Illness and death At four o'clock my father called me and asked me to cover him, saying that he was shivering. “Tuck your back better, your back will be very cold.” We were not very alarmed, since it was cool in the carriage, everyone was cold and wrapped in warm clothes. We covered my father with a blanket, a blanket,

Illness and death Although the ancient Slavs were a healthy people, their life was not so comfortable that death came to them only in battle or in old age. It can be assumed in advance that the climate and environment in which the Slavs lived determined

CHAPTER FIRST

Manifesto on the accession of the sovereign to the throne. – Assessment of the reign of Emperor Alexander III (V. O. Klyuchevsky, K. P. Pobedonostsev). – General situation in 1894 – Russian Empire. - Royal power. - Officials. – Tendencies of the ruling circles: “demophiliac” and “aristocratic”. – Foreign policy and the Franco-Russian alliance. - Army. - Fleet. - Local government. – Finland. – Press and censorship. – The softness of laws and courts.

The role of Alexander III in Russian history

“It pleased Almighty God, in his inscrutable ways, to interrupt the precious life of Our beloved Parent, Sovereign Emperor Alexander Alexandrovich. The serious illness did not yield to either treatment or the fertile climate of Crimea, and on October 20 He died in Livadia, surrounded by His August Family, in the arms of Her Imperial Majesty the Empress and Ours.

Our grief cannot be expressed in words, but every Russian heart will understand it, and We believe that there will be no place in Our vast State where hot tears would not be shed for the Sovereign, who untimely passed away into eternity and left his native land, which He loved with all His might. the Russian soul and on whose welfare He placed all His thoughts, sparing neither His health nor life. And not only in Russia, but far beyond its borders, they will never cease to honor the memory of the Tsar, who personified unshakable truth and peace, which was never violated throughout His Reign.”

These words begin the manifesto that announced to Russia the accession of Emperor Nicholas II to the ancestral throne.

The reign of Emperor Alexander III, who received the name Tsar-Peacemaker, was not replete with external events, but it left a deep imprint on Russian and world life. During these thirteen years, many knots were tied - both in foreign and domestic policy - which his son and successor, Emperor Nicholas II Alexandrovich, had the opportunity to untie or cut.

Both friends and enemies of Imperial Russia equally recognize that Emperor Alexander III significantly increased the international weight of the Russian Empire, and within its borders established and exalted the importance of autocratic tsarist power. He led the Russian ship of state on a different course than his father. He did not believe that the reforms of the 60s and 70s were an unconditional blessing, but tried to introduce into them those amendments that, in his opinion, were necessary for the internal balance of Russia.

After the era of great reforms, after the war of 1877-1878, this enormous tension of Russian forces in the interests of the Balkan Slavs, Russia, in any case, needed a respite. It was necessary to master and “digest” the changes that had occurred.

Assessments of the reign of Alexander III

At the Imperial Society of Russian History and Antiquities at Moscow University, the famous Russian historian, prof. V. O. Klyuchevsky, in his word in memory of Emperor Alexander III a week after his death, said:

“During the reign of Emperor Alexander III, before the eyes of one generation, we peacefully carried out a number of profound reforms in our political system in the spirit of Christian rules, therefore, in the spirit of European principles - such reforms that cost Western Europe centuries-long and often violent efforts - and this Europe continued to see in us representatives of Mongolian inertia, some kind of imposed adoptions of the cultural world...

Thirteen years of the reign of Emperor Alexander III passed, and the more hastily the hand of death hastened to close His eyes, the wider and more astonished the eyes of Europe opened to the global significance of this short reign. Finally, the stones cried out, the organs of public opinion in Europe began to speak the truth about Russia, and they spoke the more sincerely, the more unusual it was for them to say this. It turned out, according to these confessions, that European civilization had not sufficiently and carelessly ensured its peaceful development, for its own safety it had placed itself on a powder magazine, that the burning fuse had more than once approached this dangerous defensive warehouse from different sides, and each time the caring and patient hand of the Russian Tsar quietly and carefully led him away... Europe recognized that the Tsar of the Russian people were the sovereign of the international world, and with this recognition confirmed the historical vocation of Russia, for in Russia, according to its political organization, the will of the Tsar expresses the thought of His people, and the will of the people becomes the thought of its Tsar. Europe recognized that the country, which it considered a threat to its civilization, stood and stands guard over it, understands, appreciates and protects its foundations no worse than its creators; she recognized Russia as an organically necessary part of her cultural composition, a blood, natural member of the family of her peoples...

Science will give Emperor Alexander III his rightful place not only in the history of Russia and all of Europe, but also in Russian historiography, will say that He won a victory in the area where these victories are most difficult to achieve, defeated the prejudice of peoples and thereby contributed to their rapprochement, conquered the public conscience in the name of peace and truth, increased the amount of good in the moral circulation of humanity, encouraged and raised Russian historical thought, Russian national consciousness, and did all this so quietly and silently that only now, when He was no longer there, Europe understood what He was for her."

If Professor Klyuchevsky, a Russian intellectual and rather a “Westernizer,” dwells more on the foreign policy of Emperor Alexander III and, apparently, hints at a rapprochement with France, the closest collaborator of the late monarch, K.P., spoke about the other side of this reign in a concise and expressive form. Pobedonostsev:

“Everyone knew that he would not give in to the Russian, his history of bequeathed interest either in Poland or on other outskirts of the foreign element, that he deeply preserves in his soul the same faith and love for the Orthodox Church with the people; finally, that he, along with the people, believes in the unshakable significance of autocratic power in Russia and will not allow it, in the ghost of freedom, a disastrous confusion of languages ​​and opinions.”

At a meeting of the French Senate, its chairman, Challmel-Lacourt, said in his speech (November 5, 1894) that the Russian people were experiencing “the grief of the loss of a ruler immensely devoted to his future, his greatness, his security; The Russian nation, under the just and peaceful authority of its emperor, enjoyed security, this highest good of society and an instrument of true greatness.”

Most of the French press spoke in the same tones about the late Russian Tsar: “He leaves Russia greater than he received it,” wrote the Journal des Debats; and “Revue des deux Mondes” echoed the words of V. O. Klyuchevsky: “This grief was also our grief; for us it has acquired a national character; but other nations experienced almost the same feelings... Europe felt that it was losing an arbiter who had always been guided by the idea of ​​justice.”

International situation at the end of the reign of Alexander III

1894 – just like the 80s and 90s in general. – refers to that long period of “calm before the storm,” the longest period without major wars in modern and medieval history. This time left its mark on everyone who grew up during these years of calm. By the end of the 19th century, the growth of material well-being and external education proceeded with increasing acceleration. Technology went from invention to invention, science - from discovery to discovery. Railways and steamships have already made it possible to “travel around the world in 80 days”; Following the telegraph wires, strings of telephone wires were already stretched around the world. Electric lighting was quickly replacing gas lighting. But in 1894, the clumsy first cars could not yet compete with the graceful carriages and carriages; “live photography” was still in the stage of preliminary experiments; controllable balloons were just a dream; Heavier-than-air vehicles have never been heard of. Radio had not been invented, and radium had not yet been discovered...

In almost all states, the same political process was observed: the growth of the influence of parliament, the expansion of suffrage, and the transfer of power to more left-wing circles. In essence, no one in the West waged a real struggle against this trend, which at that time seemed to be a spontaneous course of “historical progress”. The Conservatives, themselves gradually moving towards the left, were content to at times slow down the pace of this development - 1894 saw just such a slowdown in most countries.

In France, after the assassination of President Carnot and a series of senseless anarchist assassination attempts, up to a bomb in the Chamber of Deputies and the notorious Panama scandal, which marked the beginning of the 90s. In this country, there has just been a slight shift to the right. The president was Casimir Perrier, a right-wing republican inclined to expand presidential power; The Dupuis ministry was governed by a moderate majority. But already at that time those who were on the extreme left of the National Assembly in the 70s were considered “moderate”; just shortly before - around 1890 - under the influence of the advice of Pope Leo XIII, a significant part of French Catholics joined the ranks of the Republicans.

In Germany, after the resignation of Bismarck, the influence of the Reichstag increased significantly; Social Democracy, gradually conquering more and more large cities, became the largest German party. The conservatives, for their part, relying on the Prussian Landtag, waged a stubborn struggle against the economic policies of Wilhelm II. For lack of energy in the fight against the socialists, Chancellor Caprivi was replaced in October 1894 by the elderly Prince Hohenlohe; but this did not result in any noticeable change in course.

In England in 1894, the liberals were defeated on the Irish question, and the “intermediate” ministry of Lord Rosebery was in power, which soon gave way to the cabinet of Lord Salisbury, which relied on conservatives and liberal unionists (opponents of Irish self-government). These unionists, led by Chamberlain, played such a prominent role in the government majority that soon the name of the unionists generally supplanted the name of the conservatives for twenty years. Unlike Germany, the English labor movement was not yet political in nature, and the powerful trade unions, which had already organized very impressive strikes, were content for now with economic and professional achievements - finding more support in this from conservatives than from liberals. These relationships explain the phrase of a prominent English figure of that time: “We are all socialists now”...

In Austria and Hungary, parliamentary rule was more pronounced than in Germany: cabinets that did not have a majority had to resign. On the other hand, the parliament itself opposed the expansion of suffrage: the dominant parties were afraid of losing power. By the time of the death of Emperor Alexander III, Vienna was ruled by the short-lived ministry of the prince. Windischgrätz, which relied on very heterogeneous elements: German liberals, Poles and clerics.

In Italy, after a period of dominance of the left with Giolitti at the head, after a scandal with the appointment to the Senate of the thieving bank director Tanlongo, at the beginning of 1894 the old politician Crispi, one of the authors of the Triple Alliance, who played a role in the special Italian parliamentary conditions, came back to power conservative.

Although the Second International had already been founded in 1889 and socialist ideas were becoming increasingly widespread in Europe, by 1894 the socialists did not yet represent a serious political force in any country except Germany (where in 1893 they already had 44 deputies ). But the parliamentary system in many small states - Belgium, Scandinavian, Balkan countries - has received an even more straightforward application than that of the great powers. Apart from Russia, only Turkey and Montenegro among European countries did not have parliaments at all at that time.

The era of calm was at the same time an era of armed peace. All the great powers, and after them the small ones, increased and improved their weapons. Europe, as V. O. Klyuchevsky put it, “for its own safety has placed itself in a powder magazine.” Universal conscription was carried out in all the main states of Europe, except insular England. The technology of war did not lag behind the technology of peace in its development.

Mutual distrust between states was great. The Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy seemed the most powerful combination of powers. But its participants did not fully rely on each other. Until 1890, Germany still considered it necessary to “play it safe” through a secret treaty with Russia - and Bismarck saw a fatal mistake in the fact that Emperor Wilhelm II did not renew this treaty - and France entered into negotiations with Italy more than once, trying to tear it away from the Tripartite Treaty union. England was in "magnificent solitude." France harbored the unhealed wound of its defeat in 1870-1871. and was ready to side with any enemy of Germany. The thirst for revenge clearly manifested itself in the late 80s. the successes of Boulangism.

The division of Africa was largely completed by 1890, at least on the coast. Enterprising colonialists strove from everywhere to the interior of the mainland, where there were still unexplored areas, to be the first to raise the flag of their country and secure “no man's lands” for it. Only on the middle reaches of the Nile was the path of the British still blocked by the state of the Mahdists, Muslim fanatics, who in 1885 defeated and killed the English general Gordon during the capture of Khartoum. And mountainous Abyssinia, against which the Italians began their campaign, was preparing an unexpectedly powerful rebuff for them.

All these were just islands - Africa, like Australia and America before, became the property of the white race. Until the end of the 19th century, the prevailing belief was that Asia would suffer the same fate. England and Russia were already watching each other through the thin barrier of weak, still independent states, Persia, Afghanistan, and semi-independent Tibet. The closest it came to war during the entire reign of Emperor Alexander III was when in 1885 General Komarov defeated the Afghans near Kushka: the British kept a vigilant eye on the “Gateway to India”! However, the acute conflict was resolved by an agreement in 1887.

But in the Far East, where back in the 1850s. The Russians occupied the Ussuri region, which belonged to China, without a fight, and the dormant peoples just began to stir. When Emperor Alexander III was dying, cannons thundered on the shores of the Yellow Sea: small Japan, having mastered European technology, was winning its first victories over the huge but still motionless China.

Russia by the end of the reign of Alexander III

Portrait of Alexander III. Artist A. Sokolov, 1883

In this world, the Russian Empire, with its space of twenty million square miles, with a population of 125 million people, occupied a prominent position. Since the Seven Years' War, and especially since 1812, Russia's military power has been highly valued in Western Europe. The Crimean War showed the limits of this power, but at the same time confirmed its strength. Since then, the era of reforms, including in the military sphere, has created new conditions for the development of Russian strength.

Russia began to be seriously studied at this time. A. Leroy-Beaulieu in French, Sir D. Mackenzie-Wallace in English published large studies about Russia in the 1870-1880s. The structure of the Russian Empire differed very significantly from Western European conditions, but foreigners then already began to understand that we were talking about dissimilar, and not “backward” state forms.

“The Russian Empire is governed on the exact basis of laws emanating from the Supreme Authority. The Emperor is an autocratic and unlimited monarch,” read the Russian fundamental laws. The king had full legislative and executive power. This did not mean arbitrariness: all essential questions had precise answers in the laws, which were subject to execution until repealed. In the field of civil rights, the Russian tsarist government generally avoided a sharp break, took into account the legal skills of the population and acquired rights, and left in force on the territory of the empire both the Napoleon Code (in the Kingdom of Poland), and the Lithuanian Statute (in the Poltava and Chernigov provinces), and the Magdeburg law (in the Baltic region), and common law among peasants, and all kinds of local laws and customs in the Caucasus, Siberia, and Central Asia.

But the right to make laws indivisibly belonged to the king. There was a State Council of the highest dignitaries appointed there by the sovereign; he discussed draft laws; but the king could agree, at his discretion, with both the opinion of the majority and the opinion of the minority - or reject both. Usually, special commissions and meetings were formed to conduct important events; but they had, of course, only preparatory value.

In the executive sphere, the fullness of royal power was also unlimited. After the death of Cardinal Mazarin, Louis XIV declared that from now on he wanted to be his own first minister. But all Russian monarchs were in the same position. Russia did not know the position of the first minister. The title of chancellor, sometimes assigned to the minister of foreign affairs (the last chancellor was His Serene Highness Prince A.M. Gorchakov, who died in 1883), gave him the rank of 1st class on the table of ranks, but did not mean any primacy over the other ministers. There was a Committee of Ministers, it had a permanent chairman (in 1894 it was still the former Minister of Finance N.H. Bunge). But this Committee was, in essence, only a kind of interdepartmental meeting.

All ministers and chief managers of individual units had their own independent report to the sovereign. The governors-general, as well as the mayors of both capitals, were also directly subordinate to the sovereign.

This did not mean that the sovereign was involved in all the details of the management of individual departments (although, for example, Emperor Alexander III was “his own minister of foreign affairs”, to whom everything “incoming” and “outgoing” was reported; N.K. Girs was, as it were, his "comrade minister") Individual ministers sometimes had great power and the possibility of broad initiative. But they had them because and while the sovereign trusted them.

To implement plans coming from above, Russia also had a large staff of officials. Emperor Nicholas I once dropped an ironic phrase that Russia is governed by 30,000 government officials. Complaints about “bureaucracy” and “mediastinum” were very common in Russian society. It was customary to scold officials and grumble at them. Abroad, there was an idea of ​​almost universal bribery of Russian officials. He was often judged by the satires of Gogol or Shchedrin; but a caricature, even a successful one, cannot be considered a portrait. In some departments, for example, in the police, low salaries actually contributed to the fairly widespread use of bribes. Others, such as the Ministry of Finance or the Judiciary after the reform of 1864, enjoyed, on the contrary, a reputation for high integrity. It must be admitted, however, that one of the features that united Russia with the eastern countries was an everyday condescending attitude towards many actions of dubious honesty; the fight against this phenomenon was psychologically difficult. Some groups of the population, such as engineers, enjoyed an even worse reputation than officials - quite often, of course, undeserved.

But the top government officials were free from this disease. Cases where ministers or other government officials were involved in abuses were rare and sensational exceptions.

Be that as it may, the Russian administration, even in its most imperfect parts, carried out, despite difficult conditions, the task entrusted to it. The tsarist government had at its disposal an obedient and well-organized state apparatus, adapted to the diverse needs of the Russian Empire. This apparatus was created over centuries - from Moscow orders - and in many ways achieved high perfection.

But the Russian Tsar was not only the head of state: he was at the same time the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, which occupied a leading position in the country. This, of course, did not mean that the tsar had the right to touch upon church dogmas; The conciliar structure of the Orthodox Church excluded such an understanding of the rights of the tsar. But at the proposal of the Holy Synod, the highest church college, the appointment of bishops was made by the king; and the replenishment of the Synod itself depended on him (in the same order). The chief prosecutor of the Synod was the link between the church and the state. This position was occupied by K. P. Pobedonostsev, a man of outstanding intelligence and strong will, for more than a quarter of a century, the teacher of two emperors - Alexander III and Nicholas II.

During the reign of Emperor Alexander III, the following main tendencies of power appeared: not a sweepingly negative, but in any case a critical attitude towards what was called “progress”, and the desire to give Russia more internal unity by asserting the primacy of the Russian elements of the country. In addition, two currents appeared simultaneously, far from being similar, but seemingly complementing each other. One, which sets itself the goal of protecting the weak from the strong, preferring the broad masses of the people to those who have separated from them, with some egalitarian inclinations, in the terms of our time could be called “demophilic” or Christian-social. This is a trend whose representatives were, along with others, the Minister of Justice Manasein (who resigned in 1894) and K.P. Pobedonostsev, who wrote that “the nobles, like the people, are subject to curbing.” Another trend, which found its exponent in the Minister of Internal Affairs, Gr. D. A. Tolstoy, sought to strengthen the ruling classes, to establish a certain hierarchy in the state. The first movement, by the way, ardently defended the peasant community as a unique Russian form of solving the social issue.

The Russification policy met with more sympathy from the “demophile” movement. On the contrary, a prominent representative of the second trend, the famous writer K. N. Leontyev, came out in 1888 with the brochure “National Policy as a Weapon of World Revolution” (in subsequent editions the word “national” was replaced by “tribal”), proving that “the movement of modern political nationalism is nothing more than the spread of cosmopolitan democratization, modified only in its methods.”

Of the prominent right-wing publicists of that time, M. N. Katkov joined the first movement, and Prince joined the second. V. P. Meshchersky.

Emperor Alexander III himself, with his deeply Russian mindset, did not sympathize with the Russification extremes and expressively wrote to K.P. Pobedonostsev (in 1886): “There are gentlemen who think that they are the only Russians, and no one else. Do they already imagine that I am a German or a Chukhonian? It’s easy for them with their farcical patriotism when they are not responsible for anything. It’s not I who will offend Russia.”

Foreign policy results of the reign of Alexander III

In foreign policy, the reign of Emperor Alexander III brought great changes. That closeness with Germany, or rather with Prussia, which remained a common feature of Russian politics since Catherine the Great and runs like a red thread through the reigns of Alexander I, Nicholas I and especially Alexander II, gave way to a noticeable cooling. It would hardly be correct, as is sometimes done, to attribute this development of events to the anti-German sentiments of Empress Maria Feodorovna, a Danish princess who married the Russian heir shortly after the Danish-Prussian War of 1864! Can we really say that political complications this time were not mitigated, as in previous reigns, by personal good relations and family ties of the dynasties. The reasons were, of course, mainly political.

Although Bismarck considered it possible to combine the Triple Alliance with friendly relations with Russia, the Austro-German-Italian alliance was, of course, at the root of the cooling between the old friends. The Berlin Congress left bitterness in Russian public opinion. Anti-German notes began to sound at the top. Gen. is known for his harsh speech. Skobeleva against the Germans; Katkov in Moskovskie Vedomosti led a campaign against them. By the mid-1980s, the tension began to be felt more strongly; The German seven-year military budget ("septennate") was caused by deteriorating relations with Russia. The German government closed the Berlin market to Russian securities.

Emperor Alexander III, like Bismarck, was seriously worried about this aggravation, and in 1887 the so-called reinsurance agreement. This was a secret Russian-German agreement, according to which both countries promised each other benevolent neutrality in the event of an attack by any third country on one of them. This agreement constituted a significant reservation to the act of the Triple Alliance. It meant that Germany would not support any anti-Russian action by Austria. Legally, these treaties were compatible, since the Triple Alliance only provided for support in the event that any of its participants was attacked (which gave Italy the opportunity to declare neutrality in 1914 without violating the alliance treaty).

But this reinsurance agreement was not renewed in 1890. Negotiations about it coincided with the resignation of Bismarck. His successor, Gen. The Caprivi, with military straightforwardness, pointed out to William II that this treaty seemed disloyal to Austria. For his part, Emperor Alexander III, who had sympathy for Bismarck, did not seek to get involved with the new rulers of Germany.

After this, in the 90s, things came to a Russian-German customs war, which ended with a trade agreement on March 20, 1894, concluded with the close participation of the Minister of Finance S. Yu. Witte. This agreement gave Russia - for a ten-year period - significant advantages.

Relations with Austria-Hungary had no reason to deteriorate: from the time when Austria, saved from the Hungarian revolution by Emperor Nicholas I, “surprised the world with ingratitude” during the Crimean War, Russia and Austria clashed on the entire Balkan front, just like Russia and England on the entire Asian front.

England at that time still continued to see in the Russian Empire its main enemy and competitor, “a huge glacier hanging over India,” as Lord Beaconsfield (Disraeli) put it in the English Parliament.

In the Balkans, Russia experienced in the 80s. grave disappointments. The liberation war of 1877-1878, which cost Russia so much blood and such financial turmoil, did not bring it immediate fruit. Austria actually took over Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Russia was forced to admit this in order to avoid a new war. In Serbia, the Obrenovic dynasty, represented by King Milan, was in power, clearly gravitating towards Austria. Even Bismarck spoke caustically about Bulgaria in his memoirs: “Liberated peoples are not grateful, but pretentious.” There it came to the persecution of Russophile elements. The replacement of Prince Alexander of Battenberg, who became the head of anti-Russian movements, by Ferdinand of Coburg did not improve Russian-Bulgarian relations. Only in 1894 was Istanbulov, the main inspirer of Russophobic policies, supposed to resign. The only country with which Russia for many years did not even have diplomatic relations was Bulgaria, so recently resurrected by Russian weapons from a long state oblivion!

Romania was allied with Austria and Germany, resentful that in 1878 Russia had regained a small piece of Bessarabia taken from it in the Crimean War. Although Romania received in the form of compensation the entire Dobruja with the port of Constanta, it preferred to get closer to the opponents of Russian policy in the Balkans.

When Emperor Alexander III proclaimed his famous toast to “Russia’s only true friend, Prince Nicholas of Montenegro,” this, in essence, corresponded to reality. Russia's power was so great that it did not feel threatened in this solitude. But after the termination of the reinsurance agreement, during a sharp deterioration in Russian-German economic relations, Emperor Alexander III took certain steps to move closer to France.

The republican system, state unbelief and such recent phenomena as the Panama scandal could not endear the Russian Tsar, the keeper of conservative and religious principles, to France. Many therefore considered a Franco-Russian agreement out of the question. The ceremonial reception of the sailors of the French squadron in Kronstadt, when the Russian Tsar listened to the Marseillaise with his head uncovered, showed that sympathy or antipathy for the internal system of France was not decisive for Emperor Alexander III. Few people, however, thought that already in 1892, a secret defensive alliance was concluded between Russia and France, supplemented by a military convention indicating how many troops both sides undertake to field in the event of war with Germany. This agreement was so secret at that time that neither the ministers knew about it (of course, except for two or three senior officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Military Department), nor even the heir to the throne himself.

French society had long been eager to formalize this union, but the tsar made it a condition for the strictest secrecy, fearing that confidence in Russian support could give rise to militant sentiments in France, revive the thirst for revenge, and the government, due to the peculiarities of the democratic system, would not be able to resist the pressure of public opinion .

Russian army and navy by the end of the reign of Alexander III

The Russian Empire at that time had the largest peacetime army in the world. Its 22 corps, not counting the Cossacks and irregular units, reached a strength of up to 900,000 people. With a four-year term of military service, an annual call for recruits was given in the early 90s. three times more people than the army needed. This not only made it possible to make strict selection based on physical fitness, but also made it possible to provide broad benefits based on marital status. The only sons, older brothers, in whose care were younger ones, teachers, doctors, etc., were exempted from active military service and were directly enlisted in the second-class militia warriors, to whom mobilization could only reach the very last place. In Russia, only 31 percent of conscripts each year enlisted, compared with 76 percent in France.

Mostly state-owned factories worked to arm the army; in Russia there were no “gun dealers” who enjoy such an unflattering reputation in the West.

For the training of officers, there were 37 secondary and 15 higher military educational institutions, in which 14,000-15,000 people studied.

All lower ranks who served in the army received, in addition, a certain education. The illiterate were taught to read and write, and everyone was given some basic principles of general education.

The Russian fleet, which had been in decline since the Crimean War, came to life and was rebuilt during the reign of Emperor Alexander III. 114 new military vessels were launched, including 17 battleships and 10 armored cruisers. The fleet's displacement reached 300,000 tons - the Russian fleet took third place (after England and France) among the world's fleets. Its weakness, however, was that the Black Sea Fleet - about a third of the Russian naval forces - was locked in the Black Sea by international treaties and did not have the opportunity to take part in the struggle that would arise in other seas.

Local self-government in Russia by the end of the reign of Alexander III

Russia had no imperial representative institutions; Emperor Alexander III, in the words of K. P. Pobedonostsev, believed “in the unshakable significance of autocratic power in Russia” and did not allow it “in the specter of freedom, a disastrous confusion of languages ​​and opinions.” But from the previous reign, local government bodies, zemstvos and cities remained as a legacy; and since the time of Catherine II, there has been class self-government in the form of noble, provincial and district assemblies (petty bourgeois councils and other bodies of self-government of townspeople gradually lost all real significance).

Zemstvo self-governments were introduced (in 1864) in 34 (out of 50) provinces of European Russia, that is, they spread to more than half the population of the empire. They were elected by three groups of the population: peasants, private landowners and townspeople; the number of seats was distributed between groups according to the amount of taxes they paid. In 1890, a law was passed that strengthened the role of the nobility in zemstvos. In general, private owners, as the more educated element of the village, played a leading role in most provinces; but there were also predominantly peasant zemstvos (Vyatka, Perm, for example). Russian zemstvos had a wider sphere of activity than local governments in France now have. Medical and veterinary care, public education, road maintenance, statistics, insurance, agronomy, cooperation, etc. - this was the area of ​​activity of zemstvos.

City governments (dumas) were elected by homeowners. Dumas elected city councils headed by the city mayor. Their sphere of competence within cities was in general terms the same as that of zemstvos in relation to the countryside.

Reception of volost elders by Alexander III. Painting by I. Repin, 1885-1886

Finally, the village had its own peasant self-government, in which all adult peasants and wives of absent husbands took part. “Peace” resolved local issues and elected representatives to the volost assembly. The elders (chairmen) and their clerks (secretaries) led these primary cells of peasant self-government.

In general, by the end of the reign of Emperor Alexander III, with a state budget of 1,200,000,000 rubles, local budgets administered by elected institutions reached an amount of about 200 million, of which zemstvos and cities accounted for approximately 60 million per year. Of this amount, zemstvos spent about a third on medical care and about one sixth on public education.

The noble assemblies, created by Catherine the Great, consisted of all the hereditary nobles of each province (or district), and only those nobles who had land property in a given area could participate in the assemblies. Provincial noble meetings were, in essence, the only public bodies in which issues of general policy were sometimes legally discussed. Noble assemblies, in the form of addresses addressed to the Highest Name, more than once came up with political resolutions. In addition, their sphere of competence was very limited, and they played a certain role only due to their connection with the zemstvos (the local leader of the nobility was ex officio the chairman of the provincial or district zemstvo assembly).

The importance of the nobility in the country at that time was already noticeably declining. In the early 1890s, contrary to popular ideas in the West, in 49 provinces. In European Russia, out of 381 million dessiatines of land area, only 55 million belonged to the nobles, while in Siberia, Central Asia and the Caucasus, noble land ownership was almost absent (only in the provinces of the Kingdom of Poland, the nobility owned 44 percent of the land).

In local governments, as anywhere where there is an elective principle, there were, of course, their own groups, their own right and left. There were liberal zemstvos and conservative zemstvos. But this did not lead to real games. There were no significant illegal groups at that time after the collapse of Narodnaya Volya, although some revolutionary publications were published abroad. Thus, the London Foundation for Illegal Press (S. Stepnyak, N. Tchaikovsky, L. Shishko and others) in a report for 1893 reported that during the year they distributed 20,407 copies of illegal brochures and books - of which 2,360 were in Russia, which is not a large number per 125 million population...

The Grand Duchy of Finland was in a special position. There was a constitution in force there, granted by Alexander I. The Finnish Diet, consisting of representatives of the four classes (nobles, clergy, townspeople and peasants), was convened every five years, and under Emperor Alexander III it even received (in 1885) the right of legislative initiative. The local government was the Senate, appointed by the emperor, and communication with the general imperial administration was ensured through the Minister of State and Secretary of State for Finnish Affairs.

Censorship of newspapers and books

In the absence of representative institutions, there was no organized political activity in Russia, and attempts to create party groups were immediately suppressed by police measures. The press was under the watchful supervision of the authorities. Some large newspapers were published, however, without prior censorship - in order to speed up publication - and therefore carried the risk of subsequent repression. Typically, a newspaper was given two “warnings,” and on the third, its publication was suspended. But at the same time, the newspapers remained independent: within certain limits, subject to some external restraint, they could, and often did, carry out views that were very hostile to the government. Most of the big newspapers and magazines were deliberately oppositional. The government only put up external barriers to the expression of views hostile to it, and did not try to influence the content of the press.

It can be said that the Russian government had neither the inclination nor the ability for self-promotion. Its achievements and successes often remained in the shadows, while its failures and weaknesses were diligently described with imaginary objectivity on the pages of the Russian periodical press, and were disseminated abroad by Russian political emigrants, creating largely false ideas about Russia.

With regard to books, church censorship was the most stringent. Less severe than the Vatican with its “index,” it at the same time had the opportunity not only to put prohibited books on the lists, but also to actually stop their distribution. Thus, anti-church writings by gr. L. N. Tolstoy, “The Life of Jesus” by Renan; when translating from Heine, for example, passages containing mockery of religion were excluded. But in general - especially if we take into account that censorship acted with varying degrees of severity in different periods, and books, once accepted, were rarely removed from circulation - books prohibited for the Russian “legal” reader made up an insignificant portion of world literature. Of the major Russian writers, only Herzen was banned.

Russian laws and court towards the end of the reign of Alexander III

In a country that was considered abroad as “the kingdom of whips, chains and exile to Siberia,” in fact, very mild and humane laws were in force. Russia was the only country where the death penalty was generally abolished (since the time of Empress Elizabeth Petrovna) for all crimes tried by general courts. It remained only in military courts and for the highest state crimes. During the 19th century the number of those executed (if we exclude both Polish uprisings and violations of military discipline) was not even a hundred people in a hundred years. During the reign of Emperor Alexander III, in addition to the participants in the regicide on March 1, only a few people who attempted to kill the emperor were executed (one of them, by the way, was A. Ulyanov, Lenin’s brother).

Administrative exile on the basis of the law on the situation of enhanced security was applied quite widely to all types of anti-government agitation. There were different degrees of exile: to Siberia, to the northern provinces (“places not so remote,” as they usually called it), sometimes simply to provincial towns. Those deported who did not have their own funds were given a government allowance for living. In places of exile, special colonies of people united by a common fate were formed; Often these colonies of exiles became cells for future revolutionary work, creating connections and acquaintances, promoting “enslavement” in hostility to the existing order. Those who were considered the most dangerous were placed in the Shlisselburg fortress on an island in the upper reaches of the Neva.

The Russian court, founded on the judicial statutes of 1864, has stood at great heights since that time; “Gogol types” in the judicial world have faded into the realm of legends. Careful attitude towards defendants, the broadest provision of defense rights, a selected composition of judges - all this was a matter of just pride for the Russian people and corresponded to the mood of society. Judicial statutes were one of the few laws that society not only respected, but was also ready to jealously defend from the authorities when it considered it necessary to introduce reservations and amendments to the liberal law for a more successful fight against crime.

There were no zemstvos: in 12 western provinces, where non-Russian elements predominated among landowners; in the sparsely populated Arkhangelsk and Astrakhan provinces; in the Don Army Region, and in the Orenburg Province. with their Cossack institutions.

The nobility in Russia did not constitute a closed caste; the rights of hereditary nobility were acquired by everyone who reached the rank of VIII class on the table of ranks (college assessor, captain, captain).

Alexander III Alexandrovich (02/26/1845 - 10/20/1894) All-Russian Emperor (03/2/1881 - 10/20/1894)

Alexander III did not receive the education that was considered necessary for the heir to the throne. The teacher of Alexander III was the theorist of autocracy, chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod K. P. Pobedonostsev, who for the first time after the accession to the throne of his pupil was the most influential person in the government. Having ascended the throne, he made it his task to complete the reforms of Alexander II.

The emperor had enormous capacity for work and extraordinary physical strength. Unlike his father, Alexander III was not a brave man. Fearing assassination attempts, he retired to Gatchina, to the palace of his great-grandfather Paul I, designed like an ancient castle, surrounded by moats and protected by watchtowers.

In the conditions of developing capitalism, Alexander III, expressing the interests of the most conservative circles of the nobility, preserved the landlord way of life. However, in the field of economic policy, the emperor was forced to reckon with the growth of capitalist elements in the country.
In the first months of his reign, Alexander III pursued a policy of maneuvering between liberalism and reaction, which determined the struggle of factions within the government camp (M. T. Loris-Melikov, A. A. Abaza, D. A. Milyutin - on the one hand, K. P. Pobedonostsev - on the other). On April 29, 1881, Alexander III issued a manifesto on the establishment of autocracy, which meant a transition to a reactionary course in domestic politics. However, in the first half of the 1880s, under the influence of economic development and the current political situation, the government of Alexander III was forced to carry out a number of reforms. In 1882, a peasant bank was established, with the help of which peasants could acquire land property. This decision was made by Speransky, but did not receive the support of Alexander I.

This decision was a natural step before the abolition of taxes and permission to buy back (redemption was allowed earlier) the land. In 1890, a new position was introduced - the zemstvo chief, who concentrated administrative and judicial power in their hands. This was a step back to autocracy, but it was necessary, since today’s Russia was not ready (and perhaps will never be ready for democracy). The year 1884 was marked by the introduction of a new university charter - military gymnasiums were transformed into cadet corps. With the resignation of the Minister of Internal Affairs Count N.I. Ignatiev (1882) and the appointment of Count D.A. Tolstoy to this post, a period of open reaction began. During the reign of Alexander III, administrative arbitrariness increased significantly. Administrative arbitrariness was strengthened by a series of decrees in 1890. Basically, these decrees appointed new positions that limited the democratic beginning of the previous decrees - in particular, a new position of zemstvo chief was introduced, who had judicial and administrative power, which could not have a positive effect on Russian democracy.

In order to develop new lands, under Alexander III, the resettlement of peasant families to Siberia proceeded at a rapid pace. In total, during the reign of Alexander III, up to 400 thousand peasants were resettled to Siberia, and 60 thousand to Central Asia. The government to some extent cared about improving the living conditions of workers - rules were introduced on hiring for rural and factory work, the supervision of which was entrusted to factory workers inspectors (1882), the work of minors and women was limited.

In foreign policy, these years saw a deterioration in Russian-German relations and a gradual rapprochement between Russia and France, which ended with the conclusion of the Franco-Russian alliance (1891-1893).

Coronation of Alexander III

Alexander Alexandrovich, the second son of Emperor Alexander II and his wife Empress Maria Alexandrovna, ascended the throne on March 1, 1881. Alexander III was crowned on March 15, 1881 in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin.

The trial of the First Marchers

The regicide carried out by Narodnaya Volya on March 1, 1881 caused confusion and panic in Russian society. Mass raids and searches carried out by the police led to the arrest of the organizers of the assassination attempt on Alexander II. A trial was held over the emperor's murderers, and they were sentenced to death. On April 3, 1881, in St. Petersburg, five Narodnaya Volya members - noblewoman Sofya Perovskaya, son of a priest Nikolai Kibalchich, tradesman Nikolai Rysakov, peasants Andrei Zhelyabov and Timofey Mikhailov were publicly executed.

Annexation of Central Asia to Russia

By the time of Russia's widespread offensive, Central Asia had a diverse population. Of the feudal states of Central Asia, three stood out - the Kokand and Khiva khanates and the Bukhara Emirate. In 1864, Russian troops entered the Kokand Khanate. The cities of Turkestan and Chimkent were occupied. In June 1865, the largest commercial, handicraft and industrial city in Central Asia, Tashkent, with a population of 100 thousand people, was taken. In January 1868, a trade agreement beneficial for Russia was concluded with the Kokand Khan and Khudoyar Khan recognized himself as a vassal of the Russian Emperor. In May 1868, Samarkand was taken by Russian troops, the Emir of Bukhara stopped the fight and concluded an agreement with the tsarist government, according to which the emirate was placed in vassal dependence on Russia, and Russian merchants were given the right to free and preferential trade. In May 1873, the capital of the Khanate, Khiva, surrounded by Russian troops approaching from several directions, capitulated. The Khan of Khiva also recognized himself as a vassal of Russia. The annexation of Central Asia to Russia was completed in 1885.

Famine in the Volga region

In 1891, there was a crop failure in the Volga region due to drought. The eastern regions of the black earth zone - 20 provinces with a 40 million peasant population - suffered from a catastrophic famine. Famine was followed in 1892 by a cholera epidemic. A wide wave of government and public assistance to the hungry took place throughout Russia: funds were collected in cities to help the starving, canteens were organized in villages and grain was distributed, doctors worked for free in areas affected by the epidemic.

Tsar's train wreck

In October 1888, during one of his trips around the country, the imperial train derailed. The roof of the carriage in which the family of Alexander III was located began to collapse. The emperor, who possessed extraordinary physical strength, took the falling roof onto his shoulders and held it until his wife and children emerged alive and unharmed from the rubble. But due to kidney disease acquired as a result of this crash and excessive drinking, the Emperor died in 1894. He was buried in Pavlovsk Cathedral.

Counter-reforms. The era of Alexander III.

The abolition of serfdom in 1861 opened up a whole series of transformations in various spheres of life of Russian society: local self-government was introduced - zemstvo (1864) and city (1870); judicial reform (1864), democratization of education (1863-1864), press reform (1865), etc. were carried out. All these changes, accompanied by the social upsurge of the 60-70s, were in strong contradiction with tradition “state pressure” and the omnipotence of the bureaucracy. On the one hand, the opportunity to freely defend one’s interests through a system of representative institutions was unconventional for Russian society. It is accustomed to giving primacy to state interests to the detriment of private, human interests. On the other hand, conservative officials perceived any innovation as an attack on the very idea of ​​Russian statehood. It took both society and the state a lot of time to realize such radical changes, get used to them, and in some cases come to terms with them.

The reign of Emperor Alexander III (1881-1894) became a kind of historical pause - a time of comprehension of the great transformations of the previous reign and a time of reaction, which replaced the reformist onslaught of the previous 20 years. In historical science, this time was called the era of counter-reforms.

The Emperor's New Policy

The new government course was apparently different from the reform activities of Alexander II and his immediate circle - liberal-minded ministers. The latter were replaced by D. A. Tolstoy, K. P. Pobedonostsev, S. G. Stroganov, V. P. Meshchersky, who became the closest adviser to Alexander III. These were people with a different mindset, different views on the path of development of Russia and the role of the state. Such a replacement of key figures in the government meant a decisive departure from the previous course of government.

The previous, reformist period passed under the sign of modernization of the social system of Russia. Attempts were made to at least partially bring it into line with the requirements of the time, with Western European experience in providing civil liberties. The new era preferred to check time using its own historical clock. It was during this period that, thanks to the works of Pobedonostsev (1827-1907), one of the most influential figures of the new reign, the Russian state ideology, defending the inviolability of autocracy, acquired its most complete and perfect features.

The main reason for the sharp change in government policy in the early 80s. XIX century was not only the unique personality of Alexander III and his associates. The decisive role was played by the tense internal political situation caused by the terrorist activities of the People's Will, and, above all, by the assassination of Alexander II. The death of the emperor made a stunning impression on the country: Alexander II became not only a king-liberator, but also a king-martyr. The tragedy that took place on the Catherine Canal was connected by public consciousness with all the previous “liberal” activities of the sovereign, which “released dark forces,” which ultimately led to a terrible denouement. Memories of the regicide predetermined the attitude towards the revolutionary and liberal forces of the country not only on the part of those in power, but also on the part of most of the enlightened society, tuned to the need to “establish order.”

The future emperor was not inclined to continue the course begun by his father upon his accession to the throne, although on the second day after the death of his father, having gathered the highest ranks and retinue, Alexander said: “I accept the crown with determination. I will try to follow my father and finish the work he started. If the Almighty judged me the same fate as him, then I hope you will be as faithful to my son as to my father.” In dispatches sent on March 4 to Russian ambassadors at foreign courts, it was said that “the Emperor will devote himself, first of all, to the cause of internal state development, closely related to the success of citizenship and economic and social issues that are now the subject of special concerns of all governments.” In society, the new sovereign was perceived as a person of liberal views, not alien to constitutional ideas. This supported hopes for the continuation and development of those endeavors to which Alexander II returned in the last year of his reign. However, these hopes were not destined to come true.

The reign of his son was completely different from the reign of his father, whom Alexander III did not resemble in any way even outwardly. The late sovereign was handsome, possessed refined manners, natural kindness and gentleness in personal relationships. The new emperor, according to the memoirs of a major political figure S. Yu. Witte, “looked like a big Russian peasant from the central provinces; a suit would have suited him best: a sheepskin coat, a jacket and bast shoes... he was not handsome, in his manners he was rather more or less bearish; He was very tall, and for all his build, he was not particularly strong and muscular, but rather was somewhat thick and fat.”

Alexander Alexandrovich did not count on the Russian crown either in childhood or in his early youth. The legitimate heir to the throne, his older brother Nikolai Alexandrovich, died at the age of 22 from tuberculosis. Alexander Alexandrovich was declared crown prince at the age of 20, i.e. being already a fully formed person. Having grown up among officers, the Grand Duke did not receive the education that a future emperor should have. The peculiarities of the young man’s upbringing also left much to be desired. At one time, his father had excellent mentors, including the famous Russian poet V.A. Zhukovsky, who strove to ensure that his pupil would grow into a comprehensively educated, humane sovereign who cared about the well-being of the people. Pobedonostsev, Alexander Alexandrovich’s spiritual mentor, was at least suspicious of education in the spirit of the Enlightenment. And the student himself was not distinguished by any special talents. “Emperor Alexander III,” wrote Witte, “was of a completely ordinary mind, perhaps one could say below average intelligence, below average abilities, below average education...”. True, the emperor had “an enormous character, a wonderful heart,” but this is clearly not enough for a statesman. A kind family man and conservative, Alexander ΙΙΙ considered patriarchy the best way of life and thought for all citizens of his country. He himself tried to become a strict but fair father for his subjects and expected the same from officials, landowners, and the church. The shortcomings, however, were compensated for in a peculiar way by stubbornness, as well as by the strength and firmness of his character. These qualities made themselves felt in the very first months of his reign.

After brief hesitation and maneuvering between two opposing political groups - “liberal” and “protective” (they were headed respectively by M. T. Loris-Melikov and K. P. Pobedonostsev) - Alexander III leaned towards the latter. Already in March, the constitutional draft of the Minister of Internal Affairs Loris-Melikov, which envisaged the introduction of an all-Russian representative body, was “buried”. (Alexander II agreed to consider the project a few hours before his tragic death.) The tsar’s manifesto, compiled by Pobedonostsev, published on April 29, 1881, declared the determination to “become vigorously to the cause of government, with faith in the strength and truth of autocratic power,” which The emperor is called upon to “affirm and protect for the good of the people from any encroachments on it.” The basic principles of foreign and domestic policy were formulated: to maintain order and strong power, to observe justice and economy, to return to primordially Russian principles and to ensure primordially Russian interests everywhere. The constitutional dreams were over. It's getting cold in Russia.

Alexander II began his reign with the destruction of military settlements, allowing the free issuance of foreign passports, weakening censorship, amnesty for political prisoners, etc. The first measures of the government of Alexander III confirmed the determination of the authorities to firmly pursue the “protective” course proclaimed in the manifesto: August 14 In 1881, the “Regulations on measures to protect state security and public peace” were adopted. Now in any province it was allowed to introduce a state of emergency “to restore calm and eradicate sedition.” Any resident could be arrested, exiled without trial for five years, or brought before a military court. Governors received the right to close press organs, trade and industrial enterprises, and educational institutions; suspend the activities of zemstvos and city dumas. Published as “temporary” for a period of three years, this “Regulation” was constantly renewed and was in force until 1917.

The measures taken by the government of Alexander III, called counter-reforms, consisted of revising many of the achievements of the previous course in such important spheres of life of Russian society as zemstvo, city government, courts, education and the press.

Zemstvo

In 1864, the creation of zemstvo institutions began. This meant the revival of the ancient zemstvo with its idea of ​​popular representation and self-government bodies independent from the central government. The role of the latter was negated at the end of the 17th century.

According to the new “Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions” of 1890, the zemstvo was transformed. The nobility received the opportunity to elect the majority of elected zemstvo officials - vowels (about 57%). The property qualification (the minimum level of income that gives the right to a representative of a particular class to participate in the activities of zemstvo institutions) was lowered for the nobles and increased for the urban population. The peasants generally lost the right to elect councilors, since they were now appointed by the governor from among the peasant electors - persons authorized by peasant societies to participate in elections.

The newly elected zemstvo councilors were approved by the governor, which placed zemstvo institutions under strict state control. In fact, this crossed out the main idea of ​​​​the zemstvo - independence from state authorities and the tsar in resolving issues of local self-government. The meaning of the zemstvo counter-reform was to nullify the possibility of participation in the work of zemstvo bodies by “random” (undesirable for the regime) people, to increase the representation of nobles - the support of the throne, and ultimately to make zemstvos loyal to the autocratic government. All these measures reflected the opposition of the tsar and the nobility to the democratic Russian zemstvo (“land”, “people”) - a confrontation that goes back to the very depths of Russian history.

City government

The urban counter-reform pursued exactly the same goals as the zemstvo one: to weaken the electoral principle, narrow the range of issues resolved by city governments, and expand the scope of government powers. According to the new city regulations of 1892, the property qualification that gave the right to participate in elections was increased. As a result, the number of voters in Moscow, for example, decreased threefold. The provision that city councils and councils act independently was removed from the legislation. The interference of the tsarist administration in their affairs was consolidated. The government received the right not to approve the officially elected mayor - the chairman of the city duma. The number of meetings of the latter was limited. Thus, city government was essentially turned into a type of public service.

The Russian judicial system - the most successful brainchild of the reformers removed from power - did not undergo any significant changes at this time. The judicial statutes of 1864 continued to operate successfully. However, in legal proceedings in political cases, openness was limited: publication of reports on political trials was prohibited. All cases of violent actions against officials were removed from jury trials.

Significant changes have occurred in the lower judiciary. The magistrates' courts, which, in addition to hearing minor cases, resolved controversial issues between peasants and landowners, were largely liquidated. They survived only in three large cities - Moscow, St. Petersburg and Odessa. Justices of the peace were replaced by zemstvo district chiefs, whose positions were provided exclusively to nobles with a high property qualification. Unlike the magistrate's court, which was entrusted with achieving agreement between peasants and landowners, zemstvo leaders resolved all controversial issues individually, with an eye on the local state administration.

Education

Since students were considered the main source of freethinking, a breeding ground for republican ideas and all kinds of unrest, Russian universities became one of the first victims of the protective policy. The new university charter of 1884 abolished their autonomy. The university court was liquidated, and any student associations were prohibited. Teachers elected by academic councils were necessarily confirmed in office by the Minister of Education. The entire university life was now led by a government official - the trustee of the educational district: he appointed deans (one of the highest elected positions of the university), had the right to convene the academic council, attend its meetings, and oversee teaching. The state did not forget to remind students about the “obligation to fulfill military duty”: benefits for conscription into the army for those with a higher education were limited, and the minimum period of military service was increased.

The inspirer and main organizer of counter-reforms in the field of education, Count I. D. Delyanov (1818-1897), Minister of Public Education since 1882, also authored the notorious circular “about cooks’ children.” This document recommended limiting the admission to gymnasiums and pre-gymnasiums of “children of coachmen, footmen, cooks, laundresses, small shopkeepers and similar people, whose children, with the exception of those gifted with extraordinary abilities, should not be taken out of the environment to which they belong.” The enrollment of persons of Jewish nationality in secondary and higher educational institutions was reduced. The circular, however, did not have any real consequences, remaining in the history of Russian education as an example of the exceptional limitations of government officials.

Seal

The first experience of freedom of speech was interrupted after the approval in August 1882 of the new “Temporary Rules on the Press” (which became permanent). The administration received the right to close any newspapers and magazines and deprive publishers and editors of the right to continue their professional activities. The editors were obliged to disclose the pseudonyms of their authors at the request of the authorities. Censorship has increased.

In accordance with the new legislation, in 1884 the magazine Otechestvennye zapiski, hated by the government, whose editor was M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, ceased to exist. But the newspaper of M. N. Katkov (1818-1887) “Moskovskie Vedomosti” flourished. Precisely in the 80s. This marks the final period of the activity of this famous Russian publicist, who at one time was known as a liberal and did a lot to expand the range of issues allowed for discussion in the press. But from the mid-60s, and especially after the establishment of a new government course under Alexander III, Katkov contributed greatly to strengthening the protective spirit and intolerance of those in power in the country. Possessing great journalistic talent and a reputation as a liberal, he managed to instill doubt in the minds of his readers about the need to continue the reforms, which he declared in general as “unsuccessful”: “A few more months, perhaps weeks of the previous regime,” he wrote on the occasion of the manifesto on April 29 1881 - and the collapse would have been inevitable."

Counter-reforms in the socio-economic sphere

The reactionary nature of the government of Alexander III was also evident in the socio-economic sphere. An attempt to protect the interests of bankrupt landowners led to a tougher policy towards the peasantry, as a result of which, in order to prevent the emergence of a rural bourgeoisie, family divisions of peasants were limited and obstacles were raised to the alienation of peasant plots. However, in the context of a deteriorating international situation, the government could not help but encourage the development of capitalist relations, primarily in the field of industrial production, although it did not do this very consistently. Priority was given to enterprises and industries of strategic importance. A policy was pursued of their encouragement and state protection, which actually turned them into monopolists. As a result of these actions, threatening imbalances grew, which could lead to economic and social upheaval.

V. Klyuchevsky: “Alexander III raised Russian historical thought, Russian national consciousness.”

Education and start of activity

Alexander III (Alexander Alexandrovich Romanov) was born in February 1845. He was the second son of Emperor Alexander II and Empress Maria Alexandrovna.

His older brother Nikolai Alexandrovich was considered the heir to the throne, so the younger Alexander was preparing for a military career. But the premature death of his older brother in 1865 unexpectedly changed the fate of the 20-year-old young man, who faced the need to succeed to the throne. He had to change his intentions and start getting a more fundamental education. Among Alexander Alexandrovich’s teachers were the most famous people of that time: the historian S. M. Solovyov, Y. K. Grot, who taught him the history of literature, M. I. Dragomirov taught him the art of war. But the greatest influence on the future emperor was exerted by the teacher of law K. P. Pobedonostsev, who during the reign of Alexander served as chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod and had great influence on state affairs.

In 1866, Alexander married the Danish princess Dagmara (in Orthodoxy - Maria Fedorovna). Their children: Nicholas (later Russian Emperor Nicholas II), George, Ksenia, Mikhail, Olga. The last family photograph taken in Livadia shows, from left to right: Tsarevich Nicholas, Grand Duke George, Empress Maria Feodorovna, Grand Duchess Olga, Grand Duke Michael, Grand Duchess Xenia and Emperor Alexander III.

The last family photo of Alexander III

Before ascending the throne, Alexander Alexandrovich was the appointed ataman of all Cossack troops, and was the commander of the troops of the St. Petersburg Military District and the Guards Corps. Since 1868 he was a member of the State Council and the Committee of Ministers. Participated in the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, commanded the Rushchuk detachment in Bulgaria. After the war, he participated in the creation of the Voluntary Fleet, a joint-stock shipping company (together with Pobedonostsev), which was supposed to promote the government’s foreign economic policy.

Emperor's personality

S.K. Zaryanko "Portrait of Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich in a retinue frock coat"

Alexander III was not like his father, neither in appearance, nor in character, nor in habits, nor in his mentality. He was distinguished by his very large height (193 cm) and strength. In his youth, he could bend a coin with his fingers and break a horseshoe. Contemporaries note that he was devoid of external aristocracy: he preferred unpretentiousness in clothing, modesty, was not inclined to comfort, liked to spend his leisure time in a narrow family or friendly circle, was thrifty, and adhered to strict moral rules. S.Yu. Witte described the emperor this way: “He made an impression with his impressiveness, the calmness of his manners and, on the one hand, extreme firmness, and on the other hand, the complacency in his face... in appearance, he looked like a big Russian peasant from the central provinces, he was most approached a suit: short fur coat, jacket and bast shoes; and yet, with his appearance, which reflected his enormous character, beautiful heart, complacency, justice and at the same time firmness, he undoubtedly impressed, and, as I said above, if they had not known that he was an emperor, he would entered the room in any suit, - undoubtedly, everyone would pay attention to him.”

He had a negative attitude towards the reforms of his father, Emperor Alexander II, as he saw their unfavorable consequences: the growth of bureaucracy, the plight of the people, imitation of the West, corruption in the government. He had a dislike for liberalism and the intelligentsia. His political ideal: patriarchal-paternal autocratic rule, religious values, strengthening of the class structure, nationally distinctive social development.

The emperor and his family lived mainly in Gatchina due to the threat of terrorism. But he lived for a long time in both Peterhof and Tsarskoe Selo. He didn't really like the Winter Palace.

Alexander III simplified court etiquette and ceremony, reduced the staff of the Ministry of the Court, significantly reduced the number of servants, and introduced strict control over the spending of money. He replaced expensive foreign wines at court with Crimean and Caucasian wines, and limited the number of balls per year to four.

At the same time, the emperor did not spare money to purchase objects of art, which he knew how to appreciate, since in his youth he studied drawing with professor of painting N. I. Tikhobrazov. Later, Alexander Alexandrovich resumed his studies together with his wife Maria Fedorovna under the guidance of academician A.P. Bogolyubov. During his reign, Alexander III, due to his workload, left this occupation, but retained his love for art throughout his life: the emperor collected an extensive collection of paintings, graphics, objects of decorative and applied art, and sculptures, which after his death was transferred to the foundation founded by the Russian Emperor Nicholas II in memory of his father, Russian Museum.

The emperor was fond of hunting and fishing. Belovezhskaya Pushcha became his favorite hunting spot.

On October 17, 1888, the royal train in which the emperor was traveling crashed near Kharkov. There were casualties among the servants in the seven wrecked carriages, but the royal family remained intact. During the crash, the roof of the dining car collapsed; as is known from eyewitness accounts, Alexander held the roof on his shoulders until his children and wife got out of the carriage and help arrived.

But soon after this, the emperor began to feel pain in his lower back - the concussion from the fall damaged his kidneys. The disease gradually developed. The Emperor began to feel unwell more and more often: his appetite disappeared and heart problems began. Doctors diagnosed him with nephritis. In the winter of 1894, he caught a cold, and the disease quickly began to progress. Alexander III was sent for treatment to Crimea (Livadia), where he died on October 20, 1894.

On the day of the emperor’s death and in the previous last days of his life, Archpriest John of Kronstadt was next to him, who laid his hands on the head of the dying man at his request.

The emperor's body was taken to St. Petersburg and buried in the Peter and Paul Cathedral.

Domestic policy

Alexander II intended to continue his reforms. The Loris-Melikov project (called the “constitution”) received the highest approval, but on March 1, 1881, the emperor was killed by terrorists, and his successor curtailed the reforms. Alexander III, as mentioned above, did not support the policies of his father; moreover, K. P. Pobedonostsev, who was the leader of the conservative party in the government of the new tsar, had a strong influence on the new emperor.

This is what he wrote to the emperor in the first days after his accession to the throne: “... it’s a terrible hour and time is running out. Either save Russia and yourself now, or never. If they sing the old siren songs to you about how you need to calm down, you need to continue in the liberal direction, you need to give in to so-called public opinion - oh, for God’s sake, don’t believe it, Your Majesty, don’t listen. This will be death, the death of Russia and yours: this is clear to me as day.<…>The insane villains who destroyed your Parent will not be satisfied with any concession and will only become furious. They can be appeased, the evil seed can be torn out only by fighting them to the death and to the stomach, with iron and blood. It is not difficult to win: until now everyone wanted to avoid the fight and deceived the late Emperor, you, themselves, everyone and everything in the world, because they were not people of reason, strength and heart, but flabby eunuchs and magicians.<…>do not leave Count Loris-Melikov. I don't believe him. He is a magician and can also play doubles.<…>The new policy must be announced immediately and decisively. It is necessary to end at once, right now, all talk about freedom of the press, about the willfulness of meetings, about a representative assembly<…>».

After the death of Alexander II, a struggle developed between liberals and conservatives in the government; at a meeting of the Committee of Ministers, the new emperor, after some hesitation, nevertheless accepted the project drawn up by Pobedonostsev, which is known as the Manifesto on the Inviolability of Autocracy. This was a departure from the previous liberal course: liberal-minded ministers and dignitaries (Loris-Melikov, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, Dmitry Milyutin) resigned; Ignatiev (Slavophile) became the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs; he issued a circular that read: “... the great and broadly conceived transformations of the past Reign did not bring all the benefits that the Tsar-Liberator had the right to expect from them. The Manifesto of April 29 indicates to us that the Supreme Power has measured the enormity of the evil from which our Fatherland is suffering and has decided to begin to eradicate it...”

The government of Alexander III pursued a policy of counter-reforms that limited the liberal reforms of the 1860s and 70s. A new University Charter was issued in 1884, which abolished the autonomy of higher education. The entry into gymnasiums of children of the lower classes was limited (“circular about cooks’ children,” 1887). Since 1889, peasant self-government began to be subordinate to zemstvo chiefs from local landowners, who combined administrative and judicial power in their hands. Zemstvo (1890) and city (1892) regulations tightened the administration's control over local self-government and limited the rights of voters from the lower strata of the population.

During his coronation in 1883, Alexander III announced to the volost elders: “Follow the advice and guidance of your leaders of the nobility.” This meant the protection of the class rights of the noble landowners (the establishment of the Noble Land Bank, the adoption of the Regulations on Hiring for Agricultural Work, which was beneficial for the landowners), strengthening of administrative guardianship over the peasantry, conservation of the community and the large patriarchal family. Attempts were made to increase the social role of the Orthodox Church (the spread of parochial schools), and repressions against Old Believers and sectarians were intensified. On the outskirts, a policy of Russification was carried out, the rights of foreigners (especially Jews) were limited. A percentage norm was established for Jews in secondary and then higher educational institutions (within the Pale of Settlement - 10%, outside the Pale - 5, in the capitals - 3%). A policy of Russification was pursued. In the 1880s. Instruction in Russian was introduced in Polish universities (previously, after the uprising of 1862-1863, it was introduced there in schools). In Poland, Finland, the Baltic states, and Ukraine, the Russian language was introduced in institutions, on railways, on posters, etc.

But the reign of Alexander III was not characterized only by counter-reforms. Redemption payments were lowered, the mandatory redemption of peasant plots was legalized, and a peasant land bank was established to enable peasants to obtain loans to purchase land. In 1886, the poll tax was abolished, and an inheritance and interest tax were introduced. In 1882, restrictions were introduced on factory work by minors, as well as on night work by women and children. At the same time, the police regime and the class privileges of the nobility were strengthened. Already in 1882-1884, new rules were issued on the press, libraries and reading rooms, called temporary, but in force until 1905. This was followed by a number of measures expanding the benefits of the landed nobility - the law on escheat of noble property (1883), the organization long-term loan for noble landowners, in the form of the establishment of a noble land bank (1885), instead of the all-class land bank projected by the Minister of Finance.

I. Repin "Reception of volost elders by Alexander III in the courtyard of the Petrovsky Palace in Moscow"

During the reign of Alexander III, 114 new military vessels were built, including 17 battleships and 10 armored cruisers; The Russian fleet ranked third in the world after England and France. The army and the military department were put in order after their disorganization during the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, which was facilitated by the complete trust shown to Minister Vannovsky and the chief of the main staff Obruchev by the emperor, who did not allow outside interference in their activities.

The influence of Orthodoxy in the country increased: the number of church periodicals increased, the circulation of spiritual literature increased; parishes closed during the previous reign were restored, intensive construction of new churches was underway, the number of dioceses within Russia increased from 59 to 64.

During the reign of Alexander III, there was a sharp decrease in protests, in comparison with the second half of the reign of Alexander II, and a decline in the revolutionary movement in the mid-80s. Terrorist activity has also decreased. After the assassination of Alexander II, there was only one successful attempt by Narodnaya Volya (1882) on the Odessa prosecutor Strelnikov and a failed attempt (1887) on Alexander III. After this, there were no more terrorist attacks in the country until the beginning of the 20th century.

Foreign policy

During the reign of Alexander III, Russia did not wage a single war. For this Alexander III received the name Peacemaker.

The main directions of the foreign policy of Alexander III:

Balkan policy: strengthening Russia's position.

Peaceful relations with all countries.

Search for loyal and reliable allies.

Determination of the southern borders of Central Asia.

Politics in the new territories of the Far East.

After the 5-century Turkish yoke as a result of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. Bulgaria gained its statehood in 1879 and became a constitutional monarchy. Russia expected to find an ally in Bulgaria. At first it was like this: the Bulgarian Prince A. Battenberg pursued a friendly policy towards Russia, but then Austrian influence began to prevail, and in May 18881 a coup d’etat took place in Bulgaria, led by Battenberg himself - he abolished the constitution and became an unlimited ruler, pursuing a pro-Austrian policy. The Bulgarian people did not approve of this and did not support Battenberg; Alexander III demanded the restoration of the constitution. In 1886 A. Battenberg abdicated the throne. In order to prevent Turkish influence on Bulgaria again, Alexander III advocated strict compliance with the Berlin Treaty; invited Bulgaria to solve its own problems in foreign policy, recalled the Russian military without interfering in Bulgarian-Turkish affairs. Although the Russian ambassador in Constantinople announced to the Sultan that Russia would not allow a Turkish invasion. In 1886, diplomatic relations were severed between Russia and Bulgaria.

N. Sverchkov "Portrait of Emperor Alexander III in the uniform of the Life Guards Hussar Regiment"

At the same time, Russia's relations with England are becoming more complicated as a result of clashes of interests in Central Asia, the Balkans and Turkey. At the same time, relations between Germany and France were also becoming complicated, so France and Germany began to look for opportunities for rapprochement with Russia in case of war between themselves - it was provided for in the plans of Chancellor Bismarck. But Emperor Alexander III kept William I from attacking France using family ties, and in 1891 a Russian-French alliance was concluded for as long as the Triple Alliance existed. The agreement had a high degree of secrecy: Alexander III warned the French government that if the secret was disclosed, the alliance would be dissolved.

In Central Asia, Kazakhstan, the Kokand Khanate, the Bukhara Emirate, the Khiva Khanate were annexed, and the annexation of the Turkmen tribes continued. During the reign of Alexander III, the territory of the Russian Empire increased by 430 thousand square meters. km. This was the end of the expansion of the borders of the Russian Empire. Russia avoided war with England. In 1885, an agreement was signed on the creation of Russian-British military commissions to determine the final borders of Russia and Afghanistan.

At the same time, Japan's expansion was intensifying, but it was difficult for Russia to conduct military operations in that area due to the lack of roads and Russia's weak military potential. In 1891, construction of the Great Siberian Railway began in Russia - the Chelyabinsk-Omsk-Irkutsk-Khabarovsk-Vladivostok railway line (approx. 7 thousand km). This could dramatically increase Russia's forces in the Far East.

Results of the board

During the 13 years of the reign of Emperor Alexander III (1881–1894), Russia made a strong economic breakthrough, created industry, rearmed the Russian army and navy, and became the world's largest exporter of agricultural products. It is very important that Russia lived in peace throughout the years of Alexander III’s reign.

The years of the reign of Emperor Alexander III are associated with the flourishing of Russian national culture, art, music, literature and theater. He was a wise philanthropist and collector.

During difficult times for him, P.I. Tchaikovsky repeatedly received financial support from the emperor, which is noted in the composer’s letters.

S. Diaghilev believed that for Russian culture Alexander III was the best of the Russian monarchs. It was under him that Russian literature, painting, music and ballet began to flourish. Great art, which later glorified Russia, began under Emperor Alexander III.

He played an outstanding role in the development of historical knowledge in Russia: under him, the Russian Imperial Historical Society, of which he was chairman, began to actively work. The Emperor was the creator and founder of the Historical Museum in Moscow.

On the initiative of Alexander, a patriotic museum was created in Sevastopol, the main exhibition of which was the Panorama of the Sevastopol Defense.

Under Alexander III, the first university was opened in Siberia (Tomsk), a project was prepared for the creation of the Russian Archaeological Institute in Constantinople, the Russian Imperial Palestine Society began to operate, and Orthodox churches were built in many European cities and in the East.

The greatest works of science, culture, art, literature, from the reign of Alexander III are the great achievements of Russia, of which we are still proud.

“If Emperor Alexander III had been destined to continue reigning for as many years as he reigned, then his reign would have been one of the greatest reigns of the Russian Empire” (S.Yu. Witte).