to him, and Bennigsen, pulling his troops to one point, gave a successful rebuff to the vanguard of the French troops near Pultusk, fifty miles from Warsaw on the other side of the Vistula. At first they thought - and Bennigsen supported this opinion - that there was a battle with Napoleon himself (in fact, the victory was won over the troops of Marshal Lannes, who were in the vanguard of the Napoleonic army). Bennigsen, bypassing his senior rank c. Bukshoevden, was appointed commander in chief. Then, in the battle of Preussish-Eylau (not far from Koenigsberg), one of the bloodiest battles, in which up to 50 thousand people fell. - including 26 thousand from our side - Bennigsen really managed to repel Napoleon himself: both troops remained in their places, and the fact that the battle with such an enemy as Napoleon was not lost greatly supported the spirit of the army. However, after 5 months of inactivity, Napoleon inflicted a decisive defeat on the Russian troops at Friedland (which cost us at least 15 thousand soldiers), after which we could no longer continue the war. There was no hope for reinforcements, except for one infantry division brought by Prince. Lobanov-Rostovsky and consisted entirely of recruits; meanwhile, we had to declare war on Turkey, and therefore part of the troops was needed to reinforce Michelson's army, which occupied Wallachia and Moldavia. As for the militia, in spite of all its enormity, it proved to be completely useless; it could offer great resistance in the event of an enemy invasion of Russia, in a guerrilla war, but untrained and poorly armed warriors were completely unsuitable for a regular war, in an active army; however, with the then impassability, they could not even be quickly mobilized.

It was especially difficult to replenish the huge loss in officers and generals; there were few good generals - the best were out of order - as for the officers, there was already a shortage in them before, which forced them to take the most extreme measures - to take, for example, students who were not prepared for military service, and even just nobles, as officers “undersized” if they agreed to undergo some training in the cadet corps in a few months. Thus, we could not fight alone. Meanwhile, they had to act just one way: England participated in the war with subsidies, and they were released rather meagerly (in the amount of 2,200 thousand pounds sterling a year for all of its continental allies). Thanks to all this, Alexander had no choice but to start peace negotiations, taking advantage of the fact that Napoleon himself willingly extended the hand of reconciliation, since he, too, was in great difficulty after the bloody battles at Preussisch-Eylau and Friedland.

Peace of Tilsit

A meeting took place between the two emperors on the Neman, in Tilsit. Here, for the first time, Alexander had to show his remarkable diplomatic talent in all its splendor, since Napoleon offered him to negotiate directly, without the participation of ministers, and Alexander willingly agreed to this. At the same time, he had to spend especially a lot of effort to keep Napoleon from the complete destruction of Prussia. Prussia was, however, brought to an unprecedented humiliation: she lost half of her territory and from a great power turned for a while into a country dependent on Napoleon, which did not even have the right to maintain an army of more than 42 thousand people; her fortresses, even on the territory returned to her, were occupied by the French for a number of years (until payment of indemnity).

During the negotiations in Tilsit, Napoleon did not want to reckon with anyone except Alexander, with whom he intended for the time being to share dominion over the world. Alexander, realizing that now further struggle is impossible, decided to temporarily meet the wishes of his rival, who, in appearance, offered rather honorable terms of peace. But an indispensable condition for peace, a condition sina qua non, Napoleon set, in the event that England refused the conditions set for her - and she obviously could not agree to them - Alexander's declaration of war with her acceptance at the same time of the notorious continental system. This system invented by Napoleon consisted in the fact that all the states of Europe, allied with him or dependent on him, refused trade relations with England and pledged not to allow English merchant ships into their ports. Alexander pledged, in addition, to force Sweden and Denmark to break with England and take part in the continental system directed against her; moreover, it could be foreseen in advance that Sweden, completely defenseless from the attack of the British, could not agree to this, while its king, Gustav IV, showed a fanatical hatred of Napoleon. Thus, even then it was possible to foresee the inevitability of an attack by England and Sweden on Russia from the sea and land near St. Petersburg. Meanwhile, at that time, the northern coast of the Gulf of Finland belonged to Sweden. Therefore, Napoleon quite thoroughly, from a strategic point of view, pointed out to Alexander the need to conquer it. Thus, in Tilsit, the accession of Finland to Russia was prepared, for which we had to in 1808 and 1809. wage a difficult two-year war with Sweden.

As for Turkey, with which we were at that time in a war caused by the Turks thanks to the intrigues of the French ambassador in Constantinople, Sebastiani, Napoleon offered his mediation to end it on terms favorable to Russia, and at the same time, in verbal negotiations with Alexander, he even expressed readiness , in the event of Porta's persistence in ceding the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia to Russia, go hand in hand with Alexander, if he wishes, up to the partition of Turkey (its European possessions); but at the same time, he made it a precondition for the beginning of a truce and peace negotiations to withdraw our troops from both principalities, so that, however, the Turks could not occupy them with their troops. In fact, the war with the Turks did not stop, and although Napoleon later tried to tempt Alexander with the brilliant prospects of expelling the Turks from Europe and a joint campaign with him in India, Russia, however, had to wage a rather fruitless war with the Turks this time without any assistance from him. before 1812

The intrigues and measures of Napoleon on the Polish question were very unfavorable for Russia: Napoleon did not agree in Tilsit to the return of the Polish regions occupied by the French to Prussia and formed the Duchy of Warsaw from them under the leadership of the Saxon king and under the protectorate of the emperor of the French. Thus, a military outpost of Napoleon himself was created on the Russian border. At the same time, Napoleon placed Alexander in a difficult position in relation to the Poles; Alexander had to stand in apparent contradiction with himself and prevent the restoration of an independent Poland. This circumstance caused the final disappointment of the Poles in their hopes for Alexander and forced them to transfer them entirely to Napoleon.

In Tilsit and after Tilsit, Alexander outwardly expressed admiration for the genius of Napoleon and his friendship with him. He was reproached by his contemporaries for having allowed himself to be deceived by the cunning Corsican, since much of what Napoleon had promised orally was not later included in the written contracts. However, Alexander was by no means infatuated with Napoleon; he skillfully played his part in Tilsit, and then in Erfurt, so that he even gave Napoleon reason to call him later northern Talma(the name of a then famous dramatic actor) and "Byzantine Greek".

It is difficult to say who was more deceived in this diplomatic tournament, since Napoleon was later repeatedly told by those close to him that he was deceived by Alexander. If we look at the matter from the point of view of the then international relations and if we take into account the real conditions of the moment, then it should, in any case, be recognized that the policy of Alexander in Tilsit and then a year later at a new meeting with Napoleon in Erfurt was very skillful. In these negotiations, Alexander appears for the first time as a subtle and insightful diplomat, and it seems that now we can assume that this was his real sphere, in which he was undoubtedly a great statesman, able to compete with all the European celebrities of his time.

Russia and the continental blockade

These wars with Napoleon affected the situation of the population in Russia most sharply. We have already talked about the severity of wars for the population - the severity of recruiting, militia, food supplies, etc. The suspension of the legislative activities of the government caused by the war also had a huge negative effect. Finally, the plight of the finances, under the influence of military spending, greatly curtailed all the plans of the government in the field of public education, which had advanced so much just before. As a result of the wars of 1805-1807, to which was added a complete crop failure in Russia in 1806, the financial situation began to deteriorate from year to year. In 1806, revenues were 100 million rubles, while expenses were 122 million rubles; in 1807, income - 121, and expenses - 171 million rubles; in 1808 it was 111.5 million rubles. income and 140 million rubles. expenses only for the army, and the total amount of expenses in 1808 reached 240 million rubles. Huge deficits were again covered by new issues of paper money, the total amount of which already reached 319 million rubles in 1806, 382 million rubles in 1807, and 477 million rubles in 1808. Meanwhile, the turnover of foreign trade under the influence of the war, and then the continental system and the prohibition of the export of grain from the western provinces, which followed under the influence of a bad harvest in 1806, was extremely reduced, and the export of Russian raw materials abroad was especially reduced, which changed the balance of trade in an unfavorable direction, which caused, in turn, the outflow of specie, which greatly influenced the depreciation of paper money.

Thanks to all these circumstances, the exchange rate of our paper money, which held firmly from 1802 to 1805 and even increased during these years, now began to fall sharply: in 1806 the paper ruble was equal to 78 kopecks, in 1807 - 66 kopecks. and in 1808 fell to 48 kopecks. Meanwhile, taxes were paid in banknotes, and a significant part of foreign state expenditures (for the maintenance of the army and for subsidies to the completely ruined Prussian king) had to be made in specie. The situation thus became very difficult, and after the Peace of Tilsit and the accession of Russia to the continental system, it became, as we shall see, downright unbearable. The Treaty of Tilsit made a depressing impression on all sections of Russian society and on the people. Many considered this treaty more shameful than all the lost battles. After the peace with Napoleon, Alexander lost a significant part of the popularity that he enjoyed. The people, who shortly before this had heard curses against Napoleon from the church pulpit, could not understand how the Russian tsar could be so defiantly friends with the “enemy of the human race”, who was plotting to abolish the Christian faith.

When the continental system began to be implemented, which completely undermined our export trade, led to the bankruptcy of many trading houses, ruined many landlord farms that sold raw materials abroad (especially flax and hemp in various forms), and caused the high cost of many supplies, then discontent took over. universal character. According to contemporaries, Alexander, who, in the eyes of everyone, had to play such an unpleasant and difficult role in his relations with Napoleon, began to noticeably deteriorate in character, and his previously so even and kind treatment of everyone began to be replaced by an irritable, sometimes gloomy mood of the spirit, moreover, characteristic his stubbornness began to manifest itself sometimes in very unpleasant forms. It is remarkable that already in 1805, going to war, Alexander, by secret order, restored, in essence, the secret police, establishing a special temporary committee of three persons to monitor public opinion and talk among the public. This committee, after the Peace of Tilsit, was officially converted into a permanent institution, and a secret instruction was given to it, which restored, among other things, the revision of letters and those methods of police supervision, from which Alexander was so far away in the first years of his reign. Especially unpleasant at this time, Alexander was affected by the rumors in society about his friendship with Napoleon. At the head of the opposition to Alexander's foreign policy in court spheres was the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna herself. At the same time, Alexander's position was all the more difficult because he was forced to play his role without revealing his real intentions to anyone.

Patriotic opposition to the Peace of Tilsit

Alexander's closest friends, former members of the secret committee Kochubey, Czartorysky, Novosiltsev, retired and the last two even went abroad, and Stroganov went into military service so as not to interfere in politics. Even the Marshal Alexandra gr. N. A. Tolstoy managed to express his opposition to Alexander’s friendship with Napoleon by refusing to put on, next to the ribbon of the Legion of Honor granted to him by Napoleon, the ribbon of the highest Russian order of St. Andrew the First-Called, which Alexander wanted to put on him. The opposition in the highest circles of St. Petersburg society was especially pronounced when General Savary, sent by Napoleon as a military agent, came to St. Petersburg, personally involved in the execution of the Duke of Enghien. Petersburg salons closed their doors to him, they did not receive him anywhere (except for the Winter Palace) and did not give him visits, until, finally, Alexander himself intervened in this matter and demanded from his confidants a more polite attitude towards the representative of his ally. Savary, later Napoleon's Minister of Police, decided to show his political and, one might say, downright provocative talents here too. He diligently began to collect and combine all sorts of gossip and careless phrases that sometimes broke out at Alexander in a circle of people dissatisfied with his policies, and went so far as to fabricate a legend about a major conspiracy and a coup that was being prepared, and did not hesitate to inspire all this to Alexander, trying to quarrel him with society and inflate the mutual distrust that began to form during this period between the young sovereign and his subjects.

In wider public circles, discontent manifested itself even more strongly, expressing itself in literature and in theaters, where patriotic tragedies like Dmitry Donskoy became the favorite plays of the public. Ozerova or "Prince Pozharsky" Kryukovsky, who in the most pathetic places evoked stormy applause and even sobs from the audience. Comedies enjoyed the same success. Krylova"Fashion Shop" and "A Lesson for Daughters", directed against the French language and imitation of French fashions.

This opposition manifested itself even more strongly in Moscow, where one of the most ardent patriots of that time S. N. Glinka began to publish since 1808 a new patriotic magazine "Russian Messenger", directed directly against Napoleon. In this journal, Glinka wrote in the interval between the Tilsit and Erfurt meetings - where Alexander so vividly demonstrated his friendship with Napoleon in the face of all Europe - that the Tilsit peace is only a temporary truce and that when there is a new war, then all measures will be taken in society to repel the power-hungry Napoleon. Napoleon's envoy, Caulaincourt, considered it his duty to draw Alexander's attention to this article, and Glinka, an ardent patriot and conservative of Glinka, one of the first in Alexander's reign, provoked censorship persecution against himself. Along with him, the old Pavlovian nobleman gr. Rostopchin, who lived in Moscow "out of work", published at the same time a pamphlet under the pseudonym Bogatyrev "Thoughts aloud on the Red Porch", in which he tried to spread the same views in wide circles of the common people.

At the same time, Admiral A. S. Shishkov, a Russian Old Believer, already known earlier for his attacks on Karamzin (in "Discourse on the old and new syllable of the Russian language"), now formed in St. and Karamzin and even the liberal Mordvinov.

It is remarkable that this opposition, which united fairly broad social circles and manifested itself in patriotic forms, was by no means chauvinistic in nature. It was directed entirely against Napoleon and the Treaty of Tilsit with its consequences, which were so heavily reflected in the position of Russian trade, Russian industry and the entire course of Russian social life. At that time we fought four wars, and Russian society, according to a contemporary ( Vigel, a man of quite protective views), treated with amazing indifference, sometimes even with direct hostility to the success of the goals set by the government! Two of these wars (with then weak Persia and with Austria, with which Alexander himself fought à contre coeur [reluctantly], as an ally of Napoleon), were given relatively easily, although they still required significant costs. But the other two cost us very dearly and required significant expenditures both in money and in people. These were: the war with Turkey, which lasted from 1806 - with interruptions, but without the conclusion of peace - until the spring of 1812, and the war with Sweden, which began after the Treaty of Tilsit as a direct consequence of the treaty with Napoleon and ended after a number of vicissitudes and heroic , but heavy exploits for our troops in 1809 by annexing all of Finland to the Torneo River.

Alexander wanted to attract the hearts of new subjects with generosity, and even before the signing of the peace treaty, he gathered the Diet in Borgo, having previously confirmed the ancient rights and privileges of the Finnish population with a special letter. With accession to Russia, therefore, the legal situation of the population of Finland did not change for the worse, and the economic situation of the country even improved at the very beginning: the tax that Finland paid to cover Swedish debts was canceled, and internal customs were destroyed.

But Russian society nevertheless reacted rather disapprovingly to the Friedrichsham world - there were even regrets addressed to the Swedes.

Wishes were also expressed to end the war with Turkey. Mordvinov in 1810 submitted a note to Alexander, in which he justified in detail the uselessness of territorial acquisitions for Russia, whose borders were already stretched, and insisted on the need for a speedy end to the Turkish war.

Such was the mood of Russian society after the Peace of Tilsit.

“A fierce enemy of peace and blessed silence,” the Synod’s proclamation begins, “Napoleon Bonaparte, who autocratically appropriated the royal crown of France and by force of arms, and more cunningly extended his power to many neighboring states, devastated their cities and villages with a sword and flames, dares, in the frenzy of her malice, to threaten Russia, which is patronized from above, with an invasion of its borders, the destruction of landscaping, which she now enjoys alone in the world under the meek scepter of our God-blessed and beloved pious sovereign Alexander the First, and the shock of the Orthodox Greek-Russian Church, in all its purity and holiness in this prosperous Empire ... "

After referring to the duties of the pastors of the church, the Synod continues:

“The whole world knows his ungodly plans and deeds, with which he trampled on the law and truth.”

“Even during the time of popular indignation that raged in France during the ungodly revolution, disastrous for mankind and brought a heavenly curse on the perpetrators of it, he broke away from the Christian faith, triumphed at the gatherings of the people, the idolatrous festivals established by false-minded apostates, and in the host of his impious accomplices paid worship, befitting to the only Almighty deity, to idols, human creatures and harlots, who served as an idol image for them.

“In Egypt, he joined the persecutors of the Church of Christ, preached the alcoran Mohammed, declared himself the defender of the confession of the superstitious followers of this false prophet of Muslims, and solemnly showed his contempt for the pastors of the holy church of Christ.”

“Finally, to her greatest disgrace, he convened Jewish synagogues in France, commanded that the rabbis be clearly honored and established a new great Jewish sanhydrin, this most ungodly cathedral, which once dared to condemn our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to the crucifixion - and now is thinking of uniting the Jews, scattered all over the face of the earth by the wrath of God, and direct them to overthrow the church of Christ and (oh, terrible insolence, surpassing the measure of all atrocities!) - to proclaim a false messiah in the person of Napoleon ... "

At the end of the proclamation, after various formidable curses and threats borrowed from Deuteronomy, the same thing is repeated once more:

“... Rejecting the thoughts of God's justice, he (i.e. Napoleon) dreams in his rampage, with the help of haters of the Christian name and capable of his wickedness, the Jews, to steal (which every person can even think terribly!) the sacred name of the Messiah: show him that he is a creature, burned with conscience and deserving of contempt...” A similar appeal was sent by the Catholic Metropolitan of Mogilev Sestrentsevich to the Catholic priests of the Western Territory (Schilder, name cit., II, p. 354 - in appendices to the text). At the same time, the local authorities of the Western Territory received an order to watch the Jews and warn them against relations with the Parisian all-Jewish institutions formed by Napoleon, and the Jews were instilled that the Parisian assembly (Sanhedrin) was striving to change their faith (Circus, February 20, 1807, see Heb. Encicl., vol. XI, p. 516). It is remarkable that the Jews in the Western Territory in 1812, contrary to all fears, remained loyal to Russia everywhere. (Compare “Acts, documents and materials for political and everyday history of 1812”, ed. K. Voensky, in "Collection, Russian. ist. gen., volumes CXXVIII and CXXXIII. SPb., 1910 and 1911, and his own art. "Napoleon and the Borisov Jews in 1812", in Voen. collection, for 1906, No. 9.)

Ref. Bogdanovich, name op. II, p. 177. The commanders of the divisions received an order directly from the field marshal: “when retreating to the Russian borders, go by the shortest route to Vilna and report to the elder” (!). Gr. Buksgevden, to whom he handed over the command, Kamensky ordered to throw battery artillery on the road if it impedes the movement of troops, and to take care only of saving people. (Ibid.) All this before meeting the enemy.

Bogdanovich reports that due to the lack of guns only fifth part militia could have them; the rest of the warriors were supposed to be armed with peaks (Ist. Reigning them. Alexander I, vol. II, p. 165). After the battle of Pultusk, Alexander ordered the militia to be reduced to 252,000 men. (Shiman."Alexander I", p. 17 Russian. translation and Bogdanovich, ibidem, vol. III, p. 1). Albert Vandal("Napoleon and Alexander I", vol. I, p. 49 of the Russian translation) quotes from Rustam's memoirs, published in Revue retrospective, nos. 8-9,. the following fact: when the Russian army fled after the Friedland defeat, having lost the ability to resist, the French, having reached the Neman near Tilsit, saw a strange sight: “a horde of barbarians with Asian faces, Kalmyks and Siberians (?) without guns, firing clouds of arrows, circled around plain and vainly frightened us. It was a reserve army, which Russia announced to the public and brought by Prince. Lobanov.

Ref. Napoleon's letter to Alexander dated February 2, 1808. Its text is given at vandal(vol. 1, p. 249, Russian translation) and Solovyov (“Imp. Alexander I”, p. 165), and both historians attach completely different significance to this letter.

Napoleon's Admirer vandal this is how he expresses this subject: "Not intending to put the victim of the triple partition in the position of a stable state, he wants to create in Europe - I will not say a Polish nation - but a Polish army, because he recognizes in the projected state only a large military force standing guard over France "(! - on the banks of the Vistula), called. cit., vol. I, p. 90 of the Russian translation.

Ref. a report to Napoleon Duroc, who managed, probably with the help of bribery, to get from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Napoleon to the Russian ambassador, Prince. Kurakin in 1809. The text of this curious document is given in extracts from Bogdanovich, vol. III, p. 85 et seq.

The prices of colonial goods, which until then had been received from England, rose so much that, for example, a pood of sugar in 1808 cost 100 rubles in St. Petersburg.

"The text of these decrees and instructions see Schilder, vol. II, pp. 362–367 – in appendices. There, by the way, there is a very curious list of the subjects of the competence of these secret committees, and it is clear how this competence expanded from September 5, 1805 to January 13, 1807.

Ref. at vandal, name op. pp. 111 ff., Russian translation, a whole juicy chapter entitled "Diplomatic intelligence". It is curious that other foreign diplomats in St. Petersburg (for example, Bar. Steding) and Canning in London (as can be seen from his conversation with the Russian ambassador Alopeus) report the same disturbing (but undoubtedly unfounded) rumors about conspiracies supposedly being prepared in St. Petersburg and coups. It is very possible that these were traces of Savary's intrigues and inventions. Ref. Shiman, name op. page 18 Russian translation.

In 1807, the St. Petersburg newspaper The Genius of Times also spoke of Napoleon with great harshness. After 1808, when the government began to prohibit such reviews, in the same "Genius of the Times" N. I. Grech already wrote laudatory articles about Napoleon, which did not prevent him later (in 1812) from scolding him again without mercy in Son of the Fatherland. But the public in 1808-1811. she already treated such “official” praises and censures with contempt.

In 1809, after Erfurt, Alexander, convinced of the impossibility of keeping the Austrians from a dangerous war with Napoleon, in which he himself formally undertook to help Napoleon, in a fit of frankness, told the Austrian ambassador, Prince. Schwarzenberg: “... My position is so strange that although you and I are on opposite lines, I cannot but wish you success! ..” (Soloviev, p. 190). The Russian public in 1809 directly rejoiced at every success of our "enemies" of the Austrians and every failure of our "ally" Napoleon (Vigel, Notes).

Vigel. Notes, cf. at Schilder, vol. II, p. 242.

Alexander - Napoleon, the beginning of a relationship

Since the autumn of 1801, an active and friendly correspondence has been going on between the Russian emperor and the French consul. Alexander sees in Napoleon a liberator from revolutionary terror, he gave freedom to France. Napoleon is interested in a lasting alliance with Russia in his eternal political and economic struggle with England. He even managed to agree with the obstinate and unpredictable Pavel that he would be able to get along with the “soft” Alexander, and in his favor, he has no doubt.

Over time, the relationship between the two rulers begins to deteriorate. In June 1802, at the urgent request of his mother, Maria Feodorovna, Alexander met with the couple of Prussian monarchs - Wilhelm III and the famous Queen Louise. Kochubey did his best to dissuade Alexander from this meeting, SV Vorontsov, the eagle of our diplomacy, was also against it, but you can’t argue with your mother. Yes, Alexander did not argue very much. The Romanovs had a genetic love for Prussia. Peter III and Paul bowed before Frederick the Great.

Alexander went to Prussia incognito, under the name of the Count of Russia. The meeting took place in Memel and was arranged very solemnly. Then anecdotes were told about the meeting in Memel in Europe, clearly alluding to the love between Alexander and the beautiful Louise that happened there. The Russian emperor charmed the queen for life, and she remained faithful to this romantic feeling until her death. You can’t say the same about Alexander, he behaved much more restrained. Napoleon was very dissatisfied with Russia's "flirting" with Prussia, his opponent.

Alexander had his own claims to Napoleon. On August 2, 1803, he was elected consul for life. What is it? Unlimited power, while for life. This means that Napoleon is a graceless tsar, that's all. In a letter to La Harpe dated July 14, 1803, the tsar writes: “I have completely changed, just like you, my dear, my opinion about the first consul. Since the establishment of his consulate for life, the veil has been lifted; Since then, things have gone from bad to worse. He began by depriving himself of the greatest glory that can befall a man. The only thing left for him was to prove that he acted without any personal benefit, only for the sake of the happiness and glory of his homeland, and to remain faithful to the Constitution, to which he himself swore to transfer his power ten years later. Instead, he chose to monkey-copy the customs of the royal courts, thereby violating the Constitution of his country. He is now one of the greatest tyrants that history has ever produced." Touching letter. Alexander argues in it just like our Decembrists.

Further more. Under the Treaty of Amiens, France and England divided territories and spheres of influence. And suddenly England, in violation of the treaty, declares that it retains Malta for another seven years. Napoleon asks Alexander to mediate in resolving this issue. He refuses, not wanting to interfere with European affairs. Then Napoleon gathers an army - the Boulogne camp, and then rapidly occupies Hanover and the Kingdom of Naples. Europe only shrugged it off, England took care of it. This did not concern us yet, but it was clear that things were heading for war.

On March 18, the Senate proclaimed Napoleon emperor. And four days later suddenly a new atrocity in France. On March 21, 1804, on the orders of Napoleon, the Duke of Enghien was captured in Ettenheim, hastily convicted and shot - the full name of Louis Antoine Henri de Bourbon Conde (1772–1804), that is, a representative of the royal family. The essence of this story is as follows. The day before, a conspiracy against Napoleon was uncovered, an English hand was guessed in it, and the performers, of course, were royalists. At the right moment, wanting to curry favor and prove his loyalty, Talleyrand, a smart and unprincipled man to the point of cynicism, informed Napoleon that the conspiracy was led by the Duke of Enghien, who lives in Baden, in the town of Ettenheim, that is, actually abroad. Napoleon ordered a detachment of gendarmes to kidnap him and bring him to France. The duke was taken to the Château de Vincennes, then a speedy military court. That very night he was shot. Needless to say, the duke had nothing to do with the conspiracy. He even wrote an explanatory letter to Napoleon, but Talleyrand prudently delayed the delivery of this message. Napoleon later read this letter and declared that if he had read it earlier, the duke would have been pardoned. He was worried, of course, that he had unfairly shot a man, but then he calmed down, for the exasperation of the royalists, this is perhaps good. Usual revolutionary logic!

But this event made a heavy impression on Europe. And the court, and justice - where? A representative of the royal house was shot in a ravine near the Château de Vincennes, as in the blackest years of terror. There were calls for war, it's time to teach the "Corsican monster" a lesson! Russia declared mourning for the Duke of Enghien, but Prussia refused to sign a protest against the execution. Strange as it may seem to write about it, there was opposition at the court in St. Petersburg. The closest circle of the emperor, this very four hot and young, was especially criticized. The Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna was at the head of the opposition. She hated Napoleon and warned her son that it was impossible to be friends with the "Corsican", she warned more than once, and that's what happened.

This time, Alexander was in complete agreement with his mother. Russia sent a protest to France, in which Napoleon was explained in an intelligible form what he was wrong about and how his recklessness could affect the political situation in Europe. Russia's answer was composed by Talleyrand: if you want to fight, then do not look for a reason for this, act openly. The consul for life does not want war, but he will not allow anyone to interfere in the internal affairs of France. An explanation followed. I don’t have the exact text, so I’ll use a quote from E. V. Tarle: “Napoleon ordered his foreign minister to give that famous answer that was never forgotten by Alexander, because no one had ever insulted him more cruelly in his entire life. The meaning of the answer is as follows: the Duke of Enghien was arrested for participating in a conspiracy to kill Napoleon; if, for example, Emperor Alexander found out that the murderers of his late father, Emperor Paul, were even on foreign territory, but that it was possible (physically) to arrest them, and if Alexander really arrested them, then he, Napoleon, would not protest against this violation of foreign territory by Alexander. In fact, he called Alexander a parricide. From this moment on, relations between the two emperors have not only a state, but also a personal character.

On July 27, France withdrew its ambassador from St. Petersburg. Motivation - Russia boldly declared mourning for the executed duke, although it had no family ties with him. Diplomatic relations were interrupted. On December 2, 1804, Napoleon was crowned by the Pope, brought specially to Paris, and on December 6, Alexander signed an agreement with England. It was an open challenge to France.

Alexander did not want war. Wanting to prevent it, he sent Novosiltsev to London with clear instructions. Mark Aldanov, the unsurpassed author of Historical Portraits, writes wonderfully about this trip. Here is an excerpt from Alexander's instructions: "Why could not positive international law be defined in this way, ensure the advantage of neutrality, establish an obligation never to start a war except by exhausting all the means provided by the mediation of a third power, and thus clarifying mutual claims and means for settling them? These are the principles on which it will be possible to arrange general appeasement and create a league, which should be based, so to speak, on a new code of international law, which, having been approved by the majority of European states, will naturally become an indispensable law for cabinets. Particularly because those who wish to break it run the risk of calling the forces of the new league against them. This league, probably, will be started little by little by all the powers, weary from the last wars ... "

So, the proposal to create the League of Nations, and this is at the very beginning of the 19th century. The text of the instructions to Novosiltsev was also set out by Czartorysky in his Notes, probably he himself wrote these instructions, but, of course, everything was discussed by the whole four and approved by the sovereign himself. Neither Vorontsov, our ambassador, nor William Pitt, the prime minister of England, began to talk seriously about any league. The instructions were a hundred years ahead of their time. All the more pleasant to read Aldanov. He writes about Alexander, his advisers and about Russia itself with pride: “It was in this environment that the idea of ​​the League of Nations arose. It is not necessary to be a fanatical admirer of the Geneva institution - the writer of these lines does not fear being enrolled in the list of fanatical admirers. But what culture can refuse to claim copyright, however remote, for an idea that is so sensational in the world?

The Treaty of Amiens was terminated, and England was effectively at war. Napoleon in Boulogne was gathering a huge army, near the English Channel. Pitt was well aware of the size of the threat looming over the country. Just then Novosiltsev appeared with his proposals. Czartoryski, already Minister of Foreign Affairs, actively persuaded Alexander I to an alliance with England. Alexander himself said: "Russia and England are the only powers in Europe that do not have hostile interests among themselves." If Pitt approves the idea of ​​creating a league and a new international code, brings this idea to Napoleon, and he approves it, then everything is fine. Otherwise, there is only one outcome - war.

Novosiltsev arrived in London on November 4, 1804. The conversation with Vorontsov about the creation of the league did not work out, the ambassador was generally skeptical about the activities of the Private Committee - the boys picked up new French ideas! But Pitt had already decided everything for himself - Napoleon must be put in his place, France must be "brought into its natural borders." The conversation with Novosiltsev turned to the need to create a third coalition, which would include England, Russia, Austria and Prussia. On April 11, a treaty was signed that determined how many soldiers the states should supply. England will fight at sea. She agreed to pay for the war on land. For every one hundred thousand soldiers, England was obliged to pay one million two hundred and fifty pounds sterling. London retained Malta, but agreed with the Russian claims to Poland and Turkey. There were many clauses in the treaty - seven open and thirteen secret.

The Russian and Austrian armies began to move, Prussia refused to participate in the coalition. War - the fun of emperors - has begun. What next? On October 14, 1805, the Austrian army was defeated near Elchingen, on October 20 the same story was repeated near Ulm, the 32,000-strong army surrendered to the mercy of the winner.

On November 6, 1805, Alexander I arrived in the Russian army in Moravia. He arrived in Europe much earlier. The first destination was Berlin, Alexander made an attempt to persuade Frederick William III to join the coalition. Wilhelm was afraid of both Napoleon and Alexander, in the end he nevertheless agreed to present a protest to Napoleon and eventually join the coalition. There was also an agreement on "friendship for all time", which was confirmed by an oath. A lot was written about this oath, pictures were drawn on this topic, some called the oath romantic and sentimental, others absurd, and found more stringent definitions. The fact is that Alexander, Queen Louise and Frederick William III took their oath at twelve o'clock at night, by the light of torches in the crypt over the ashes of Frederick the Great. Speaking lofty words about eternal friendship, Alexander and Friedrich-Wilhelm held hands and looked into each other's eyes. The absurdity of this scene lies in the fact that Frederick the Great pursued a hostile policy towards Russia, we fought with him in the Seven Years' War, and Catherine II was always afraid of tricks on his part. The Memel and Berlin meetings between Alexander I and Friedrich Wilhelm III had no serious significance in the international politics of that time (laugh at it all you want), but it determined the policy of Russia for many years. We have not been at war with Germany for many years. The "oath over the coffin" was broken only in 1914.

So, on November 6, the king arrived at Olmutz in Moravia. And on December 2, 1805, Napoleon with a 68,000th army at Austerlitz defeated the 92,000th Allied army, smashed it to smithereens. It is worth dwelling on this battle in more detail, because under Austerlitz Alexander I actually took command.

Founded in the XII century by the Templars, Austerlitz is a tiny town 120 kilometers from Vienna. The battle that took place on December 2 was called the "battle of the three emperors." Everyone was "on the field" - Franz I, Alexander I and Napoleon I. Kutuzov considered it untimely to give battle to Napoleon. The Russian army had just escaped encirclement, the soldiers were exhausted. The idea to attack first belonged to the Austrians. They were sure of victory. A persistent rumor spread throughout the army that Napoleon was avoiding battle. He has just occupied Vienna, the army is tired. But the French emperor played his card. He just needed the Russians to give battle, and end the war with that.

On the eve of the battle, the French Adjutant General Savary unexpectedly appeared in the Russian camp. He brought a letter from Napoleon - the most kind - with an offer of peace. In addition, he asked Alexander for a meeting. The Russian headquarters rejoiced. Alexander refused to meet, and in return sent his adjutant, the young and self-confident Prince Pyotr Dolgorukov, to the French camp "for negotiations". Upon his return, the prince spoke of his meeting with Napoleon in the following way: “Most of all, this man in a gray frock coat wants to be called “your majesty.” I didn't give him that opportunity." And here is Napoleon’s review of Alexander’s envoy: “I had a conversation with this impudent varmint in which he spoke to me as he could talk to a boyar sent to Siberia. This young man is endowed, among other things, with unprecedented arrogance. Did he take my extreme restraint as a sign of great fear? That's just the point, that he accepted. Napoleon is a coward! This is the conclusion Dolgorukov made and inspired this to Alexander.

He wrote superbly about Alexander and his retinue, which included the “magnificent four”, L. N. Tolstoy in War and Peace. The young people were cheerful, self-confident, handsome, on magnificent horses, and next to them was an old one-eyed commander. Kutuzov persuaded Alexander not to rush, to wait for Bennigsen to approach with the troops (the former conspirator fought superbly in these wars), but Alexander did not listen. Everyone quotes the famous conversation between the commander and the tsar (I don’t know in which diaries or notes Tolstoy found it):

Why don't you start the battle, Mikhail Illarionovich? Alexander asked.

I'm waiting, Your Majesty, - answered Kutuzov, - not all the columns have yet gathered.

We are not in the Tsaritsyn Meadow, - Alexander said with a laugh, - where they don’t start the parade until all the regiments have gathered.

That's why I'm not starting, sir, because we're not at the parade and not in the Tsaritsy's Meadow. - After the answer, there is a momentary hitch, the retinue is silent, and Kutuzov is already in a different tone: - However, if you order, Your Majesty ...

Their Majesty had the imprudence to order, which forced Kutuzov to leave an advantageous position. Alexander was a weak general. The army was commanded mainly by Austrian generals. The soldiers took to flight, the emperors hurried after them, fearing to be captured. In the meadow among the dead bodies lay, looking at the sky, Prince Bolkonsky. The defeat was terrible. The Austrians lost six thousand soldiers, the Russians died three times as many. But in general, who exactly counted there, now all encyclopedias and military reference books give different numbers. After the shameful defeat, Alexander burst into tears at night with grief. It was a pity for the soldiers, insulting, ashamed of their arrogance. Napoleon spent him like a boy! He later told Kutuzov: "I was young and stupid, and you should have been more persistent." Alexander did not like Kutuzov. He could not forgive him for his arrogance at Austerlitz.

On December 4, 1805, Napoleon signed an armistice with Austria. Conditions were set for Franz I: Russian troops must immediately leave Austria.

In St. Petersburg, after Austerlitz, Alexander I, as they say now, "received in full" (vulgarism, of course, but very accurately) - for a shameful defeat, for a wrong policy. Most of all, mother Maria Fedorovna and her entourage were indignant. “I conjure you to watch out,” she admonished her son, “so that you cannot be accused of betraying the interests and glory of Russia.”

Czartoryski, he headed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, also did not support the king. They had different tasks. Czartoryski hated Prussia, and one can understand him. Let me remind the reader of the results of the third partition of Poland: Russia received Lithuania, Courland and Western Belarus, Austria - Krakow and Ljubljana with adjacent territories, Prussia - Warsaw and most of the Polish lands. Czartoryski dreamed that Russia, having started the war with Napoleon, would first of all conquer Prussia and Poland would be returned to Warsaw and the territories that had gone to the Prussians.

But you have to pay for the unification of Poland. Aldanov writes: “... in compiled by him (Czartoryski. - Auth.) the note stated that in "in case of emergency, Prussia could offer Holland instead of renouncing the Polish lands." Austria, in gratitude for the same, should receive Bavaria and those regions in Swabia and Franconia that she herself chooses.

It is amazing how easily the map of Europe was redrawn in the 19th century. The states in it are large, rich, the weather is good. In the morning, the hard-working people got up, swept the territory, watered the tulips from the watering can, and live - rejoice, and God knows what sovereign you now obey. Russia did not fall under these tailor's scissors, it was not necessary. And who needs Taimyr or the Laptev Sea with islands. Sweep the permafrost, plant tulips. And it sounds stupid. Now everything is different.

In April 1806, Czartoryski burst into a letter (frankly, defiant), he criticized the tsar, deliberately putting pressure on the most painful points: “... accustoming the soldiers to see you constantly and without any need, you weakened the charm produced by your appearance.

Your presence during the battle of Austerlitz did not bring any benefit even in the very part where you were, the troops were immediately completely defeated, and you yourself, Your Majesty, had to hastily flee from the battlefield. In no case should you expose yourself to this ... We must do justice to the generals that even in advance, before the disaster, they, feeling how much your presence, Sovereign, complicates and complicates their actions, constantly begged Your Majesty, firstly, to retire from the army and, secondly, not to expose yourself to unnecessary danger ... ”And so on. In June of the same year, Czartoryski submitted his resignation and received it. Here is an excerpt from his letter to Alexander: “Your Majesty never completely trusts anyone, which is why, perhaps, not a single enterprise was carried out as it was desirable ...”

But Alexander swore an oath to protect Prussia and did not want to go back on his word. In July 1806, Alexander signed a declaration of alliance with William III, after which the king, a arrogant and narrow-minded man (apparently, the glory of Frederick the Great blinded his eyes), demanded that France withdraw its troops from the territory of Prussia. Ah well? Napoleon immediately gave the Prussians a couple of battles and smashed them head on, then occupied Berlin. The Prussian army ceased to exist. How indignant was the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna and her court! Why do we need Prussia? It was under Frederick the Great that she was considered, and King Wilhelm is weak, cunning and unsympathetic.

On November 18, 1806, Russia declared war on France. Not only Prussia Alexander cared. He kept wanting to cut off Napoleon's hands, besides, the threat of a continental blockade, which France wanted to impose on Russia, threatened to destroy our economy. The essence of the continental blockade is that the states of Europe were forbidden to trade with England. It was possible to trade only with France and with friendly states. Now this situation has become especially aggravated, because the French fleet was destroyed by Nelson in September 1805 at the Battle of Trafalgar (Nelson himself died then). England was the mistress of the seas. And what about the port of Arkhangelsk and St. Petersburg, where, as you know, "all the flags were visiting us"?

War is war, Napoleon loved to fight. It immediately began with our defeats, but after the crushing defeat near Friedland (June 14, 1807), all the hopes of Alexander I evaporated. Napoleon marched on Konigberg, the last fortress of the Prussians. Bennigsen got in his way. The Russians fought bravely, but the fatal mistake of the command decided the matter. After a devastating battle near Friedland, Napoleon stopped on the Neman River near the town of Tilsit. Along the Neman was the border with Russia. Bennigsen offered a truce, Napoleon agreed, but Alexander hesitated. So much wasted effort and all for nothing? Even after the defeat near Heilsberg, Tsarevich Konstantin expressed his opinion: “Sir, if you do not want peace, then it is better to give each Russian soldier a loaded pistol and order them all to shoot themselves. You will get the same result that a new battle will give you! ..” Konstantin was a stormy, quick-tempered, hysterical nature, and it turns out that he was right? Panic reigned in the Russian troops, and Napoleon could immediately launch an invasion of Russia, it was a stone's throw to Vilna.

| |

An inattentive, sometimes dismissive attitude to history does not allow people to see even those simple lessons that are on the surface.

Mahan A.T.

The Treaty of Tilsit is the name of a historical document that was signed on June 25 - July 9, 1807 by France and Russia. The treaty was ratified by the emperors of the states: Napoleon and Alexander 1. The historical significance of the Tilsit peace treaty can hardly be overestimated, since as a result an alliance was concluded between the two strongest powers on the continent, and peace finally came to Europe. In today's article, we will talk about the historical significance of Tilsit, as well as what consequences this agreement had for Russia and France.

Preconditions of the agreement

In 1807, a unique situation developed in Europe, since the entire continent was effectively captured by France. Napoleon himself wrote in his autobiography that in order to completely conquer Europe, it was necessary to destroy England. In the face of Russia, the French emperor saw his ally, saying that the whole world for France can have only one ally - Russia. Largely because of this, the Peace of Tilsit became possible. The fact is that in order to defeat England, Napoleon needed a complete continental blockade. It was simply impossible to win at sea, so it was decided to conclude a special agreement with Russia, creating a united front to fight England. Alexander 1 understood that his coalition with Prussia, England and Sweden had failed, as Napoleon won victory after victory, and the position of the allies became more and more precarious every day.

Negotiations between countries

On June 12, 1807, the French army, which was personally led by Emperor Napoleon 1, in the battle of Friedland, won a complete and unconditional victory over the Russian army, which was commanded by General Bennigsen. After this, Bonaparte showed amazing generosity, not pursuing the enemy, I invited him to make peace. He proved in practice that the union is important to him, and he does not consider Emperor Alexander 1 as his enemy.

The situation was precarious enough especially for Alexander, as his army was defeated. As a result, the Russian emperor put forward two conditions:

• The meeting must take place on independent soil, and not on French territory or on the territory of the country and its satellite.
• Russia does not recognize any claims to the geographical integrity of its side.

Napoleon assured the Russian ambassadors that both points would be fulfilled, thus paving the way for a meeting with Alexander first.

Negotiations were made on the Neman River. A raft was set up in the middle of the river, on which a tent was set up, where the emperors of the two countries met. This happened on June 25, 1807 and became the basis for the signing of the peace of Tilsit. Historical documents clearly indicate that Alexander 1 assured Bonaparte that England was their common enemy. After that, the French emperor said that in this case the problem of concluding a peace agreement would not arise. A fragment of this speech is given literally in every history textbook, however, these same textbooks do not explain why France and Russia fought among themselves for 6 years, if they had a common enemy, and there were no disagreements between themselves ...

The fate of Prussia

The negotiations between Alexander 1 and Napoleon lasted a little less than 1 hour. All this time, the emperor of Prussia was on the banks of the Neman River. He hoped that Napoleon would agree to accept him in order to discuss the fate of the German state. Bonaparte's position was that Prussia should have disappeared from the map of Europe. This is exactly what Alexander 1 suggested, he said the following about Prussia: "this is a vile nation, led by a vile monarch, in his submission a vile army. They have always betrayed everyone, and does not deserve further existence." Only the participation of the Russian emperor helped save Prussia as a state.

Terms of agreement

Negotiations between the powers came very quickly. It was possible to agree on all points of the settlement agreements very quickly. Despite this stay in Tilsit amounted to two weeks. During this time, the emperors of both countries were practically inseparable, thus creating prospects for the future of the world. As a result of all these events, the Tilsit peace was signed, the terms of which were:

• Recognition by Russia of all the conquests that Napoleon made in Europe.
• Russia was to join the continental blockade against England. In its essence, this meant that Alexander was breaking off all trade relations with Foggy Albion. All English ships were banned from entering Russian ports.
• A military alliance was signed between France and Russia. Under the terms of this alliance, the countries were obliged to support each other in any war, both offensive and defensive.
• Polish lands departed from Prussia. A new state was created on this territory - the Duchy of Warsaw, which was directly dependent on France.
• Russia officially recognized all proteges whom Bonaparte placed on the throne of the European powers.
• France ceases to show any help to Turkey, and Russia in response must withdraw its troops from Moldavia and Wallachia.
• Full recognition, by all parties to the agreements, created earlier by the Confederation of the Rhine.

Historical meaning

Tilsit, without any doubt, is an advantageous peace treaty for Russia. However, one cannot share the opinion of many historians who attribute this to the success of domestic diplomacy. In fact, Bonaparte himself did all the work for Alexander 1, offering him extremely favorable conditions. As a result, both countries were in a winning position:

• Russia could now focus on fighting Turkey without fear that France would interfere in this conflict.
• For the first time Napoleon could enjoy the European world. Now there was only England, for the war with which they began to prepare.

The Treaty of Tilsit lasted until the summer of 1812, when the Patriotic War began.

Tilsit is a small town, which is located on the territory of the modern Kaliningrad region, and is called Sovetsk.

NAPOLEON I (Napoleon) (Napoleon Bonaparte) (1769-1821), French emperor in 1804-14 and in March - June 1815. A native of Corsica. He began serving in the army in 1785 with the rank of junior lieutenant of artillery; advanced during the French Revolution (reaching the rank of brigadier general) and under the Directory (army commander). In November 1799 he carried out a coup d'état (Brumaire 18), as a result of which he became the first consul, who in the course of time effectively concentrated all power in his hands; in 1804 he was proclaimed emperor. Established a dictatorial regime. He carried out a number of reforms (the adoption of the civil code, 1804, the foundation of the French bank, 1800, etc.). Thanks to victorious wars, he significantly expanded the territory of the empire, made most of the Western states dependent on France. and Center. Europe. The defeat of Napoleon's troops in the war of 1812 against Russia marked the beginning of the collapse of the empire of Napoleon I. The entry of troops of the anti-French coalition into Paris in 1814 forced Napoleon I to abdicate. Was exiled to Fr. Elbe. He again occupied the French throne in March 1815 (see "One Hundred Days"). After the defeat at Waterloo, he abdicated a second time (June 22, 1815). He spent the last years of his life on about. St. Helena a prisoner of the British.

Alexander I (Blessed), Alexander Pavlovich (December 12 (23), 1777, St. Petersburg - November 19 (December 1), 1825, Taganrog) - Emperor of the Russian Empire from March 11 (23), 1801 to November 19 (December 1), 1825 ), the eldest son of Emperor Paul I and Maria Feodorovna. At the beginning of his reign, he carried out moderately liberal reforms developed by the Private Committee and M.M. Speransky. In foreign policy, he maneuvered between Great Britain and France. In 1805-07 he participated in anti-French coalitions. In 1807-12 he temporarily became close to France. He waged successful wars with Turkey (1806-12) and Sweden (1808-09). Under Alexander I, the territories of Eastern Georgia (1801), Finland (1809), Bessarabia (1812), Azerbaijan (1813), and the former Duchy of Warsaw (1815) were annexed to Russia. After the Patriotic War of 1812, in 1813-14 he headed the anti-French coalition of European powers. He was one of the leaders of the Vienna Congress of 1814-15 and the organizers of the Holy Alliance. In the last years of his life, he often spoke of his intention to abdicate and “remove from the world,” which, after his unexpected death from typhoid fever in Taganrog, gave rise to the legend of “Elder Fyodor Kuzmich.” According to this legend, it was not Alexander who died and was then buried in Taganrog, but his double, while the tsar lived for a long time as an old hermit in Siberia and died in 1864.

Foreign policy and their friendship

Russia and France were bound by a common destiny, which determined many things not only in their lives. The two empires turned out to be both parallel to each other and very different. Historians talk about it in long sentences. Art clearly shows this without words. The cultural affinity established by the Age of Enlightenment proved to be more than just stronger than political enmity. It included this enmity (and its variant, the touching alliance) within itself, made it a concrete version of cultural history, more enduring and more important for posterity than political history. Monuments tell us about the same situation of love and hate that politicians have felt and are feeling.

In the west, Russia actively participated in European affairs. In the first decade and a half of the nineteenth century the implementation of the western direction was associated with the struggle against the aggression of Napoleon. After 1815, the main task of Russia's foreign policy in Europe became the maintenance of the old monarchical regimes and the struggle against the revolutionary movement. Alexander I and Nicholas I relied on the most conservative forces and most often relied on alliances with Austria and Prussia. In 1848, Nicholas helped the Austrian emperor suppress the revolution that broke out in Hungary, and strangled the revolutionary uprisings in the Danubian principalities.

At the very beginning of the XIX century. Russia adhered to neutrality in European affairs. However, the aggressive plans of Napoleon, since 1804 the French emperor, forced Alexander I to oppose him. In 1805, a third coalition was formed against France: Russia, Austria and England. The outbreak of the war was extremely unsuccessful for the allies. In November 1805, their troops were defeated near Austerlipem. Austria withdrew from the war, the coalition collapsed.

Russia, continuing to fight alone, tried to create a new alliance against France. In 1806, the 4th coalition was formed: Russia, Prussia, England and Sweden. However, the French army forced Prussia to capitulate within just a few weeks. Once again, Russia found itself alone in the face of a formidable and powerful enemy. In June 1807, she lost the battle near Friedland (the territory of East Prussia, now the Kaliningrad region of Russia). This forced Alexander I to enter into peace negotiations with Napoleon.

In the summer of 1807, in Tilsit, Russia and France signed a peace treaty, and then an alliance treaty. According to its terms, the Duchy of Warsaw was created from the Polish lands torn away from Prussia under the protectorate of Napoleon. This territory in the future became a springboard for an attack on Russia. The Treaty of Tilsit obliged Russia to join the continental blockade of Great Britain and break off political relations with it. The rupture of traditional trade ties with England caused significant damage to the Russian economy, undermining its finances. The nobles, whose material well-being largely depended on the sale of Russian agricultural products to England, showed particular dissatisfaction with this condition and Alexander I personally. The peace of Tilsit was unfavorable for Russia. At the same time, he gave her a temporary respite in Europe, allowing her to intensify her policy in the eastern and northwestern directions.

Napoleon, sensing the serious political significance of the Bailen catastrophe. Although he pretended to be calm, emphasizing that the Baylen loss was a complete trifle compared to the resources owned by his empire, he understood perfectly well how this event should affect Austria, which began to arm itself with redoubled energy.

Austria saw that Napoleon suddenly had not one front, but two, and that this new southern Spanish front would from now on greatly weaken him on the Danube. To keep Austria out of the war, it was necessary to make her understand that Alexander I would invade Austrian possessions from the east, while Napoleon, his ally, would march on Vienna from the west. For this purpose, the Erfurt demonstration of friendship between the two emperors was mainly started.

Alexander I experienced a difficult time after Tilsit. The alliance with Napoleon and the inevitable consequences of this alliance - a break with England - severely hurt the economic interests of both the nobility and the merchant class. Friedland and Tilsit were considered not only a misfortune, but also a disgrace.

Alexander hoped, believing Napoleon's promises, that by acquiring a part of Turkey thanks to the Franco-Russian alliance, he would calm the court, guards, general noble opposition. But time passed, and no steps were taken by Napoleon in this direction; moreover, rumors began to reach St. Petersburg that Napoleon was inciting the Turks to further resistance in the war they were waging at that time against Russia. In Erfurt, both participants in the Franco-Russian alliance hoped to take a closer look at the good quality of the cards with which each of them plays his diplomatic game. Both allies deceived each other, both knew it, although not yet completely, both did not trust each other in anything, and both needed each other. Alexander considered Napoleon a man of the greatest mind; Napoleon recognized the diplomatic subtlety and cunning of Alexander. "This is a real Byzantine," the French emperor said about the Russian Tsar. Therefore, at the first meeting in Erfurt on September 27, 1808, they passionately embraced and kissed each other in public and did not stop doing this for two weeks in a row, daily and inseparably appearing at reviews, parades, melons, feasts, in the theater, on hunting, on horseback rides. Publicity was the most important thing in these hugs and kisses: for Napoleon, these kisses would have lost all their sweetness if the Austrians had not known about them, and for Alexander if the Turks had not known about them.

During the year that passed between Tilsit and Erfurt, Alexander made sure that Napoleon only beckoned him with a promise to give him the "East" and take the "West" for himself; it was clear that not only would he not allow the tsar to occupy Constantinople, but that Napoleon would prefer to leave even Moldavia and Wallachia in the hands of the Turks. On the other hand, the tsar saw that Napoleon, for a whole year after Tilsit, did not bother to remove his troops even from that part of Prussia, which he returned to the Prussian king. As for Napoleon, for him the most important thing was to keep Austria from speaking out against France, while he was. Napoleon will not be able to put an end to the guerrilla war that has flared up in Spain. And for this, Alexander had to undertake to actively act against Austria if Austria decided to speak out. And Alexander did not want to give or fulfill this direct obligation. Napoleon agreed to give in advance for this Russian military assistance to Alexander Galicia and even more possessions near the Carpathians. Subsequently, the most prominent representatives of both the Slavophile and the national-patriotic schools of Russian historiography bitterly reproached Alexander for not accepting these proposals of Napoleon and for missing an opportunity that would never happen again. But Alexander submitted after feeble attempts to resist that strong current in the Russian nobility, which saw in an alliance with Napoleon, who twice defeated the Russian army (in 1805 and 1807), not only a disgrace (it would still go anywhere), but also ruin. Anonymous letters reminding Alexander of the end of Paul, his father, who also entered into friendship with Napoleon, were quite convincing. And yet, Alexander was afraid of Napoleon and did not want to break with him for anything. At the direction and invitation of Napoleon, who wanted to punish Sweden for her alliance with England, Alexander had been waging war with Sweden since February 1808, which ended with the rejection of all Finland from Sweden to the Torneo River and its annexation to Russia. Alexander knew that even by this he did not calm the irritation and anxiety of the Russian landlords, for whom the interests of their own pocket were infinitely higher than any territorial state expansions in the barren north. In any case, the acquisition of Finland was for Alexander also an argument in favor of the fact that breaking with Napoleon now is both dangerous and unprofitable.

In Erfurt, Talleyrand betrayed Napoleon for the first time by entering into secret relations with Alexander, whom he advised to resist Napoleonic hegemony. Talleyrand subsequently motivated his behavior by allegedly caring for France, which Napoleon's insane love of power led to death. "The Russian sovereign is civilized, but the Russian people are not civilized, the French sovereign is not civilized, but the French people are civilized. It is necessary that the Russian sovereign and the French people enter into an alliance with each other," with such a flattering phrase, the old intriguer began his secret negotiations with the tsar.

It was said about Talleyrand that throughout his life he "sold those who bought him." At one time he sold the Directory to Napoleon, now in Erfurt he sold Napoleon to Alexander. He subsequently sold Alexander to the British. He only did not sell the English to anyone, because only they did not buy him (although he offered himself to them several times at the most reasonable price).

Here it is inappropriate to delve into the motives of Talleyrand (who later received money from Alexander, although not in such a large amount as he expected). It is important for us to note two features here: firstly, Talleyrand saw more clearly than others already in 1808 what, more or less vaguely, began to disturb, as already mentioned, many marshals and dignitaries; secondly, Alexander realized that the Napoleonic empire was not as strong and indestructible as it might seem. He began to oppose Napoleonic harassment on the issue of Russia's military action against Austria in the event of a new Franco-Austrian war. During one of these disputes, Napoleon threw his hat on the ground and began to trample it furiously with his feet. Alexander, in response to this trick, said: “You are sharp, but I am stubborn ... We will talk, we will reason, otherwise I will leave.” The alliance remained formally in force, but from now on Napoleon could not count on it.

People in Russia waited with great anxiety to see whether the meeting in Erfurt would end well: whether Napoleon would arrest Alexander, as he had done just four months earlier with the Spanish Bourbons, luring them to Bayonne. "No one hoped that he would let you go, Your Majesty," one old Prussian general blurted out frankly (and to Alexander's great annoyance) when Alexander was returning from Erfurt. From the outside, everything was excellent: during the entire Erfurt meeting, the vassal kings and other monarchs who made up Napoleon's retinue did not cease to be touched by the heartfelt mutual love of Napoleon and the tsar. But Napoleon himself, seeing Alexander off, was gloomy. He knew that the vassal kings did not believe in the strength of this alliance, and that Austria did not believe either. It was necessary to finish the Spanish affairs as soon as possible.

Napoleon had 100,000 men in Spain. He ordered another 150,000 to hastily invade Spain. The peasant uprising flared up every month. The Spanish word guerilla, "little war," misunderstood the meaning of what was happening. This war with peasants and artisans, with shepherds of sheep and mule drivers worried the emperor much more than other great campaigns.

After the slavishly resigned Prussia, the Spanish furious resistance seemed especially strange and unexpected. And yet Napoleon did not even suspect what this Spanish fire would come to. This could have had a somewhat sobering effect on General Bonaparte, but the “riot of the poor ragamuffins” could not have affected the Emperor Napoleon, the winner of Europe.

Unsure of Alexander's help and almost convinced that Austria would turn against him. Napoleon in the late autumn of 1808 rushed to Spain.

France and Russia share a remarkably complicated history of political and cultural relations. The war with Napoleon was the main event in Russian history in the 19th century. But she had a strange result. In Russia, the cult of Napoleon intensified, and the traditional love for French culture increased immeasurably. The Empire style with its Russian version dominated everywhere. The Russian emperor ordered a large painting “Parade of the Old Guard” for his office, and a unit was created as part of the Russian guard, wearing a uniform that deliberately repeated the form of Napoleonic soldiers.

Republican ideas that inspired the Russian nobles to the Decembrist uprising were also brought from Imperial France.

Internal sympathy existed, despite the objective political and social contradictions.

The Empire style of art would have meant "Napoleon style" if it had not become international and transcended the era. The ideology of the Napoleonic Empire created a kind of artificial Renaissance, which revived not the ancient spirit, but the symbols and signs of the Roman militarized world - eagles, armor, lictor bundles, sacrificial tripods - and the solemn severity inherent in Roman aesthetics. This style, created "under Napoleon", became an important contribution to the history of culture, no less important than military campaigns with their bright victories and gloomy defeats. The style survived Napoleon and took root in many countries of the world, but especially and very beautifully in another empire - in Russia. What is called Russian Empire is part of an international phenomenon. However, in Russia, the "imperial" style not only changed its form, but also found new historical sources and key symbols - the past of Russia with its helmets and chain mail, with the image-ideal of a medieval knight.

The works of French and Russian applied art of the early 19th century shown next to each other confirm the global nature of the style created by France, which turned the Republic back into a monarchy, focusing on the ideals and style of the Ancient World. Russia imported brilliant monuments of French craftsmanship. French artists created sketches for Russian factories. The original works of Russian workshops were not inferior to imported ones and were saturated with their own ideological program. All this can be shown by Russia and its museum - the Hermitage. But he also shows objects with a stronger French accent. Thanks to a combination of circumstances, personal sympathies and dynastic marriages, many Napoleonic things that were kept in the Beauharnais family ended up in Russia: from the saber that was with Napoleon at Marengo to the service.

However, behind the story about art lies a theme very close to Russian history. Gilded heroes of French and Russian production stand side by side like brothers, like Alexander Pavlovich and Napoleon on a raft in Tilsit. The theme "Alexander and Napoleon" is loved not only by historians, but also by everyone who in Russia reflects on Russian history. A dramatic break with France after the assassination of Paul, a humiliating defeat at Austerlitz, a reconciliation that delighted everyone, skillfully used for Russia's political purposes. A treacherous preventive attack, the loss of Moscow and the terrible humiliation of the all-European victors, which ended with the capture of Paris by the Russian troops, which was struck by the nobility of the victorious emperor. This is a beautiful saga.

For the Hermitage, there is another aspect of this story. His name is Vivant Denon. A remarkable artist, one of the organizers of the scientific Egyptian expedition of Napoleon, the creator of the Louvre, the father of "Egyptomania", a freemason and mystic, who served in his youth at the Russian Court. The Egyptian papyrus donated by him and a luxurious book of his oriental engravings are kept in Russia. They say that during the period of friendship between Alexander and Napoleon, he helped to buy paintings for the Hermitage, including, supposedly, Caravaggio's The Lute Player. Alexander awarded him the Order of St. Anne in gratitude for the art objects sent to St. Petersburg. As director of the Louvre, he unsuccessfully tried to buy from the Empress Josephine part of her art collection. Josephine's daughter sold paintings and sculptures to Alexander, to the Hermitage. The Russian emperor, in turn, defended the right of France to preserve the treasures collected by Denon throughout Europe.

Our cultural interactions are full of fascinating episodes, many of which visibly and invisibly stand behind amazingly beautiful things united "under the sign of two eagles" - Russian and French.

The Bucharest peace treaty was of great importance. It was concluded a month before Napoleon's attack on Russia and upset his hopes of helping the Turkish army. The treaty allowed the Russian command to concentrate all its forces on repelling the Napoleonic aggression. The successes of Russian weapons and the conclusion of the Treaty of Bucharest led to the weakening of the political, economic and religious yoke of the Ottoman Empire over the Christian peoples of the Balkan Peninsula.

Reasons for the termination of friendship, their common interests and contradictions

After Erfurt, Alexander returned to St. Petersburg with the intention of supporting the Franco-Russian alliance and not getting out of the wake of Napoleonic policy, at least in the near future. When a scientific and detailed socio-economic and political history of Russia at the beginning of the 19th century is written, then, probably, the future researcher will pay much attention and devote a lot of pages to these curious years from Erfurt to the invasion of Napoleon in 1812. In these four years, we see a complex the struggle of hostile social forces and currents that determined the historical pattern of both the appearance of the figure of Speransky and his downfall.

Apparently, the question of introducing some reforms in the administration of the Russian Empire was put forward rather persistently by the conditions of that time. There were enough shocks that contributed to the creation of the need for reform: Austerlitz, Friedland, Tilsit. But, on the other hand, the terrible defeats in the two big wars that were waged by Russia in 1805-1807. against Napoleon, ended, no matter what was said about the shame of Tilsit, with a comparatively advantageous alliance with a world conqueror and then, in a short time, the acquisition of vast Finland. This means that the Russian tsar did not see any reasons for very deep, fundamental reforms, even for those that were outlined for Prussia after the Jena defeat. It was here that Speransky came in unusually handy to the court. A smart, dexterous and cautious raznochinets returned from Erfurt, where he traveled in Alexander's retinue, completely delighted with Napoleon. Speransky did not touch serfdom in any way, even remotely - on the contrary, he convincingly argued that it was not slavery at all. He also did not touch the Orthodox Church in any way - on the contrary, he said many compliments to her at every opportunity. Not only did he not encroach on any restriction of autocracy, but, on the contrary, he saw in tsarist absolutism the main lever of the transformations he had initiated. And these transformations were precisely intended to turn the loose semi-Eastern despotism, the patrimony of the Holstein-Gottorp family, who appropriated the boyar surname of the extinct Romanovs, into a modern European state with a properly functioning bureaucracy, with a system of formal legality, with organized control over finances and administration, educated and businesslike personnel of the bureaucracy, with the transformation of governors from satraps into prefects, in a word, he wanted to plant on Russian soil the same orders that, in his opinion, turned France into the first country in the world. In itself, this program did not contradict the thoughts, feelings, desires of Alexander, and the king supported his favorite for several years in a row. But both Alexander and Speransky paid off without a host. The well-born nobility and the middle-noble stratum led by it sensed the enemy, no matter how much he covered himself with moderation and good intentions. They understood instinctively that Speransky was striving to make the feudal-absolutist state bourgeois-absolutist and create forms that were essentially incompatible with the feudal-serf system that existed in Russia and the nobility of political and social life.

They went as a united phalanx against Speransky. Not by chance, but organically, Speransky's reform work was associated in their eyes with the commitment of the leading minister to the Franco-Russian alliance, to friendship with the military dictator of France and Europe; not by chance, but organically, in the minds of the Russian nobility, the popovich was associated, who introduces exams for officials and wants to oust the nobility from the state machine in order to transfer this machine to raznochintsy, rabble-rousers and merchants, and the French conqueror, who ruins the same Russian nobility with a continental blockade and to whom the king went to the Erfurt Horde to bow with his favorite. What was the firm line of the court and noble opposition in St. Petersburg and Moscow in 1808-1812, and this opposition was directed equally sharply both against the domestic and against the foreign policy of the tsar and his minister.

Already this circumstance deprived the Franco-Russian alliance of due strength. In Russian aristocratic salons, the taking of Finland from Sweden was condemned, because it was done at the request of Napoleon, and they did not even want to get Galicia, if this required helping the hated Bonaparte against Austria in 1809. They tried in every possible way to show coldness to the French ambassador in St. Petersburg, Caulaincourt, and the more affectionate and cordial the tsar was with him, the more demonstratively the aristocratic circles, both of new Petersburg and especially of old Moscow, showed their hostility.

But from the end of 1810, Alexander ceased to oppose this victorious current. Firstly, Napoleon's Tilsit speeches about the spread of Russian influence in the East, in Turkey, turned out to be only words, and this disappointed Alexander; Secondly. Napoleon still did not withdraw his troops from Prussia and, most importantly, played some kind of game with the Poles, not abandoning the idea of ​​restoring Poland, which threatened the integrity of the Russian borders and the rejection of Lithuania; thirdly, Napoleon's protests and displeasure at the failure to comply exactly with the conditions of the continental blockade took on very insulting forms; fourthly, the arbitrary annexations with a stroke of the pen of entire states, practiced by Napoleon so willingly in 1810-1811, disturbed and annoyed Alexander. The exorbitant power of Napoleon itself hung an eternal threat over his vassals, and after Tilsit, Alexander was looked upon (and he knew it) as a simple vassal of Napoleon. They were ironic about the small handouts that Napoleon gave Alexander both in 1807, giving him the Prussian Bialystok, and in 1809, giving the king one Austrian district on the eastern (Galician) border; they said that Napoleon treats Alexander in the same way as the former Russian tsars treated their serfs, granting them so many souls as a reward for their service.

When Napoleon's marriage to Grand Duchess Anna Pavlovna failed, for the first time in all of Europe they began to talk about the approaching sharp quarrel between the two emperors. The marriage of Napoleon to the daughter of the Austrian emperor was interpreted as replacing the Franco-Russian alliance with the Franco-Austrian one.

There are precise indications that for the first time not only thinking aloud about the war with Russia, but also seriously studying this issue, Napoleon began in January 1811, when he got acquainted with the new Russian customs tariff. This tariff greatly increased duties on the importation into Russia of wines, silk and velvet fabrics, and other luxury items, i.e., just those goods that were the main items of French imports to Russia. Napoleon protested against this tariff; he was told that the deplorable state of Russian finances compels such a measure. The rate remains. Complaints about the too easy passage of colonial goods to Russia on pseudo-neutral, but in fact English courts, became more and more frequent. Napoleon was sure that the Russians were secretly releasing English goods and that from Russia these goods were widely distributed in Germany, Austria, Poland, and thus the blockade of England was reduced to zero.

Alexander also thought about the inevitability of war, looked for allies, negotiated with Bernadotte, formerly a Napoleonic marshal, now the Crown Prince of Sweden and an enemy of Napoleon. On August 15, 1811, at a solemn reception of the diplomatic corps, who arrived to congratulate Napoleon on his birthday, the emperor, stopping near the Russian ambassador, Prince Kurakin, turned to him with an angry speech that had a threatening meaning. He accused Alexander of infidelity to the union, of hostile actions. What does your sovereign hope for? he asked menacingly. Napoleon then suggested that Kurakin immediately sign an agreement that would settle all misunderstandings between Russia and the French Empire. Kurakin, timid and agitated, declared that he had no authority for such an act. No authority? - Napoleon shouted. - So demand your powers! .. I don’t want war, I don’t want to restore Poland, but you yourself want the duchies of Warsaw and Danzig to be annexed to Russia ... Until the secret intentions of your court become open, I will not stop increasing army stationed in Germany! The emperor did not listen to excuses and explanations of Kurakin, who rejected all these accusations, but spoke and repeated his thoughts in every way.

After this scene, no one in Europe doubted the imminent war. Napoleon gradually turned the whole of vassal Germany into a vast springboard for a future invasion. At the same time, he decided to force both Prussia and Austria into a military alliance with him - two powers on the continent that were still considered independent, although in fact Prussia was in complete political slavery to Napoleon. This military alliance was to immediately precede the attack on Russia.

Prussia experienced very difficult times in the years when the Napoleonic yoke weighed on it, but still, even in the first moments after Tilsit, in 1807-1808, there was no such chronic panic as after Wagram and the Austrian marriage of Napoleon. In the early years, under the influence of Stein and the Reform Party in Prussia, if not completely abolished serfdom, then almost all of its legal foundations were very significantly broken. Some other reforms were also carried out.

But then the fiery patriot Stein, who too openly admired the Spanish uprising, attracted the attention of the Napoleonic police: one of his letters was intercepted, which seemed unintentional to Napoleon, and the emperor ordered King Frederick William III to immediately expel Stein from Prussia. The king, as a sign of zeal, not only immediately carried out the order, but also confiscated the property of the disgraced statesman.

The cause of reform in Prussia slowed down, but did not stop. Scharnhorst, the Minister of War, Gneisenau and their assistants worked as far as possible to reorganize the army. At the request of Napoleon, Prussia could not have an army of more than 42 thousand people, but by various clever measures the Prussian government managed, calling for a short time, to give military training to a large mass. Thus, slavishly fulfilling the will of Napoleon, submissive, flattering, humiliating, Prussia nevertheless quietly prepared for the distant future and did not lose hope of a way out of that desperate impossible situation in which the terrible defeat of 1806 and the Treaty of Tilsit in 1807 had placed her.

When Napoleon's war with Austria broke out in 1809, there was one desperate, convulsive, made at individual risk and fear attempt on the Prussian side to free themselves from oppression: Major Schill with part of the hussar regiment, which he commanded, began a partisan war. He was defeated and killed, his comrades, by order of Napoleon, were tried by a Prussian military court and shot. The king was beside himself with fear and rage against Schill, but for the time being Napoleon was content with these executions and the humiliated assurances of Friedrich-Wilhelm. After the new defeat of Austria at Wagram, after the Treaty of Schönbrunn and the marriage of Napoleon to Marie-Louise, the last hopes for the salvation of Prussia disappeared: Austria, it seemed, completely and irrevocably entered the orbit of Napoleonic politics. Who could help, what to hope for? At the beginning of the quarrel between Napoleon and Russia? But this quarrel developed very slowly, and now, after Austerlitz and Friedland, former hopes were no longer placed on the strength of Russia.

From the very beginning of 1810 there were ominous rumors that Napoleon intended, without war, by a simple decree, to destroy Prussia, either by dividing it into parts (between the French Empire, the Westphalian kingdom of Jerome Bonaparte and Saxony, which was in vassal dependence on Napoleon), or by expelling from there the Hohenzollern dynasty and replacing it with one of their relatives or marshals. When, on June 9, 1810, by a simple decree, Napoleon annexed Holland and then turned it into nine new departments of the French Empire, when Hamburg, Bremen, Lübeck, the Lauenburg duchies of Oldenburg, Salm-Salm, Arenberg and a number of others were annexed to France in the same easy way possessions, when, having occupied the entire northern coast of Germany, from Holland to Holstein, Marshal Davout, as the only consolation for those who were joining, declared in an official appeal to them: Your independence was only imaginary, then the Prussian king began to expect the last hour of his reign. His independence, after all, was also only imaginary, and he knew that back in Tilsit, Napoleon had categorically declared that he had not erased Prussia from the map of Europe only out of courtesy to the Russian Tsar. And now, in 1810-1811, Napoleon's relations with the tsar quickly deteriorated and there was no talk of any kindness. At the end of 1810, Napoleon, for no reason at all, in the midst of complete peace, did not hesitate to drive the Duke of Oldenburg out of his possessions and annex Oldenburg to his state, although the son and heir of this duke was married to Alexander's sister, Ekaterina Pavlovna.

Prussia in 1810-1811 was waiting for death. It was not only King Frederick William III, who had never distinguished himself for courage, who was afraid, but those liberal-patriotic associations, like the Tugendbund, which at that time reflected the desire of a part of the young German bourgeoisie to get rid of the foreign oppressor and then create a new, free Germany, were also silenced. The Tugendbund was not the only, but only the most conspicuous of these illegal associations; he, too, fell silent and despondent in 1810, and especially in 1811 and early 1812. The situation seemed very hopeless. Minister Hardenberg, who once stood for resistance and for this, at the request of Napoleon, removed from the Prussian court, now formally repented and in writing brought to the attention of the French ambassador Saint-Marsan about a complete change in his convictions. Our salvation depends only on Napoleon, - wrote Hardenberg to General Scharnhorst. Hardenberg himself in May 1810 turned to the French ambassador with the following humiliated request: Let his imperial majesty deign to speak out about the participation that I could take in business. This will provide substantial proof of the return of the emperor's trust and favors to the king.

Napoleon relented and allowed Friedrich Wilhelm to appoint Hardenberg as state chancellor. This happened on June 5, and already on June 7, 1810. the new Prussian chancellor wrote to Napoleon: Deeply convinced that Prussia can be reborn and ensure its integrity and its future happiness only by honestly following your system, sovereign ... I consider it my highest glory to earn the approval and high confidence of your imperial majesty. I remain with the deepest respect, sir, the most humble and obedient servant of Your Imperial Majesty. Baron von Hardenberg, State Chancellor of the King of Prussia.

On March 14, 1812, a Franco-Austrian treaty was signed in Paris, according to which Austria was obliged to send 30,000 soldiers to help Napoleon. Napoleon guaranteed the seizure of Moldavia and Wallachia from Russia, which were then occupied by Russian troops. In addition, the Austrians were guaranteed the possession of Galicia or other territorial compensation corresponding in value.

These two alliances, with Prussia and Austria, were needed by Napoleon not so much to replenish the great army, but to divert part of the Russian forces north and south of that direct road Kovno - Vilna - Vitebsk - Smolensk - Moscow, along which he was to be sent offensive.

Prussia undertook to put 20 thousand people at the disposal of Napoleon for the upcoming war, Austria - 30 thousand people. Moreover, Prussia pledged to provide Napoleon for his army (to pay off part of its unpaid debts to the French emperor, from which Prussia could not get out) 20 million kilograms of rye, 40 million kilograms of wheat, more than 40 thousand bulls, 70 million bottles of alcoholic beverages.

Diplomatic preparations for the war were already completed in early spring. There is information that a bad harvest in 1811 led to famine in some parts of France at the end of winter and in the spring of 1812, that in some places in the countryside there were disturbances on this basis, and in some places they were expected, and there are indications that this delayed Napoleon's campaign for one and a half to two months. Buying and speculating in grain increased anxiety and irritation in the countryside, and this uneasy situation also slowed down Napoleon's advance.

Napoleon was forced to organize special flying detachments, which were supposed to hunt through the forests for those who were evading and forcibly bring them to military units. As a result of repressive measures, recruiting before the war of 1812, in general, gave everything that Napoleon counted on.

By the end of the spring of 1812, Napoleon's military and diplomatic preparations were basically and partly completed in detail. All vassal Europe was dutifully ready to oppose Russia.

Literature

1. Aksenova M., Ismailova S. World History - T.I, - M .: Avanta +, 1993 -618 p.

2. Volgin I.L., Narinsky M.M.. Dialogue about Dostoevsky, Napoleon and the Napoleonic myth // Metamorphoses of Europe. M., 1993, p. 127-164

3. Tarle E. V. Napoleon. - M.: Gosizdat, 1941. - 562 p.

4. Chandler D. Napoleon's military campaigns. M.: Tsentropoligraf, 1999.

Volgin I.L., Narinsky M.M.. Dialogue about Dostoevsky, Napoleon and the Napoleonic myth // Metamorphoses of Europe. M., 1993, p. 127-164

Tarle E. V. Napoleon. - M.: Gosizdat, 1941. - S. 432.

Tarle E. V. Napoleon. - M.: Gosizdat, 1941. - S. 401.

Tarle E. V. Napoleon. - M.: Gosizdat, 1941. - S. 368.

Chandler D. Napoleon's military campaigns. M.: Tsentropoligraf, 1999.

Aksenova M., Ismailova S. World History - T.I, - M .: Avanta +, 1993 - P 222.