Zhu Di (1360-1424), Prince of Yan, the fourth son of the Hongwu Emperor, became the Yongle Emperor in 1403 and ruled China for 22 years. He strengthened the Ming Dynasty and went down in history as an emperor with outstanding achievements. /website/

Prince Yan - Sparrow

Legend has it that when Emperor Hongwu proudly showed the strong walls of the capital to his advisor Liu Bowen, also known for his predictions as the “divine Nostradamus of China,” Liu replied: “The walls are high and strong, only a sparrow can fly over them.”

Many years later, when Prince Yan entered the capital with his troops, overthrew his nephew, who was then emperor, and ascended the throne himself, some people believed that the sparrow meant Prince Yan, since "yang" in Chinese also means " sparrow".

As the fourth son of the Hongwu Emperor, Prince Yan showed a talent for commanding an army in his youth, and his military success against the Mongols in the north made him the most likely candidate for the throne after the crown prince. When the crown prince died and Emperor Hongwu chose his grandson to succeed him, Prince Yan was disillusioned but still expected to play a key role at court.

However, the young emperor thought differently. On the advice of his assistants, he oversaw the removal of his uncles from power, as a result of which one of them committed suicide and the second ended up in prison. Anticipating a similar fate, Prince Yan declared that the inexperienced emperor had become a victim of the evil intent of his advisers, and in 1399 he rebelled. After three years of civil war, in 1402, Zhu Di overthrew the young emperor and ascended the throne in 1403 under the motto of the reign of Yongle (meaning "Eternal Happiness").

Economic recovery and religious tolerance

After ruthlessly eliminating political groups that were loyal or close to the disappeared young emperor, Yongle immediately set about rebuilding the economy destroyed by the civil war.

Having a strong desire to improve the economic situation, the emperor worked diligently, showing great frugality and moderation. He continued the agricultural program for the military, helping former military personnel set up farms and provide for their own lives. The Emperor established a low land tax and ordered the reconstruction of the Grand Canal to improve the transport network.

Regarding religions, Yongle was tolerant and gave Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism equal conditions. He appointed many Confucian scholars as advisors to the court and invited a famous Tibetan Buddhist to the capital to spread Buddhism. Also during his reign, the emperor supported the spread of Taoism.

The economy recovered very quickly, and during Yongle's reign, people began to live in abundance, something that had not happened for many decades.

International relations and diplomatic missions

Having successfully conducted his early military campaign against the Mongol tribes, the Yongle Emperor later took a different approach. He won the support of the Mongols and maintained peace with them and other nomadic tribes on the northern border. In 1410, hostilities were resumed, which, along with careful diplomatic efforts, led to the restoration of Chinese control in the north.

The Yongle Emperor expanded his territories far to the south and captured Annam (part of modern Vietnam) as a new province. But this did not last long, his grandson lost control of this territory.

Yongle sent envoys more than six times on sea expeditions abroad - to Southeast Asia and East Africa, which was not even thought of by any of the previous emperors in Chinese history. Under Yongle, economic and cultural exchanges between China and Asian and African countries increased significantly, with more than thirty countries regularly paying tribute to China. The reign of the Yongle Emperor was a time of greatest prosperity in the Ming Dynasty.

Yongle Encyclopedia

Soon after his accession to the throne, the Yongle Emperor decreed that a large number of ancient classical texts should be compiled into one book called the Yongle Dadian, or Yongle Encyclopedia. All the books that have appeared in the last 500 years have been collected and edited to make one book.

The Emperor praised the first edition, but was still not completely satisfied. Soon, more than 2,000 scientists were hired to collaborate on the second edition. It took another three years to complete the final version of Yongle Dadian. It contained more than 11,095 volumes and 370 million Chinese characters.

The Yongle Encyclopedia has not changed the content of its constituent books. Due to its enormous size, it was impossible to print, so 370 million characters were copied by hand.

The Yongle Encyclopedia covered topics such as astronomy, geography, man, religion, morality, political system, agriculture, art, drama, descriptions of unusual natural phenomena, short stories, etc. It included and categorized 8,000 books, from the Qin Dynasty to the early Ming Dynasty. All Taoist, Buddhist, Confucian and other philosophical teachings were collected and provided with indexes. The encyclopedia contained a large number of literary works up to the 14th century, as well as texts on philosophy, history, language, literature, science, technology and more.

Chinese historians describe the Yongle Emperor as having wisdom, courage, strategy, and intelligence. He is considered one of the most outstanding emperors in Chinese history.

E. Vernet "Portrait of Nicholas I"

According to the description of contemporaries, Nicholas I was “a soldier by vocation,
a soldier by education, by appearance and by inside.”

Personality

Nicholas, the third son of Emperor Paul I and Empress Maria Feodorovna, was born on June 25, 1796 - a few months before the accession of Grand Duke Pavel Petrovich to the throne.

Since the eldest son Alexander was considered the crown prince, and his successor Konstantin, the younger brothers - Nicholas and Mikhail - were not prepared for the throne, they were raised as grand dukes destined for military service.

A. Rokstuhl "Nicholas I in childhood"

From birth, he was in the care of his grandmother, Catherine II, and after her death, he was raised by a nanny, Scottish woman Lyon, to whom he was very attached.

Since November 1800, General M.I. Lamzdorf became the teacher of Nikolai and Mikhail. This was the choice of the father, Emperor Paul I, who said: “Just don’t make my sons such rakes as German princes.” Lamsdorf was the future emperor's tutor for 17 years. The future emperor did not show any success in his studies, with the exception of drawing. He studied painting as a child under the guidance of painters I.A. Akimov and V.K. Shebueva.

Nikolai realized his calling early. In his memoirs, he wrote: “The military sciences alone interested me passionately; in them alone I found consolation and a pleasant activity, similar to the disposition of my spirit.”

“His mind is not cultivated, his upbringing was careless,” Queen Victoria wrote about Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich in 1844.

During the Patriotic War of 1812, he passionately wanted to participate in military events, but received a decisive refusal from the Empress Mother.

In 1816-1817 To complete his education, Nikolai made two trips: one throughout Russia (he visited more than 10 provinces), the other to England. There he became acquainted with the state structure of the country: he attended a meeting of the English Parliament, but remained indifferent to what he saw, because... believed that such a political system was unacceptable for Russia.

In 1817, Nicholas's wedding took place with the Prussian princess Charlotte (in Orthodoxy, Alexandra Fedorovna).

Before ascending the throne, his public activities were limited to the command of a guards brigade, then a division; from 1817, he held the honorary position of inspector general for the military engineering department. Already during this period of military service, Nikolai began to show concern for military educational institutions. On his initiative, company and battalion schools began to function in the engineering troops, and in 1818. The Main Engineering School (the future Nikolaev Engineering Academy) and the School of Guards Ensigns (later the Nikolaev Cavalry School) were established.

Beginning of reign

Nicholas had to ascend the throne under exceptional circumstances. After the death of childless Alexander I in 1825, according to the Decree on Succession to the Throne, Constantine was to become the next king. But back in 1822, Constantine signed a written abdication of the throne.

D. Doe "Portrait of Nicholas I"

On November 27, 1825, having received news of the death of Alexander I, Nicholas swore allegiance to the new emperor Constantine, who was in Warsaw at that time; swore in the generals, army regiments, and government agencies. Meanwhile, Constantine, having received news of his brother's death, confirmed his reluctance to take the throne and swore allegiance to Nicholas as the Russian Emperor and swore in Poland. And only when Constantine twice confirmed his abdication, Nicholas agreed to reign. While there was correspondence between Nicholas and Constantine, there was a virtual interregnum. In order not to drag out the situation for a long time, Nicholas decided to take the oath of office on December 14, 1825.

This short interregnum was taken advantage of by members of the Northern Society - supporters of a constitutional monarchy, who, with the demands laid down in their program, brought military units to the Senate Square that refused to swear allegiance to Nicholas.

K. Kolman "Revolt of the Decembrists"

The new emperor dispersed the troops from Senate Square with grapeshot, and then personally supervised the investigation, as a result of which five leaders of the uprising were hanged, 120 people were sent to hard labor and exile; The regiments that took part in the uprising were disbanded, the rank and file were punished with spitzrutens and sent to remote garrisons.

Domestic policy

Nicholas's reign took place during a period of aggravated crisis of the feudal-serf system in Russia, a growing peasant movement in Poland and the Caucasus, bourgeois revolutions in Western Europe and, as a consequence of these revolutions, the formation of bourgeois revolutionary movements in the ranks of the Russian nobility and the common intelligentsia. Therefore, the Decembrist cause was of great importance and was reflected in the public mood of that time. In the heat of revelations, the tsar called the Decembrists “his friends of December 14th” and understood well that their demands had a place in Russian reality and the order in Russia required reforms.

Upon ascending the throne, Nicholas, being unprepared, did not have a definite idea of ​​​​what he would like to see the Russian Empire. He was only confident that the country’s prosperity could be ensured exclusively through strict order, strict fulfillment of everyone’s duties, control and regulation of social activities. Despite his reputation as a narrow-minded martinet, he brought some revival to the life of the country after the gloomy last years of the reign of Alexander I. He sought to eliminate abuses, restore law and order, and carry out reforms. The Emperor personally inspected government institutions, condemning red tape and corruption.

Wanting to strengthen the existing political system and not trusting the apparatus of officials, Nicholas I significantly expanded the functions of His Majesty’s Own Chancellery, which practically replaced the highest state bodies. For this purpose, six departments were formed: the first dealt with personnel issues and monitored the execution of the highest orders; The second was concerned with the codification of laws; The third monitored law and order in government and public life, and later turned into a body of political investigation; The fourth was in charge of charitable and women's educational institutions; The fifth developed the reform of state peasants and monitored its implementation; The sixth was preparing governance reform in the Caucasus.

V. Golike "Nicholas I"

The emperor loved to create numerous secret committees and commissions. One of the first such committees was the “Committee of December 6, 1826.” Nicholas set him the task of reviewing all the papers of Alexander I and determining “what is good now, what cannot be left and what can be replaced with.” After working for four years, the committee proposed a number of projects for the transformation of central and provincial institutions. These proposals, with the approval of the emperor, were submitted for consideration to the State Council, but events in Poland, Belgium and France forced the king to close the committee and completely abandon fundamental reforms of the political system. So the first attempt to implement at least some reforms in Russia ended in failure, the country continued to strengthen clerical and administrative methods of management.

In the first years of his reign, Nicholas I surrounded himself with major statesmen, thanks to whom it was possible to solve a number of major tasks that were not completed by his predecessors. So, M.M. He instructed Speransky to codify Russian law, for which all laws adopted after 1649 were identified in the archives and arranged in chronological order, which were published in 1830 in the 51st volume of the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire”.

Then the preparation of the current laws began, drawn up in 15 volumes. In January 1833, the “Code of Laws” was approved by the State Council, and Nicholas I, who was present at the meeting, having removed the Order of A. the First-Called from himself, awarded it to M.M. Speransky. The main advantage of this “Code” was the reduction of chaos in management and arbitrariness of officials. However, this over-centralization of power did not lead to positive results. Not trusting the public, the emperor expanded the number of ministries and departments that created their local bodies in order to control all areas of life, which led to the swelling of the bureaucracy and red tape, and the costs of their maintenance and the army absorbed almost all state funds. V. Yu Klyuchevsky wrote that under Nicholas I in Russia “the building of the Russian bureaucracy was completed.”

Peasant question

The most important issue in the domestic policy of Nicholas I was the peasant question. Nicholas I understood the need to abolish serfdom, but could not carry it out due to opposition from the nobility and fear of a “general upheaval.” Because of this, he limited himself to such minor measures as the publication of a law on obligated peasants and the partial implementation of the reform of state peasants. The complete liberation of the peasants did not take place during the life of the emperor.

But some historians, in particular V. Klyuchevsky, pointed to three significant changes in this area that occurred during the reign of Nicholas I:

— there was a sharp reduction in the number of serfs, they ceased to constitute the majority of the population. Obviously, a significant role was played by the cessation of the practice of “distributing” state peasants to landowners along with lands, which flourished under the previous kings, and the spontaneous liberation of the peasants that began;

- the situation of state peasants greatly improved, all state peasants were allocated their own plots of land and forest plots, and auxiliary cash desks and grain stores were established everywhere, which provided assistance to the peasants with cash loans and grain in case of crop failure. As a result of these measures, not only did the welfare of state peasants increase, but also treasury income from them increased by 15-20%, tax arrears were halved, and by the mid-1850s there were practically no landless farm laborers eking out a miserable and dependent existence, all received land from the state;

- the situation of serfs improved significantly: a number of laws were adopted that improved their situation: landowners were strictly forbidden to sell peasants (without land) and send them to hard labor, which had previously been common practice; serfs received the right to own land, conduct business, and received relative freedom of movement.

Restoration of Moscow after the Patriotic War of 1812

During the reign of Nicholas I, the restoration of Moscow after the fire of 1812 was completed; on his instructions, in memory of Emperor Alexander I, who “restored Moscow from the ashes and ruins,” the Triumphal Gate was built in 1826. and work began on the implementation of a new program for planning and development of Moscow (architects M.D. Bykovsky, K.A. Ton).

The boundaries of the city center and adjacent streets were expanded, Kremlin monuments were restored, including the Arsenal, along the walls of which trophies of 1812 were placed - guns (875 in total) captured from the “Great Army”; the building of the Armory Chamber was built (1844-51). In 1839, the solemn ceremony of laying the foundation of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior took place. The main building in Moscow under Emperor Nicholas I is the Grand Kremlin Palace, the consecration of which took place on April 3, 1849 in the presence of the sovereign and the entire imperial family.

The improvement of the city’s water supply was facilitated by the construction of the “Alekseevsky water supply building,” founded in 1828. In 1829, the permanent Moskvoretsky Bridge was erected “on stone piers and abutments.” The construction of the Nikolaevskaya railway (St. Petersburg - Moscow; train traffic began in 1851) and St. Petersburg - Warsaw was of great importance for Moscow. 100 ships were launched.

Foreign policy

An important aspect of foreign policy was the return to the principles of the Holy Alliance. Russia's role in the fight against any manifestations of the “spirit of change” in European life has increased. It was during the reign of Nicholas I that Russia received the unflattering nickname of “the gendarme of Europe.”

In the fall of 1831, Russian troops brutally suppressed the uprising in Poland, as a result of which Poland lost its autonomy. The Russian army suppressed the revolution in Hungary.

The Eastern Question occupied a special place in the foreign policy of Nicholas I.

Russia under Nicholas I abandoned plans for the division of the Ottoman Empire, which were discussed under the previous tsars (Catherine II and Paul I), and began to pursue a completely different policy in the Balkans - a policy of protecting the Orthodox population and ensuring its religious and civil rights, up to political independence .

Along with this, Russia sought to ensure its influence in the Balkans and the possibility of unhindered navigation in the straits (Bosporus and Dardanelles).

During the Russian-Turkish wars of 1806-1812. and 1828-1829, Russia achieved great success in implementing this policy. At the request of Russia, which declared itself the patroness of all Christian subjects of the Sultan, the Sultan was forced to recognize the freedom and independence of Greece and the broad autonomy of Serbia (1830); According to the Treaty of Unkar-Iskelesiki (1833), which marked the peak of Russian influence in Constantinople, Russia received the right to block the passage of foreign ships into the Black Sea (which it lost in 1841). The same reasons: the support of Orthodox Christians of the Ottoman Empire and disagreements over the Eastern Question - pushed Russia to aggravate relations with Turkey in 1853, which resulted in its declaration of war on Russia. The beginning of the war with Turkey in 1853 was marked by the brilliant victory of the Russian fleet under the command of Admiral P. S. Nakhimov, which defeated the enemy in Sinop Bay. This was the last major battle of the sailing fleet.

Russia's military successes caused a negative reaction in the West. The leading world powers were not interested in strengthening Russia at the expense of the decrepit Ottoman Empire. This created the basis for a military alliance between England and France. Nicholas I's miscalculation in assessing the internal political situation in England, France and Austria led to the country finding itself in political isolation. In 1854, England and France entered the war on the side of Turkey. Due to Russia's technical backwardness, it was difficult to resist these European powers. The main military operations took place in Crimea. In October 1854, the Allies besieged Sevastopol. The Russian army suffered a number of defeats and was unable to provide assistance to the besieged fortress city. Despite the heroic defense of the city, after an 11-month siege, in August 1855, the defenders of Sevastopol were forced to surrender the city. At the beginning of 1856, following the Crimean War, the Paris Peace Treaty was signed. According to its terms, Russia was prohibited from having naval forces, arsenals and fortresses in the Black Sea. Russia became vulnerable from the sea and lost the opportunity to conduct an active foreign policy in this region.

Carried away by reviews and parades, Nicholas I was late with the technical re-equipment of the army. Military failures occurred to a large extent due to the lack of roads and railways. It was during the war years that he finally became convinced that the state apparatus he himself had created was good for nothing.

Culture

Nicholas I suppressed the slightest manifestations of freethinking. He introduced censorship. It was forbidden to print almost anything that had any political overtones. Although he freed Pushkin from general censorship, he himself subjected his works to personal censorship. “There is a lot of ensign in him and a little of Peter the Great,” Pushkin wrote about Nicholas in his diary on May 21, 1834; at the same time, the diary also notes “sensible” comments on “The History of Pugachev” (the sovereign edited it and lent Pushkin 20 thousand rubles), ease of use and the king’s good language. Nikolai arrested and sent to soldiery for Polezhaev’s free poetry, and twice ordered Lermontov to be exiled to the Caucasus. By his order, the magazines “European”, “Moscow Telegraph”, “Telescope” were closed, P. Chaadaev and his publisher were persecuted, and F. Schiller was banned from publication in Russia. But at the same time, he supported the Alexandria Theater, both Pushkin and Gogol read their works to him, he was the first to support the talent of L. Tolstoy, he had enough literary taste and civic courage to defend “The Inspector General” and after the first performance to say: “Everyone got it - and most of all ME.”

But the attitude of his contemporaries towards him was quite contradictory.

CM. Soloviev wrote: “He would like to cut off all the heads that rose above the general level.”

N.V. Gogol recalled that Nicholas I, with his arrival in Moscow during the horrors of the cholera epidemic, showed a desire to uplift and encourage the fallen - “a trait that hardly any of the crown bearers showed.”

Herzen, who from his youth was painfully worried about the failure of the Decembrist uprising, attributed cruelty, rudeness, vindictiveness, intolerance to “free-thinking” to the tsar’s personality, and accused him of following a reactionary course of domestic policy.

I. L. Solonevich wrote that Nicholas I was, like Alexander Nevsky and Ivan III, a true “sovereign master,” with “a master’s eye and a master’s calculation.”

“Nikolai Pavlovich’s contemporaries did not “idolize” him, as was customary to say during his reign, but were afraid of him. Non-worship, non-worship would probably be recognized as a state crime. And gradually this custom-made feeling, a necessary guarantee of personal safety, entered the flesh and blood of his contemporaries and was then instilled in their children and grandchildren (N.E. Wrangel).

and his wife - Maria Fedorovna. As soon as Nikolai Pavlovich was born (06/25/1796), his parents enrolled him in military service. He became the chief of the Life Guards cavalry regiment, with the rank of colonel.

Three years later, the prince put on the uniform of his regiment for the first time. In May 1800, Nicholas I became the chief of the Izmailovsky regiment. In 1801, as a result of a palace coup, his father, Paul I, was killed.

Military affairs became Nicholas I's real passion. The passion for military affairs was apparently passed on from his father, and at the genetic level.

Soldiers and cannons were the Grand Duke’s favorite toys, with which he and his brother Mikhail spent a lot of time. Unlike his brother, he did not gravitate toward science.

On July 13, 1817, the marriage of Nicholas I and the Prussian Princess Charlotte took place. In Orthodoxy, Charlotte was named Alexandra Fedorovna. By the way, the marriage took place on the wife’s birthday.

The life together of the royal couple was happy. After the wedding, he became inspector general in charge of engineering affairs.

Nicholas I was never prepared as the heir to the Russian throne. He was only the third child of Paul I. It so happened that Alexander I had no children.

In this case, the throne passed to Alexander’s younger brother, and Nicholas’s older brother, Constantine. But Konstantin was not eager to shoulder the responsibility and became the Russian emperor.

Alexander I wanted to make Nicholas his heir. This has long been a secret for Russian society. In November, Alexander I unexpectedly died, and Nikolai Pavlovich was to ascend the throne.

It so happened that on the day Russian society took the oath to the new emperor, something happened. Fortunately, everything ended well. The uprising was suppressed, and Nicholas I became emperor. After the tragic events on Senate Square, he exclaimed: “I am the Emperor, but at what cost.”

The policy of Nicholas I had distinctly conservative features. Historians often accuse Nicholas I of excessive conservatism and severity. But how could the emperor behave differently after the Decembrist uprising? It was this event that largely set the course of domestic politics during his reign.

Domestic policy

The most important issue in the domestic policy of Nicholas I was the peasant question. He believed that we should try with all our might to alleviate the situation of the peasants. During his reign, many legislative acts were issued to make life easier for the peasantry.

As many as 11 committees worked in conditions of the strictest secrecy, trying to think through solutions to the peasant issue. The Emperor returned Mikhail Speransky to active government activities and instructed him to streamline the legislation of the Russian Empire.

Speransky coped with the task brilliantly, preparing the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire for 1648 -1826” and the “Code of Laws of the Russian Empire”. Finance Minister Kankrin carried out a progressive monetary reform, which brought the country's economy back to life.

Most of all, historians criticize Nicholas I for the activities of the 3rd department of the Imperial Chancellery. This body performed a supervisory function. The Russian Empire was divided into gendarmerie districts, which were headed by generals who had a large staff under their command.

The third department investigated political affairs, closely monitored censorship, as well as the activities of officials of various ranks.

Foreign policy

The foreign policy of Nicholas I was a continuation of the policy of Alexander I. He sought to maintain peace in Europe, guided by the interests of Russia, and to develop active activities on the eastern borders of the empire.

During his reign, talented diplomats appeared in Russia who extracted favorable terms of cooperation from “our partners.” There were constant diplomatic battles for influence in the world.

Russian diplomats won many such battles. In July 1826, the Russian army fought in Iran. In February 1828, peace was signed, thanks to the efforts of Griboedov, the Nakhichevan and Erivan khanates went to Russia, and the empire also acquired the exclusive right to have a military fleet in the Caspian Sea.

During the reign of Nicholas I, Russia fought with the mountain peoples. There was also a successful war with Turkey, which showed the world military talent. The next Russian-Turkish war turned out to be a real disaster for Russia. After, in which the Russian ships under the command of Nakhimov won a stunning victory.

England and France, fearing the strengthening of Russia, entered the war on the side of Turkey. The Crimean War began. Participation in the Crimean War showed the problems that existed in Russian society. First of all, this is technological backwardness. became a good and timely lesson, marking the beginning of a new development in Russia.

Results

Nicholas I died on February 18, 1855. The reign of this monarch can be assessed in different ways. Despite increased control and suppression of dissent, Russia greatly expanded its territory and won many diplomatic disputes.

A monetary reform was carried out in the country, ensuring economic development, and the oppression on the peasantry was eased. All these relaxations have largely become the basis for the future.

In 305 Roman Emperor Diocletian(c. 245-316), who ruled the empire for twenty years, voluntarily renounces power and will spend the rest of his life in a luxurious palace in Salona (modern Split), where he will grow cabbage. Having begun his military service as a simple soldier, Diocletian reached the highest ranks, first becoming the head of the guard of Emperor Numerian, after whose death he was proclaimed emperor by the troops. Diocletian carried out a number of reforms, strengthened the borders of the empire, and at the end of his reign he began brutal persecution of Christians, expelling them from government service, confiscating the property of Christian communities, destroying churches and punishing clergy. But all the emperor’s efforts were in vain: Christianity did not perish, but the opposite happened to the empire. Why the ruler, who for twenty years created the divine cult of the statesman and was called by his contemporaries the greatest father of all nations, made such a decision remains a mystery. The time of his reign was called the “golden age” by supporters of strong leadership: under him, wars, riots, and uprisings ceased, and the power of the emperor reached absolutism, becoming monarchical (dominant).
Some historians are inclined to think that Diocletian grew old, became weak, and his son-in-law Galerius persuaded him to abdicate the throne during his illness. However, a few years later, the successors were ready to return unlimited power to the elder Augustus. The nobility of the Roman Empire considered Diocletian's reign successful: laudatory panegyrics glorified him as a new Olympian: 16 times he was awarded the title of Greatest of various countries (German, British, Persian, Sarmatian, etc.), 22 times he was awarded the powers of a tribune, and 9 times he was elected consul.
For some reason, he celebrated the twentieth anniversary of his reign in Rome not on September 17, 304, but almost a year earlier. Perhaps this circumstance had something to do with the decision to leave power. In the late autumn of 303, Diocletian and his co-ruler Maximian, who built the majestic baths (baths) on the instructions of the dictator, arrived in the holy city. The anniversary celebrations continued for a whole month, but the Romans were dissatisfied with them, condemning the emperor for stinginess.
And, although a triumphal arch was built, and elephants loaded with the richest Persian trophies and gifts appeared before the Roman public, Diocletian felt dissatisfied. Not wanting to stay in Rome, he went home to his residence in bad weather and fell seriously ill on the way. Probably, even then, Diocletian conceived his renunciation, but kept it secret. At the beginning of 304, the emperor, called the son of the god Jupiter Jovius, invited his co-ruler Augustus Maximian to abdicate the throne together in favor of the Caesars, but he persuaded him to postpone the event for a year in order to solemnly celebrate the twentieth anniversary of his reign.
Diocletian agreed, but forced his friend to swear an oath in the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus that after the celebration of the anniversary he would renounce power. The Roman emperor probably did not trust co-ruler Maximian and feared that in the event of his death, the short-sighted and uneducated Augustus, who had shown particular cruelty in the persecution of Christians in Africa and relied on the army, would achieve unlimited power by force. Perhaps Diocletian himself was tormented by remorse that he succumbed to the persuasion of his son-in-law Galerius to completely eradicate Christianity in the empire and issued edicts (decrees) about persecution.
Absolute power and worship as the son of a pagan god suddenly ceased to please vanity - Diocletian saw that Christianity was rapidly spreading in the empire, despite persecution and mass executions. The emperor must have been shocked by the amazing resilience of one of his most beloved close comites (senior military leaders) - George, who refused to betray his faith and become a co-emperor. Perhaps the miracle of revival after painful torture and execution of this fearless Christian, a native of Cappadocia, whose father was also martyred for confessing Christ, was recalled by the “greatest” emperor when he was dying.
His son-in-law came to his senses shortly before his death and stopped the persecution of Christians by issuing a special edict, but perhaps he did this on the advice of Diocletian. Ironically, not only the date of death of the great Roman statesman has not been preserved, but also the exact year of his death (between 313 and 316). But it is well known when the emperor’s favorite prince, who suffered for his faith, died. On the day of the execution of the Great Martyr George the Victorious, April 23 (May 6 BC), Christians around the world commemorate this saint.
Diocletian knew how difficult it is to give up absolute power, how easy it is to become a tyrant relying on force. The words of the sage Solon were close and understandable to him. The emperor was approaching his seventh decade: “A man is still powerful even in his ninth, but he is weakening.” According to Solon, human life changes every seven years after a child’s teeth change. The days of the ancient Greek sage, whose laws were also used by Roman law, ended in old age. He wrote poems about a calm, peaceful life, each age of which has its own appeal.
Diocletian no longer wanted to be the “father of all nations” and the invented pagan god Job, he did not want to execute and have mercy. He abdicated power and lived in his magnificent palace, growing fruits and vegetables. When a few years later he was again offered to become an emperor with unlimited power, he responded with the wise words of Solon: “The throne is not worth the peace of life” “... it gives more joy to take care of a garden than to rule the whole world.”
The great statesman learned, having renounced power over nations, what joy excellent vegetables grown with his own hands bring.

Doctor of Historical Sciences M. RAKHMATULLIN

In February 1913, just a few years before the collapse of Tsarist Russia, the 300th anniversary of the House of Romanov was solemnly celebrated. In countless churches of the vast empire, “many years” of the reigning family were proclaimed, in noble assemblies, champagne bottle corks flew to the ceiling amid joyful exclamations, and throughout Russia millions of people sang: “Strong, sovereign... reign over us... reign to the fear of the enemies." In the past three centuries, the Russian throne was occupied by different kings: Peter I and Catherine II, endowed with remarkable intelligence and statesmanship; Paul I and Alexander III, who were not very distinguished by these qualities; Catherine I, Anna Ioannovna and Nicholas II, completely devoid of statesmanship. Among them were both cruel ones, like Peter I, Anna Ioannovna and Nicholas I, and relatively soft ones, like Alexander I and his nephew Alexander II. But what they all had in common was that each of them was an unlimited autocrat, to whom ministers, police and all subjects obeyed unquestioningly... What were these all-powerful rulers, on whose one casually thrown word much, if not everything, depended? The magazine "Science and Life" begins publishing articles dedicated to the reign of Emperor Nicholas I, who went down in Russian history mainly because he began his reign with the hanging of five Decembrists and ended it with the blood of thousands and thousands of soldiers and sailors in the shamefully lost Crimean War, unleashed , in particular, and due to the exorbitant imperial ambitions of the king.

Palace Embankment near the Winter Palace from Vasilyevsky Island. Watercolor by Swedish artist Benjamin Petersen. Beginning of the 19th century.

Mikhailovsky Castle - view from the Fontanka embankment. Early 19th century watercolor by Benjamin Petersen.

Paul I. From an engraving of 1798.

The Dowager Empress and mother of the future Emperor Nicholas I, Maria Feodorovna, after the death of Paul I. From an engraving of the early 19th century.

Emperor Alexander I. Early 20s of the 19th century.

Grand Duke Nikolai Pavlovich in childhood.

Grand Duke Konstantin Pavlovich.

Petersburg. Uprising on Senate Square on December 14, 1825. Watercolor by artist K.I. Kolman.

Science and life // Illustrations

Emperor Nicholas I and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. Portraits of the first third of the 19th century.

Count M. A. Miloradovich.

During the uprising on Senate Square, Pyotr Kakhovsky mortally wounded the military governor-general of St. Petersburg Miloradovich.

The personality and actions of the fifteenth Russian autocrat from the Romanov dynasty were assessed ambiguously by his contemporaries. Persons from his inner circle who communicated with him in an informal setting or in a narrow family circle, as a rule, spoke of the king with delight: “an eternal worker on the throne”, “a fearless knight”, “a knight of the spirit”... For a significant part of society, the name The tsar was associated with the nicknames “bloody”, “executioner”, “Nikolai Palkin”. Moreover, the latter definition seemed to re-establish itself in public opinion after 1917, when for the first time a small brochure by L. N. Tolstoy appeared in a Russian publication under the same name. The basis for its writing (in 1886) was the story of a 95-year-old former Nikolaev soldier about how lower ranks who were guilty of something were driven through the gauntlet, for which Nicholas I was popularly nicknamed Palkin. The very picture of “legal” punishment by spitzrutens, terrifying in its inhumanity, is depicted with stunning force by the writer in the famous story “After the Ball.”

Many negative assessments of the personality of Nicholas I and his activities come from A.I. Herzen, who did not forgive the monarch for his reprisal against the Decembrists and especially the execution of five of them, when everyone was hoping for a pardon. What happened was all the more terrible for society because after the public execution of Pugachev and his associates, the people had already forgotten about the death penalty. Nicholas I is so unloved by Herzen that he, usually an accurate and subtle observer, places emphasis with obvious prejudice even when describing his external appearance: “He was handsome, but his beauty was chilling; there is no face that would so mercilessly expose a person’s character as "his face. The forehead, quickly running back, the lower jaw, developed at the expense of the skull, expressed an unyielding will and weak thought, more cruelty than sensuality. But the main thing is the eyes, without any warmth, without any mercy, winter eyes."

This portrait contradicts the testimony of many other contemporaries. For example, the life physician of the Saxe-Coburg Prince Leopold, Baron Shtokman, described Grand Duke Nikolai Pavlovich as follows: unusually handsome, attractive, slender, like a young pine tree, regular facial features, beautiful open forehead, arched eyebrows, small mouth, gracefully outlined chin, character very lively, manners relaxed and graceful. One of the noble court ladies, Mrs. Kemble, who was distinguished by her particularly strict judgments about men, endlessly exclaims in delight with him: “What a charm! What a beauty! This will be the first handsome man in Europe!” The English Queen Victoria, the wife of the English envoy Bloomfield, other titled persons and “ordinary” contemporaries spoke equally flatteringly about Nicholas’s appearance.

THE FIRST YEARS OF LIFE

Ten days later, the grandmother-empress told Grimm the details of the first days of her grandson’s life: “Knight Nicholas has been eating porridge for three days now, because he constantly asks for food. I believe that an eight-day-old child has never enjoyed such a treat, this is unheard of... He looks wide eyes at everyone, holds his head straight and turns no worse than I can.” Catherine II predicts the fate of the newborn: the third grandson, “due to his extraordinary strength, is destined, it seems to me, to also reign, although he has two older brothers.” At that time, Alexander was in his twenties; Konstantin was 17 years old.

The newborn, according to the established rule, after the baptism ceremony is transferred to the care of the grandmother. But her unexpected death on November 6, 1796 “unfavorably” affected the education of Grand Duke Nikolai Pavlovich. True, the grandmother managed to make a good choice of nanny for Nikolai. It was a Scot, Evgenia Vasilievna Lyon, the daughter of a stucco master, invited to Russia by Catherine II among other artists. She remained the only teacher for the first seven years of the boy's life and is believed to have had a strong influence on the formation of his personality. The owner of a courageous, decisive, direct and noble character, Eugenia Lyon tried to instill in Nikolai the highest concepts of duty, honor, and loyalty to his word.

On January 28, 1798, another son, Mikhail, was born into the family of Emperor Paul I. Paul, deprived by the will of his mother, Empress Catherine II, of the opportunity to raise his two eldest sons himself, transferred all his fatherly love to the younger ones, giving clear preference to Nicholas. Their sister Anna Pavlovna, the future Queen of the Netherlands, writes that their father “caressed them very tenderly, which our mother never did.”

According to the established rules, Nikolai was enrolled in military service from the cradle: at the age of four months he was appointed chief of the Life Guards Horse Regiment. The boy's first toy was a wooden gun, then swords appeared, also wooden. In April 1799, he was put on his first military uniform - the “crimson garus”, and in the sixth year of his life Nikolai saddled a riding horse for the first time. From his earliest years, the future emperor absorbs the spirit of the military environment.

In 1802, studies began. From that time on, a special journal was kept in which the teachers (“gentlers”) recorded literally every step of the boy, describing in detail his behavior and actions.

The main supervision of education was entrusted to General Matvey Ivanovich Lamsdorf. It would be difficult to make a more awkward choice. According to contemporaries, Lamsdorff “not only did not possess any of the abilities necessary to educate a person of the royal house, destined to have an influence on the destinies of his compatriots and on the history of his people, but he was even alien to everything that is necessary for a person devoting himself to education of a private individual." He was an ardent supporter of the generally accepted system of education at that time, based on orders, reprimands and punishments that reached the point of cruelty. Nikolai did not avoid frequent “acquaintance” with a ruler, ramrods and rods. With the consent of his mother, Lamsdorff diligently tried to change the character of the pupil, going against all his inclinations and abilities.

As often happens in such cases, the result was the opposite. Subsequently, Nikolai Pavlovich wrote about himself and his brother Mikhail: “Count Lamsdorff knew how to instill in us one feeling - fear, and such fear and confidence in his omnipotence that mother’s face was for us the second most important concept. This order completely deprived us of filial happiness trust in the parent, to whom we were rarely allowed alone, and then never otherwise, as if on a sentence. The constant change of people around us instilled in us from infancy the habit of looking for weaknesses in them in order to take advantage of them in the sense of what we want it was necessary and, it must be admitted, not without success... Count Lamsdorff and others, imitating him, used severity with vehemence, which took away from us the feeling of guilt, leaving only the annoyance for rude treatment, and often undeserved. "Fear and the search for how to avoid punishment occupied my mind most of all. I saw only coercion in teaching, and I studied without desire."

Still would. As the biographer of Nicholas I, Baron M.A. Korf, writes, “the great princes were constantly, as it were, in a vice. They could not freely and easily stand up, sit down, walk, talk, or indulge in the usual childish playfulness and noisiness: they at every step they stopped, corrected, reprimanded, persecuted with morals or threats.” In this way, as time has shown, they tried in vain to correct Nikolai’s as independent as he was obstinate, hot-tempered character. Even Baron Korff, one of the biographers most sympathetic to him, is forced to note that the usually uncommunicative and withdrawn Nikolai seemed to be reborn during the games, and the willful principles contained in him, disapproved of by those around him, manifested themselves in their entirety. The journals of the "cavaliers" for the years 1802-1809 are replete with records of Nikolai's unbridled behavior during games with peers. “No matter what happened to him, whether he fell, or hurt himself, or considered his desires unfulfilled, and himself offended, he immediately uttered swear words... chopped the drum, toys with his hatchet, broke them, beat his comrades with a stick or whatever their games." In moments of temper he could spit at his sister Anna. Once he hit his playmate Adlerberg with such force with the butt of a child’s gun that he was left with a scar for life.

The rude manners of both grand dukes, especially during war games, were explained by the idea established in their boyish minds (not without the influence of Lamsdorff) that rudeness is a mandatory characteristic of all military men. However, teachers note that outside of war games, Nikolai Pavlovich’s manners “remained no less rude, arrogant and arrogant.” Hence the clearly expressed desire to excel in all games, to command, to be a boss or to represent the emperor. And this despite the fact that, according to the same educators, Nikolai “has very limited abilities,” although he had, in their words, “the most excellent, loving heart” and was distinguished by “excessive sensitivity.”

Another trait that also remained for the rest of his life was that Nikolai Pavlovich “could not bear any joke that seemed to him an insult, did not want to endure the slightest displeasure... he seemed to constantly consider himself both higher and more significant than everyone else.” Hence his persistent habit of admitting his mistakes only under strong duress.

So, the favorite pastime of the brothers Nikolai and Mikhail remained only war games. At their disposal was a large assortment of tin and porcelain soldiers, guns, halberds, wooden horses, drums, pipes and even charging boxes. All attempts by the late mother to turn them away from this attraction were unsuccessful. As Nikolai himself later wrote, “military sciences alone interested me passionately, in them alone I found consolation and a pleasant activity, similar to the disposition of my spirit.” In fact, it was a passion, first of all, for paradomania, for frunt, which since Peter III, according to the biographer of the royal family N.K. Schilder, “took deep and strong roots in the royal family.” “He invariably loved exercises, parades, parades and divorces to death and carried them out even in winter,” one of his contemporaries writes about Nicholas. Nikolai and Mikhail even came up with a “family” term to express the pleasure they felt when the review of the grenadier regiments went off without a hitch - “infantry pleasure.”

TEACHERS AND PUPILS

From the age of six, Nikolai begins to be introduced to the Russian and French languages, the Law of God, Russian history, and geography. This is followed by arithmetic, German and English - as a result, Nikolai was fluent in four languages. Latin and Greek were not given to him. (Subsequently, he excluded them from his children’s education program, because “he can’t stand Latin ever since he was tormented by it in his youth.”) Since 1802, Nicholas has been taught drawing and music. Having learned to play the trumpet (cornet-piston) quite well, after two or three auditions he, naturally gifted with good hearing and musical memory, could perform quite complex works in home concerts without notes. Nikolai Pavlovich retained his love for church singing throughout his life, knew all the church services by heart and willingly sang along with the singers in the choir with his sonorous and pleasant voice. He drew well (in pencil and watercolor) and even learned the art of engraving, which required great patience, a faithful eye and a steady hand.

In 1809, it was decided to expand the training of Nicholas and Mikhail to university programs. But the idea of ​​sending them to the University of Leipzig, as well as the idea of ​​sending them to the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, disappeared due to the outbreak of the Patriotic War of 1812. As a result, they continued their education at home. Well-known professors of that time were invited to study with the grand dukes: economist A.K. Storch, lawyer M.A. Balugyansky, historian F.P. Adelung and others. But the first two disciplines did not captivate Nikolai. He later expressed his attitude towards them in the instructions to M.A. Korfu, who was appointed by him to teach his son Konstantin law: “... There is no need to dwell too long on abstract subjects, which are then either forgotten or do not find any application in practice. I I remember how we were tormented over this by two people, very kind, perhaps very smart, but both of them the most intolerable pedants: the late Balugyansky and Kukolnik [father of the famous playwright. - M.R.]... During the lessons of these gentlemen, we either dozed off, or drew some nonsense, sometimes their own caricature portraits, and then for the exams we learned something by rote, without fruition or benefit for the future. In my opinion, the best theory of law is good morality, and it should be in the heart, regardless of these abstractions, and have its basis in religion."

Nikolai Pavlovich showed an interest in construction and especially engineering very early. “Mathematics, then artillery, and especially engineering science and tactics,” he writes in his notes, “attracted me exclusively; I had special success in this area, and then I got the desire to serve in engineering.” And this is not empty boasting. According to engineer-lieutenant general E. A. Egorov, a man of rare honesty and selflessness, Nikolai Pavlovich “always had a special attraction to the engineering and architectural arts... his love for the construction business did not leave him until the end of his life and, to tell the truth, he knew a lot about it... He always went into all the technical details of the work and amazed everyone with the accuracy of his comments and the fidelity of his eye.”

At the age of 17, Nikolai’s compulsory schooling is almost over. From now on, he regularly attends divorces, parades, exercises, that is, he completely indulges in what was previously not encouraged. At the beginning of 1814, the desire of the Grand Dukes to go to the Active Army finally came true. They stayed abroad for about a year. On this trip, Nicholas met his future wife, Princess Charlotte, daughter of the Prussian king. The choice of the bride was not made by chance, but also answered the aspirations of Paul I to strengthen relations between Russia and Prussia through a dynastic marriage.

In 1815, the brothers were again in the Active Army, but, as in the first case, they did not take part in military operations. On the way back, the official engagement to Princess Charlotte took place in Berlin. A 19-year-old young man, enchanted by her, upon returning to St. Petersburg, writes a letter significant in content: “Farewell, my angel, my friend, my only consolation, my only true happiness, think about me as often as I think about you, and love if you can, the one who is and will be your faithful Nikolai for life." Charlotte's reciprocal feeling was just as strong, and on July 1 (13), 1817, on her birthday, a magnificent wedding took place. With the adoption of Orthodoxy, the princess was named Alexandra Feodorovna.

Before his marriage, Nicholas took two study tours - to several provinces of Russia and to England. After marriage, he was appointed inspector general for engineering and chief of the Life Guards Sapper Battalion, which fully corresponded to his inclinations and desires. His tirelessness and service zeal amazed everyone: early in the morning he showed up for line and rifle training as a sapper, at 12 o'clock he left for Peterhof, and at 4 o'clock in the afternoon he mounted his horse and again rode 12 miles to the camp, where he remained until the evening dawn, personally supervising work on the construction of training field fortifications, digging trenches, installing mines, landmines... Nikolai had an extraordinary memory for faces and remembered the names of all the lower ranks of “his” battalion. According to his colleagues, Nikolai, who “knew his job to perfection,” fanatically demanded the same from others and strictly punished them for any mistakes. So much so that soldiers punished on his orders were often carried away on stretchers to the infirmary. Nikolai, of course, did not feel any remorse, for he only strictly followed the paragraphs of the military regulations, which provided for the merciless punishment of soldiers with sticks, rods, and spitzrutens for any offenses.

In July 1818, he was appointed brigade commander of the 1st Guards Division (while retaining the post of inspector general). He was in his 22nd year, and he sincerely rejoiced at this appointment, for he received a real opportunity to command the troops himself, to appoint exercises and reviews himself.

In this position, Nikolai Pavlovich was taught the first real lessons in behavior appropriate for an officer, which laid the foundation for the later legend of the “knight emperor.”

Once, during the next exercise, he gave a rude and unfair reprimand in front of the regiment's front to K.I. Bistrom, a military general, commander of the Jaeger Regiment, who had many awards and wounds. The enraged general came to the commander of the Separate Guards Corps, I.V. Vasilchikov, and asked him to convey to Grand Duke Nikolai Pavlovich his demand for a formal apology. Only the threat to bring the incident to the attention of the sovereign forced Nicholas to apologize to Bistrom, which he did in the presence of the regiment officers. But this lesson was of no use. After some time, for minor violations in the ranks, he gave an insulting scolding to the company commander V.S. Norov, concluding with the phrase: “I will bend you to the horn of a ram!” The regiment officers demanded that Nikolai Pavlovich “give satisfaction to Norov.” Since a duel with a member of the reigning family is by definition impossible, the officers resigned. It was difficult to resolve the conflict.

But nothing could drown out Nikolai Pavlovich’s official zeal. Following the rules of the military regulations “firmly ingrained” in his mind, he spent all his energy on drilling the units under his command. “I began to demand,” he recalled later, “but I demanded alone, because what I discredited out of duty of conscience was allowed everywhere, even by my superiors. The situation was the most difficult; to act otherwise was contrary to my conscience and duty; but by this I clearly set and bosses and subordinates against themselves. Moreover, they didn’t know me, and many either didn’t understand or didn’t want to understand.”

It must be admitted that his severity as a brigade commander was partly justified by the fact that in the officer corps at that time “the order, already shaken by the three-year campaign, was completely destroyed... Subordination disappeared and was preserved only at the front; respect for superiors disappeared completely... "There were no rules, no order, and everything was done completely arbitrarily." It got to the point that many officers came to training in tailcoats, throwing an overcoat over their shoulders and putting on a uniform hat. What was it like for serviceman Nikolai to put up with this to the core? He did not put up with it, which caused not always justified condemnation from his contemporaries. The memoirist F. F. Wigel, known for his poisonous pen, wrote that Grand Duke Nicholas “was uncommunicative and cold, completely devoted to the sense of his duty; in fulfilling it, he was too strict with himself and with others. In the regular features of his white, pale face one can see there was some kind of immobility, some kind of unaccountable severity. Let's tell the truth: he was not loved at all."

The testimonies of other contemporaries relating to the same time are in the same vein: “The ordinary expression of his face has something stern and even unfriendly in it. His smile is a smile of condescension, and not the result of a cheerful mood or passion. The habit of dominating these feelings is akin to his a being to the point that you will not notice in him any compulsion, nothing inappropriate, nothing learned, and yet all his words, like all his movements, are measured, as if musical notes were lying in front of him. There is something unusual about the Grand Duke: he speaks vividly, simply, by the way; everything he says is smart, not a single vulgar joke, not a single funny or obscene word. Neither in the tone of his voice, nor in the composition of his speech there is anything that would expose pride or secrecy. But you feel that his heart is closed, that the barrier is inaccessible, and that it would be crazy to hope to penetrate into the depths of his thoughts or have complete trust."

At the service, Nikolai Pavlovich was in constant tension, he buttoned up all the buttons of his uniform, and only at home, in the family, Empress Alexandra Feodorovna recalled about those days, “he felt quite happy, just like me.” In the notes of V.A. Zhukovsky we read that “nothing could be more touching to see the Grand Duke in his home life. As soon as he crossed the threshold, the gloominess suddenly disappeared, giving way not to smiles, but to loud, joyful laughter, frank speeches and the most affectionate treatment with those around him... A happy young man... with a kind, faithful and beautiful girlfriend, with whom he lived in perfect harmony, having occupations consistent with his inclinations, without worries, without responsibility, without ambitious thoughts, with a clear conscience, which is not did he have enough on earth?

THE PATH TO THE THRONE

Suddenly everything changed overnight. In the summer of 1819, Alexander I unexpectedly informed Nicholas and his wife of his intentions to renounce the throne in favor of his younger brother. “Nothing like this ever came to mind, even in a dream,” emphasizes Alexandra Fedorovna. “We were struck as if by thunder; the future seemed gloomy and inaccessible to happiness.” Nikolai himself compares his and his wife’s feelings with the feeling of a man calmly walking when “an abyss suddenly opens up under his feet, into which an irresistible force plunges him, not allowing him to retreat or turn back. This is a perfect image of our terrible situation.” And he was not lying, realizing how heavy the cross of fate looming on the horizon - the royal crown - would be for him.

But these are just words, for now Alexander I makes no attempts to involve his brother in state affairs, although a manifesto has already been drawn up (though secretly even from the inner circle of the court) on the renunciation of the throne of Constantine and its transfer to Nicholas. The latter is still busy, as he himself wrote, “with daily waiting in the hallway or secretary room, where... noble persons who had access to the sovereign gathered every day. We spent an hour, sometimes more, in this noisy meeting. .. This time was a waste of time, but also a precious practice for getting to know people and faces, and I took advantage of it.”

This is the whole school of Nikolai’s preparation for governing the state, for which, it should be noted, he did not strive at all and for which, as he himself admitted, “my inclinations and desires led me so little; a degree for which I had never prepared and, on the contrary, I always looked with fear, looking at the burden that lay on my benefactor" (Emperor Alexander I. - M.R.). In February 1825, Nikolai was appointed commander of the 1st Guards Division, but this did not essentially change anything. He could have become a member of the State Council, but did not. Why? The answer to the question is partly given by the Decembrist V. I. Steingeil in his “Notes on the Uprising.” Referring to rumors about the abdication of Constantine and the appointment of Nicholas as heir, he quotes the words of Moscow University professor A.F. Merzlyakov: “When this rumor spread throughout Moscow, I happened to see Zhukovsky; I asked him: “Tell me, perhaps, you are a close person - why should we expect from this change?" - “Judge for yourself,” answered Vasily Andreevich, “I have never seen a book in [his] hands; The only occupation is the frunt and the soldiers."

The unexpected news that Alexander I was dying came from Taganrog to St. Petersburg on November 25. (Alexander was touring the south of Russia and intended to travel all over Crimea.) Nikolai invited the Chairman of the State Council and the Committee of Ministers, Prince P.V. Lopukhin, Prosecutor General Prince A.B. Kurakin, commander of the Guards Corps A.L. Voinov and the military Governor General of St. Petersburg, Count M.A. Miloradovich, who was endowed with special powers in connection with the emperor’s departure from the capital, and announced to them his rights to the throne, apparently considering this a purely formal act. But, as the former adjutant of Tsarevich Konstantin F.P. Opochinin testifies, Count Miloradovich “answered flatly that Grand Duke Nicholas cannot and should not in any way hope to succeed his brother Alexander in the event of his death; that the laws of the empire do not allow the sovereign to dispose of will; that, moreover, Alexander’s will is known only to some people and is unknown among the people; that Constantine’s abdication is also implicit and remained unpublicized; that Alexander, if he wanted Nicholas to inherit the throne after him, had to make public his will and Constantine’s consent to it during his lifetime ; that neither the people nor the army will understand the abdication and will attribute everything to treason, especially since neither the sovereign himself nor the heir by birthright is in the capital, but both were absent; that, finally, the guard will resolutely refuse to take the oath to Nicholas in such circumstances , and then the inevitable consequence will be indignation... The Grand Duke proved his rights, but Count Miloradovich did not want to recognize them and refused his assistance. That's where we parted ways."

On the morning of November 27, the courier brought the news of the death of Alexander I, and Nicholas, swayed by Miloradovich’s arguments and not paying attention to the absence of a Manifesto obligatory in such cases on the accession of a new monarch to the throne, was the first to swear allegiance to the “legitimate Emperor Constantine.” The others did the same after him. From this day on, a political crisis provoked by the narrow family clan of the reigning family begins - a 17-day interregnum. Couriers scurry between St. Petersburg and Warsaw, where Constantine was, - the brothers persuade each other to take the remaining idle throne.

A situation unprecedented for Russia has arisen. If earlier in its history there was a fierce struggle for the throne, often leading to murder, now the brothers seem to be competing in renouncing their rights to supreme power. But there is a certain ambiguity and indecision in Konstantin’s behavior. Instead of immediately arriving in the capital, as the situation required, he limited himself to letters to his mother and brother. Members of the reigning house, writes the French ambassador Count Laferronais, “are playing with the crown of Russia, throwing it like a ball to one another.”

On December 12, a package was delivered from Taganrog addressed to “Emperor Constantine” from the Chief of the General Staff, I. I. Dibich. After some hesitation, Grand Duke Nicholas opened it. “Let them imagine what should have happened in me,” he later recalled, “when, glancing at what was included (in the package. - M.R.) letter from General Dibich, I saw that it was about an existing and just discovered extensive conspiracy, the branches of which spread throughout the entire Empire from St. Petersburg to Moscow and to the Second Army in Bessarabia. Only then did I fully feel the burden of my fate and remember with horror what situation I was in. It was necessary to act without wasting a minute, with full power, with experience, with determination."

Nikolai did not exaggerate: according to the adjutant of the infantry commander of the Guards Corps K.I. Bistrom, Ya.I. Rostovtsov, a friend of the Decembrist E.P. Obolensky, in general terms he knew about the impending “outrage at the new oath.” We had to hurry to act.

On the night of December 13, Nikolai Pavlovich appeared before the State Council. The first phrase he uttered: “I carry out the will of brother Konstantin Pavlovich” was supposed to convince the members of the Council that his actions were forced. Then Nicholas “in a loud voice” read out in its final form the Manifesto polished by M. M. Speransky about his accession to the throne. “Everyone listened in deep silence,” Nikolai notes in his notes. This was a natural reaction - the tsar is far from being desired by everyone (S.P. Trubetskoy expressed the opinion of many when he wrote that “the young great princes are tired of them”). However, the roots of slavish obedience to autocratic power are so strong that the unexpected change was accepted calmly by the members of the Council. At the end of the reading of the Manifesto, they “bowed deeply” to the new emperor.

Early in the morning, Nikolai Pavlovich addressed the specially assembled guards generals and colonels. He read to them the Manifesto of his accession to the throne, the will of Alexander I and documents on the abdication of Tsarevich Constantine. The answer was unanimous recognition of him as the rightful monarch. Then the commanders went to the General Headquarters to take the oath, and from there to their units to conduct the appropriate ritual.

On this critical day for him, Nikolai was outwardly calm. But his true state of mind is revealed by the words he then said to A.H. Benckendorf: “Tonight, perhaps, both of us will no longer be in the world, but at least we will die having fulfilled our duty.” He wrote about the same thing to P. M. Volkonsky: “On the fourteenth I will be sovereign or dead.”

By eight o'clock the oath ceremony in the Senate and Synod was completed, and the first news of the oath came from the guards regiments. It seemed that everything would go well. However, the members of secret societies who were in the capital, as the Decembrist M. S. Lunin wrote, “came with the idea that the decisive hour had come” and that they had to “resort to the force of arms.” But this favorable situation for the speech came as a complete surprise to the conspirators. Even the experienced K.F. Ryleev “was struck by the randomness of the case” and was forced to admit: “This circumstance gives us a clear idea of ​​​​our powerlessness. I was deceived myself, we do not have an established plan, no measures have been taken...”

In the camp of the conspirators, there are continuous arguments on the verge of hysteria, and yet in the end it was decided to speak out: “It is better to be taken in the square,” argued N. Bestuzhev, “than on the bed.” The conspirators are unanimous in defining the basic attitude of the speech - “loyalty to the oath to Constantine and reluctance to swear allegiance to Nicholas.” The Decembrists deliberately resorted to deception, convincing the soldiers that the rights of the legitimate heir to the throne, Tsarevich Constantine, should be protected from unauthorized encroachments by Nicholas.

And so, on a gloomy, windy day on December 14, 1825, about three thousand soldiers “standing for Constantine” gathered on Senate Square, with three dozen officers, their commanders. For various reasons, not all the regiments that the leaders of the conspirators were counting on showed up. Those gathered had neither artillery nor cavalry. Another dictator, S.P. Trubetskoy, got scared and didn’t show up on the square. The tedious, almost five-hour standing in their uniforms in the cold, without a specific goal or any combat mission, had a depressing effect on the soldiers who were patiently waiting, as V. I. Steingeil writes, for “the outcome from fate.” Fate appeared in the form of grapeshot, instantly scattering their ranks.

The command to fire live rounds was not given immediately. Nicholas I, despite the general confusion, decisively took the suppression of the rebellion into his own hands, still hoped to do it “without bloodshed,” even after, he recalls, how “they fired a volley at me, bullets whizzed through my head.” All this day Nikolai was in sight, in front of the 1st battalion of the Preobrazhensky Regiment, and his powerful figure on horseback represented an excellent target. “The most amazing thing,” he will say later, “is that I was not killed that day.” And Nikolai firmly believed that God’s hand was guiding his destiny.

Nikolai’s fearless behavior on December 14 is explained by his personal courage and bravery. He himself thought differently. One of the ladies of state of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna later testified that when one of those close to him, out of a desire to flatter, began to tell Nicholas I about his “heroic act” on December 14, about his extraordinary courage, the sovereign interrupted the interlocutor, saying: “You are mistaken; I was not as brave as you think. But a sense of duty forced me to overcome myself." An honest confession. And subsequently he always said that on that day he was “only doing his duty.”

December 14, 1825 determined the fate not only of Nikolai Pavlovich, but in many ways of the country. If, according to the author of the famous book “Russia in 1839”, Marquis Astolphe de Custine, on this day Nicholas “from the silent, melancholy, as he was in the days of his youth, turned into a hero,” then Russia for a long time lost the opportunity to carry out any there was liberal reform, which she so needed. This was already obvious to the most insightful contemporaries. December 14 gave the further course of the historical process “a completely different direction,” noted Count D.N. Tolstoy. Another contemporary clarifies it: “December 14, 1825... should be attributed to the dislike for any liberal movement that was constantly noticed in the orders of Emperor Nicholas.”

Meanwhile, there might not have been an uprising at all under only two conditions. The Decembrist A.E. Rosen clearly speaks about the first in his Notes. Noting that after receiving the news of the death of Alexander I, “all classes and ages were struck by unfeigned sadness” and that it was with “such a mood of spirit” that the troops swore allegiance to Constantine, Rosen adds: “... the feeling of grief took precedence over all other feelings - and the commanders and troops would have just as sadly and calmly sworn allegiance to Nicholas if the will of Alexander I had been communicated to them in a legal manner." Many spoke about the second condition, but it was most clearly stated on December 20, 1825 by Nicholas I himself in a conversation with the French ambassador: “I found, and still find, that if Brother Konstantin had heeded my persistent prayers and arrived in St. Petersburg, we would have avoided a terrifying scene... and the danger to which it plunged us over the course of several hours." As we see, a coincidence of circumstances largely determined the further course of events.

Arrests and interrogations of those involved in the outrage and members of secret societies began. And here the 29-year-old emperor behaved to such an extent cunningly, prudently and artistically that those under investigation, believing in his sincerity, made confessions that were unthinkable in terms of frankness even by the most lenient standards. “Without rest, without sleep, he interrogated... those arrested,” writes the famous historian P.E. Shchegolev, “he forced confessions... choosing masks, each time new for a new person. For some, he was a formidable monarch, whom he insulted a loyal subject, for others - the same citizen of the fatherland as the arrested man standing in front of him; for others - an old soldier suffering for the honor of his uniform; for others - a monarch ready to pronounce constitutional covenants; for others - Russians, crying over the misfortunes of their fatherland and passionately thirsty for the correction of all evils." Pretending to be almost like-minded, he “managed to instill in them confidence that he was the ruler who would make their dreams come true and benefit Russia.” It is the subtle acting of the tsar-investigator that explains the continuous series of confessions, repentances, and mutual slander of those under investigation.

The explanations of P. E. Shchegolev are complemented by the Decembrist A. S. Gangeblov: “One cannot help but be amazed at the tirelessness and patience of Nikolai Pavlovich. He did not neglect anything: without examining the ranks, he condescended to have a personal, one might say, conversation with the arrested, tried to catch the truth in the very expression eyes, in the very intonation of the defendant's words. The success of these attempts, of course, was greatly helped by the very appearance of the sovereign, his stately posture, antique facial features, especially his gaze: when Nikolai Pavlovich was in a calm, merciful mood, his eyes expressed charming kindness and affection ; but when he was angry, the same eyes flashed lightning."

Nicholas I, notes de Custine, “apparently knows how to subjugate the souls of people... some mysterious influence emanates from him.” As many other facts show, Nicholas I “always knew how to deceive observers who innocently believed in his sincerity, nobility, courage, but he was only playing. And Pushkin, the great Pushkin, was defeated by his game. He thought in the simplicity of his soul that the king honored the inspiration in him that the spirit of a sovereign is not cruel... But for Nikolai Pavlovich, Pushkin was just a rogue requiring supervision.” The manifestation of the monarch’s mercy towards the poet was dictated solely by the desire to derive the greatest possible benefit from this.

(To be continued.)

Since 1814, the poet V. A. Zhukovsky was brought closer to the court by the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna.