What were the political views of Nicholas 2. Politics of Nicholas II. What did he devote his leisure to

Question 01. What were the personal qualities and political views of Nicholas II?

Answer. Nicholas II, according to his contemporaries, was a small-scale man. An excellent family man and a diligent person, he could become an excellent member of society, but the role of head of society was beyond his strength. Politically, he was a conservative and agreed only under the influence of extraordinary circumstances, even to those minor reforms that he carried out.

Question 02. What was the difference between the political programs of S. Yu. Witte and VK Pleve?

Answer. S.Yu. Witte and V.K. Plehve rather than being engaged in a dispute between a liberal and a conservative, but continued the long-standing dispute between the Westernizer and the Slavophile. The first saw the salvation of Russia in the continuation of modernization, believed that in the course of the growth of industrial production, as in the rest of the world, here the bourgeoisie would oust the nobility, and the government would receive funds to strengthen the power of the country and at the same time for social reforms. VC. Plehve, on the contrary, defended a special path of development for Russia, although he recognized the need for some reforms.

Question 03. What is “Zubatov socialism”? What are its main ideas?

Answer. "Zubatov's socialism" is an attempt to destroy the workers' faith in revolutionary organizations, to convince them that their interests coincide with the interests of a government that opposes the interests of the bourgeoisie. S.V. Zubatov did his best to maintain a balance between the forces and interests of the classes.

Question 04. What are the reasons for the growth of dissatisfaction in society with the policies of Nicholas II?

Answer. Causes:

1) students demanded the restoration of the autonomy of universities;

2) workers suffered from difficult working conditions and low wages;

3) peasants suffered from land shortages;

4) in Russian Empire the National Question was not resolved;

5) the Pale of Settlement and other anti-Jewish laws, as well as anti-Jewish sentiments in society, remained.

Question 05. What requirements were included in the RSDLP program?

Answer. Program:

1) overthrow of the autocracy;

2) transformation of Russia into a democratic republic;

3) universal suffrage;

4) democratic freedoms;

5) broad local self-government;

6) the right of nations to self-determination;

7) equality of all nationalities in Russia;

8) the return of plots of land to the peasants;

9) cancellation of redemption and quitrent payments, return to peasants of what was paid earlier;

10) 8-hour working day;

11) cancellation of fines and overtime work;

12) the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat for the transition to socialism.

Question 06. What are the features of the program and tactics of the SRs?

Answer. Peculiarities:

1) the Socialist-Revolutionaries tried to rely not on one class, but on the whole, as they called it, "working class", which in fact included the peasantry, the proletariat, and the intelligentsia;

2) after the overthrow of the autocracy on the conviction of the Social Revolutionaries, the further fate of Russia will have to be decided by a popularly elected Constituent Assembly;

3) the Social Revolutionaries did not recognize the right of peoples to complete national independence, but advocated the transformation of Russia into a federation;

4) individual terror was one of the main means of struggle of the Socialist-Revolutionaries.

Question 07. How did the positions of the revolutionary and liberal forces differ?

Answer. The main difference is that the liberals advocated reforming the state, while the revolutionaries advocated the overthrow of the current government by violent means. In addition, the liberal movement was distinguished by a greater diversity of slogans, some of their currents even suggested preserving the monarchy, but with the transformation of the state system.

The personality of the ruler is revealed in his plans and deeds. Even before the coronation, Nicholas II emphasized that he would adhere to the principles of his father's government. Alexander III in the field of international relations provided Russia for 13 years of peace. But he did not introduce his son to the main facts that determine the international position of Russia. Nicholas II became acquainted with the terms of the Franco-Russian alliance only when he became tsar. He set himself the goal of preventing military clashes, did not consider it possible and sufficient to rely on a military alliance. Nicholas II belongs to the idea of general and complete disarmament. The main proposals of the emperor were not accepted, although some progress was made on certain issues - the use of the most barbaric methods of war was prohibited and a permanent court was established for the peaceful settlement of disputes through rivalry and arbitration. The latter institution became the prototype for the League of Nations and the United Nations.

The reign of Nicholas II was the period of the highest rates of economic growth in the history of Russia and the USSR. For the years 1880-1910. industrial growth rates exceeded 9% per year. In terms of the growth rate of industrial production, Russia came out on top, outstripping the rapidly developing United States.

In the production of agricultural crops, Russia has taken the 1st place in the world, growing more than half of the world's rye production, more than 25% of wheat and oats, about 20% of barley, and about 25% of potatoes. Russia became the main exporter of agricultural products, the first "breadbasket of Europe", which accounted for 20% of all world exports of peasant products. The rapid development of the level of industry and agricultural production allowed Russia during the reign of Nicholas II to have a stable convertible currency. The economic policy of the reign of Nicholas II was based on the principles of the most favorable treatment for all healthy economic forces through preferential taxation and lending, assistance in the organization of All-Russian industrial fairs, the all-round development of means of communication and communication. Nicholas II attached great importance to the development railways... The rise of industrial production during the reign is largely associated with the development of new factory legislation, one of the active creators of which was the emperor himself, as the country's main legislator. The purpose of the new factory legislation was, on the one hand, to streamline relations between employers and workers, and on the other, to improve the position of workers living on industrial earnings. The law of June 2, 1897 introduced the rationing of the working day. Another law, with the direct participation of Nicholas II, was on the remuneration of workers who suffered from accidents (1903). The tsar actively contributed to the development of Russian culture, art, science, reforms of the army and navy. One of the first acts of Nicholas II was an order on the allocation of significant funds to help needy scientists, writers and publicists, as well as widows and orphans (1895). In 1896, a new charter on privileges for inventions was introduced. Already the first years of the reign of Nicholas II led to brilliant intellectual and cultural achievements, later called the "Russian Renaissance" or the Silver Age of Russia.

In 1913, Russia celebrated the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty on an extraordinary scale. The jubilee was marked by magnificent celebrations, magnificent parades, and folk festivals. Luxurious publications have been published dedicated to the history of the reigning house. The country was optimistic about the future. Forecasts were different, but no one could have imagined that the mighty, seemingly full of strength empire is living out its last years.

A year later, the war began. From the balcony of the Winter Palace, Nicholas II himself read out the manifesto about the beginning of the war. This was the period of the Tsar's greatest confidence. The tsar regularly travels to the Headquarters to the front, to the rear, to factories. He himself visits hospitals and infirmaries, rewards officers and soldiers. Nicholas II saw that his presence inspired the soldiers, especially if he was with his son Alexei. P. Gilliard wrote: “The presence of the Heir next to the sovereign arouses interest in the soldiers, and when he departed, one could hear how they whisper exchanging impressions about his age, height, facial expression, etc. But most of all they were amazed that the Tsarevich was in a simple soldier's uniform, which was no different from the one worn by a team of soldiers' children. ”

Russia was not ready for war, there was only determination to win. Nicholas II decided to head the front command himself. The spirit of defeatism reigned in the rear, and anti-monarchist groups began to form. Nicholas II did not yet know that autocracy practically no longer existed. Later he wrote: "... around treason, betrayal and cowardice ...", Nicholas II was left alone. An organized smear campaign was conducted to discredit the king. They did not hesitate to use the most vile and dirty accusations - espionage in favor of the Germans, complete moral decay. An increasing part of the educated society of Russia is being rejected from Russian traditions and ideals and is taking the side of these destructive forces.

Of interest is the deep assessment of the events that took place on the eve of the death of the Russian emperor, given by W. Churchill in his book "The World Crisis of 1916-1918". “... In March, the king was on the throne. The Russian Empire and the Russian army held out, the front was secured and the victory was undeniable. ... According to the superficial fashion of our time, it is customary to interpret the tsarist system as blind, rotten, and incapable of tyranny. But an analysis of the 30 months of war with Germany and Austria should correct these lightweight ideas. We can measure the strength of the Russian Empire by the blows that it endured, by the disasters that it experienced, by the inexhaustible forces that it developed, and by the restoration of the forces that it was capable of ... ”.

In an atmosphere of growing confrontation, Nicholas II was forced to abdicate in order to avoid bloodshed. It was the tragic finest hour of Nicholas II. Nicholas II was separated from his family. On March 21, the Empress was arrested in Tsarskoe Selo, on the same day Nicholas II was to be arrested. For the first time in 23 years, he did not need to read reports, make ministers and make final decisions on issues of state importance. Nikolai got the opportunity to manage the time at his own discretion: read, smoke, study with children, play snowballs, walk in the park, and began to read the Bible.

Using a movie camera donated before the revolution by the "Pate" cinematographic company to Alexei, Nikolai organized screenings of films in the evenings. Alexey played the role of a sedate host, inviting everyone to his room to watch films. Count Benckendorff, a frequent guest at these evenings, recalled: “He is very smart and intelligent, he has a pronounced character and a wonderful heart. If we manage to cope with his illness and if God gives him life, he will play an important role in the future in the revival of our unfortunate country. His character was shaped by the suffering of his parents and his own, experienced in childhood. Maybe God will be pleased to have mercy and save him and the whole family from the fanatics, in whose clutches they are now. "

The Provisional Government placed responsibility for the safety of the imperial family entirely on the shoulders of Kerensky, who later admitted that, during close communication with the tsar during these weeks, he was struck by “modesty and the complete absence of any posture. This naturalness in behavior, unplayed simplicity created a special attractive force and charm of the emperor, which were intensified even more sharply by amazing eyes, deep and tragic ... ”. For security reasons, it was decided to move the royal family to Tobolsk. After the conclusion of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty, the royal family was transported to Yekaterinburg, where they all became truly prisoners. The guards behaved insolently and defiantly. Except for daily walks in the garden at noon, the family's life was confined to the four walls of their rooms. Nikolai and Alexandra read, the girls knitted and embroidered, Alexei played in bed with a model ship. The Ural Soviet unanimously decided to shoot the entire royal family as soon as possible and destroy all traces of what had been done. Despite attempts to hide forever how the royal family was killed, the circumstances of this cruel act of vandalism became known to the world. The perpetrators of this murder and desecration of the remains are condemned today by people.

10 years ago, the family of Nicholas II was canonized by the Russian Church. In Yekaterinburg, at the site of their tragic death in early 1990, a cross was erected in their memory, at the foot of which fresh flowers are constantly lying. Several months ago, a cross to all the Romanovs was installed at the Vagankovskoye cemetery. This cross has become a symbol of Russia's return to spiritual roots, a symbol of spiritual Resurrection.

2. Formation of views of Nicholas I

After the coronation, the emperor begins the business of government. But Nicholas did not know at the time of his accession to the throne what Russia was. He himself said that as a brigadier general, he spent a lot of time in the General Staff, in the appropriate environment, and least of all thought about global issues. And here Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin had a tremendous influence on him, who during the remaining days of his life (and he did not live long) was Nikolai's first adviser, his educator, teacher, and in this capacity he managed to do a lot in a very short time.

To understand Karamzin's views on the course of Russian history, the purpose of Russia, on the specifics of the Russian state and Russian life, you need to read the "Note on old and new Russia." The book is published, and there is a lot of clever in it, although not everything should be agreed. We are talking about whether we should be a parliamentary republic or a presidential republic, should we return to the monarchy, or vice versa - go to the side February revolution? So, it would be nice to know what they thought on this issue very smart people who studied the history of Russia professionally. And in many respects Nicholas' views on the destiny of the monarch, on the importance of autocracy, on Russia as a whole were formed under the direct influence of Karamzin.

Every evening, he conducted conversations with Emperor Nicholas in the presence of his mother, Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna, and while maintaining complete delicacy, he mercilessly criticized the reign of Alexander I: his policy towards Poland, and his constitutional dreams, and much more, which once forced Maria Fedorovna exclaim: "Nikolai Mikhailovich, spare the heart of the mother!" To which Nikolai Mikhailovich replied: "I speak not only with the mother of the deceased sovereign, but also with the mother of the reigning one."

Therefore, in order to understand the direction of the internal and partly foreign policy of Emperor Nicholas, you should read Karamzin - his "Note on old and new Russia."

The second factor, which largely determined the activities of Emperor Nicholas, was the deep conviction that, having suppressed the Decembrist uprising on December 14, he saved the country. He remained in this conviction all his life and never parted with him. In general, he did not like to remember this story, did not like to remember the hanged. Sometimes on the papers sentencing someone to death, he wrote: "We have never had the death penalty, thank God, and it is not for us to introduce it." But he replaced the death penalty with 10 thousand blows (it was necessary to drive the guilty through the line of a thousand people 10 times), that is, he put the guilty under the gauntlet.

Soviet historians liked to talk about the cruelty of Emperor Nicholas, but we will discuss this: further, and now I will say that for all his shortcomings, Nicholas was a completely Orthodox person, although you cannot call him a theologian. Much was perceived by him very simply and clearly, it was not for nothing that he was a military man. There is one more aspect that I consider it necessary to touch upon. Leo Tolstoy has a story where Nicholas is depicted as a kind of voluptuary who seduces, taking advantage of his position, it is quite possible that sooner or later they will ask questions about the personal life of Emperor Nicholas, referring to this story. As far as I can tell, this is the usual libel. Tolstoy did not love the reigning house, and besides, being himself a man far from sinless, he rewarded many people with his own shortcomings, to whom he harbored hostility.

From the book The Russian Orthodox Church and L. N. Tolstoy. Conflict through the eyes of contemporaries the author Orekhanov Archpriest George

From the book Werewolf. Shards of the brown empire by Ruth Freiger

From the book Guerrilla Warfare. Strategy and tactics. 1941-1943 author Armstrong John

2. Compound "Graukopf" (experimental formation "Osintorf", experimental formation "Center") At the end of 1941, the German military intelligence and counterintelligence (Abwehr) began to form a special unit of Russian nationalists in the village of Osintorf,

From the book History of Russian Literature of the XIX century. Part 1. 1795-1830 the author Skibin Sergei Mikhailovich

Reflection of Krylov's philosophical, social and moral views in fables The problematic of Krylov's fables and his very understanding of the genre is directly related to the events of the turn of the 18th – 19th centuries. Being an enlightener in his views, a fabulist after the Great French

From the book Wars of the Roses. Yorkie vs Lancaster the author Ustinov Vadim Georgievich

2. The evolution of historical views Prince of Wales: And if, my lord, they had not recorded All this in the annals, it would still be true After all, it would have passed through all the centuries From mouth to mouth to the Last Judgment? William Shakespeare. Richard III, III, 1 According to English historical tradition, the Wars of the Roses represented

From the book History of Philosophy. Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome... Volume II the author Copleston Frederick

Chapter 34 A Brief Survey of the Peripatetic Views The Old Academy developed Plato's mathematical theory; the peripatetics continued empirical research, begun by Aristotle. They strictly adhered to the main provisions of the teacher's philosophical system, adding to it only

From the book Military Cunning the author Lobov Vladimir Nikolaevich

Development of views and judgments After the end of the war, the accumulated experience of using forms and methods military trick, unfortunately, was not sufficiently generalized and systematized, and the problem of military cunning did not receive its theoretical development. In the definition

From the book Masons: Born in Blood the author Robinson John J.

Chapter 20 The Mystery of Religious Views Freemasons constantly argue that Freemasonry should not be considered a religion, but the main condition for admission to membership in a Masonic organization is faith in God. The candidate must assure that he is not an atheist and believes in a Supreme Being,

From the book of Kabbalah in the context of history and modernity the author Laitman Michael

From the book Vigilance is our weapon the author Team of authors

The bearers of bourgeois views are our hidden enemies It would be a mistake to think that with the liquidation of the exploiting classes in the USSR, international capital has lost any opportunity to recruit its agents inside our country. Eliminating the exploiting class means

From the book Natural Science, Philosophy and the Sciences of Human Behavior in the Soviet Union author Graham Lauren R.

Revision of views on materialism and epistemology by Russian Marxists Russian Marxists showed a greater interest in the problems of epistemology and philosophy of nature than their Western European colleagues. G.V. Plekhanov, who can be called Lenin's teacher in matters

From the book The Unknown War. The truth about the First World War. Part 1 the author Team of authors

Alexander Stykalin Evolution of the views of the Hungarian philosopher György Lukács The name of György (Georg) Lukács (1885–1971) belongs to the history of the spiritual culture of several European countries. A native of Hungary, he received his philosophical education in Berlin and Heidelberg, was a member of

From the book Ukraine. Sleep of reason author Kalinina Assiya

3. A new system of views and politics So, in the period of loss of reference points, various Western theories hastened to take their place in our then only book market. They bear the joint name New Age. New Age - new system views, which originated in the XX

From the book The Grand Ducal Opposition in Russia 1915-1917. the author Bityukov Konstantin Olegovich

Chapter 1. Political evolution of the grand dukes Nikolai Nikolaevich and Nikolai Mikhailovich in 1915-1916. The Grand Dukes Nikolai Nikolaevich and Nikolai Mikhailovich were the central figures of the grand ducal entourage, therefore their political evolution until the beginning of the period

From the book Frigate "Pallas". A look from the XXI century the author Citizens Valery Arkadievich

Chapter 47. The world of views FAR EAST Literally the next day after leaving the Bay of Bonin-sim, that is, on August 5, 1853, the entire command staff of the frigate Pallas, free from watch, was assembled by Admiral Putyatin in the wardroom. The last instructions were coming

From the book History of Western Philosophy by Russell Bertrand

480 RUB | UAH 150 | $ 7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR," #FFFFCC ", BGCOLOR," # 393939 ");" onMouseOut = "return nd ();"> Dissertation - 480 rubles, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week

Shishlyannikova, Galina Ivanovna. Political views and state activities of Nicholas II: 1881 - February 1917 : dissertation ... candidate of historical sciences: 07.00.02 / Shishlyannikova Galina Ivanovna; [Place of protection: Tamb. state un-t them. G.R. Derzhavin] .- Voronezh, 2009.- 254 p .: ill. RSL OD, 61 09-7 / 601

Introduction

CHAPTER 1. The beginning of the reign and the conditions for the formation of political views of Nicholas II (1881-1905) 33

1.1. Conditions and factors in the formation of political views of Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov (1881-1894) 33

1.2. The first period of the reign of Nicholas II: the formation of a conservative policy (1894 -1905) 65

CHAPTER 2. Political views and state activities of Emperor Nicholas II after the first Russian revolution (October 1905-February 1917) 139

2.1. State activities and political views of Nicholas II in the context of the socio-political development of the Russian Empire (October 1905-1914) 139

2.2. Transformation of political views and state activities of Nicholas II during the First World War (1914-February 1917) 181

Conclusion 231

List of sources and literature 2

Introduction to work

Relevance of the research topic. At present, the problem of the history of the formation and development of the political views of Emperor Nicholas II and his state activities is growing and is determined by the following circumstances:

the processes taking place in all spheres of modern Russia have changed a lot in our life, made us rethink most of the problems of Russian history, look more closely into our past, learn and understand the past, look for answers to the complex issues of our time facing society;

the fate of our state was determined by many historical circumstances, however, the activities of specific individuals, and especially those of supreme power, have always played a huge, often decisive role in the history of the state and society. A scientific study of their political activities, views allows you to find the connection between times and draw the historical conclusions that are necessary at the present stage;

after the canonization of the royal family, interest in the personality of the last Russian emperor Nicholas II (1894-1917) increased. In this regard, a lot of different kinds of publications and publications appeared with polar points of view on the political activity and political views of the monarch. However, the argumentation and analysis of this problem are often subjective, and sometimes just biased. An objective approach is needed to study the historical period of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, the place and role of Nicholas II in it as a prominent political figure of that era;

during the 22 - year reign of Nikolai I, certain reform measures, changes and transformations were carried out in Russian society, in which he played an important role. Moreover, Russia experienced a number of fateful historical events - the First Russian Revolution of 1905-1907, participated in two wars: with Japan (1904-1905) and in the First World War (1914-1918). The name of Nicholas II is associated with the crisis of autocracy in Russia, which was largely a consequence of his rule and which he never managed to overcome.

The degree of study of the problem: The historiographic base used in writing the dissertation is presented by the research of domestic and foreign historians.

The first group of studies on the political views and activities of Nicholas II appeared during his reign and in the first years after his abdication (1896 - 1919). This stage in the development of historiography was characterized by works in which there was open propaganda of his political course (research until February 1917) and sharp criticism of the personal

Nicholas Alexandrovich Romanov (after February 1917). Even during the life of the emperor in 1912, a unique book of its kind was published in Berlin by the historian and contemporary of Nicholas II V.P. Obninsky “The Last Autocrat. An Outline of the Life and Reign of the Emperor of Russia Nicholas II ”. 1 In Russia, this book was published only 80 years later, in 1992. In our opinion, the book of the joint venture is of great interest. Melgu-nova "The Last Autocrat: Traits for Characterizing Nicholas II" 2. In it, in contrast to the abundant sensational literature about last days Romanov, contains objective evidence of a contemporary, a famous historian and publicist, editor of the popular magazine "Voice of the Past" about the customs of the grand ducal and court environment during the reign of the last Russian emperor.

In 1918, researcher K.N. Levin published the book "The Last Russian Tsar Nicholas II", in which he revealed a wider spectrum of the emperor's activities than previous authors. The author emphasized the change in the views of the emperor after 1905. Nevertheless, all the works published in 1917 had several peculiarities: firstly, they are too subjective, and secondly, they are characterized by a high degree of emotionality.

In the 1920s -30s. a new stage began in the study of the activities of Nicholas II, when a number of works appeared, where the monarch and his political course were harshly criticized. An exception among the critical works about the monarch was the book by P. Gilliard "Emperor Nicholas II and his family" 3. The scientific and high research level of the material was presented in 1939 by the historian S.S. Oldenburg in the book "The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II" in two volumes. In 2006, the book was reissued 4.

In the mid-1980s. a new stage in the study of the political activities of the last Russian monarch began. Characteristic feature period was the so-called "new look", that is, a new approach to the prevailing stereotypes of historical thinking. In light of this, many historical figures and processes were rethought, including the political activities of Emperor Nicholas I.

1 See: V.P. Obninsky. The last autocrat. Sketch of life and kingdom
Emperor of Russia Nicholas I. Reprint edition. M .: Republic
ka, 1992.288s.

2 See: Melgunov SP. The last autocrat. Traits for characteristics
Nicholas I M: Moscow University Press, 1990.16 p.

3 See: P. Gilliard, Emperor Nicholas II and his family. Reprint edition.
M .: Megapolis, 1991.242s.

4 See: S.S. Oldenburg. Reign of Emperor Nicholas II. M .:
"DAR", 2006.607s.

In 1988, the magazine "Young Communist" published an article by K.F. Shatsillo "For deeds and will be rewarded ..." 5. The researcher tried to give an objective assessment of the political activities of Emperor Nicholas II. This article was the beginning of a wave of new publications in the press, where for several years various scientists argued about the identity of the last monarch and his role in the fate of the Russian Empire. In 1997, a monograph by Yu.N. Kryazhev "Nicholas II as a military-political leader of Russia" 6. For the first time in Russian historiography, he was able to reproduce the activities of the emperor in the military and political spheres as the supreme ruler of Russia.

The canonization of members of the family of Nicholas II was the reason for the increased interest of researchers and publicists in the activities of the last emperor at the turn of the XX - XXI centuries. In recent years, a number of works have appeared that differ in an objective approach to historical events and were written on the basis of a wide range of sources. These works include the monograph by A.N. Bokhanov "Emperor Nicholas II" 7.

Following these works in the late 1990s - early 2000s. other works were published, which praised the dignity of Nicholas II as a person, and did not speak at all about his political mistakes. In recent years, articles about Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov have appeared quite often on the pages of various periodicals. As a rule, almost all of them are dedicated to the tragic death of the emperor and tell about the mild and calm character of Nicholas II, about his family 8. The political views of the monarch remain outside the attention of the authors.

Interest in the personality of Nicholas II in foreign historiography remained steadily high throughout all periods. During these years, the works of historians A.S. Spiridovich, S. Haffner.

Today, the political activity of the last Russian autocrat is considered by many researchers. She presents

5 See: Shatsillo K.F. On business and will be rewarded ... // Young communist. -
1988. -No. 8.- S. 64-72.

6 See: Kryazhev Yu.N. Nicholas II as a military politician of Russia
sii.Kurgan, KSU, 1997, 198 p.

7 See: A.N. Bokhanov. Emperor Nikolay N / A.N. Bokhanov. - M .: Russkoe
Word, 2001, p. one

8 See: N. Sukhorukova He personified nobility: he grew up about the heir
of the Siysk throne to Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich (1843 -
1865) // Science and Religion. - 2004. - No. 7. - S. 18. -20; Sukhorukova N., Sukhoru-
kov Yu. He personified nobility: Nikolay Sh / Science and religion. -
2004.-№7.-p. 18-20.

interest for historians, political scientists, philosophers,

sociologists who consider the politics of Nicholas II from the point of view of history, political science, philosophy and sociology.

There are very few dissertation studies devoted specifically to the political activities of Nicholas II, so in our work we used works that indirectly relate to this problem. For example, the author's abstract of S.V. Bogdanov's dissertation “National and foreign experience in the formation and development of The State Duma and the State Council at the beginning of the XX century "9 and Babkina M.A. "The overthrow of the monarchy in Russia in 1917 and Orthodox Church" 10 .

The above analysis of the scientific literature on the topic of the dissertation showed that despite the seemingly sufficient study of the history of Russia in the late 19th - early 20th centuries, many aspects of the political history of this fateful period have not been sufficiently studied, some concepts require revision with the involvement of additional sources, new methodological approaches that allow you to analyze the topic from the standpoint modern level development historical science... The analysis of historiography led to the conclusion that there is no comprehensive work revealing the evolution of the political views of Emperor Nicholas II, as well as the presence of a variety of controversial judgments, opinions and approaches that require study and generalization. As a result, the problem of the evolution of the political views of the last emperor as a whole turned out to be both theoretically and historiographically fragmented and needs to further unite the efforts of domestic authors to create a comprehensive monograph on this issue, where, on the basis of a wide range of sources, the main stages of the evolution of political views of Nicholas II.

The purpose of this study is disclosure of the formation and development of political views of the last Russian autocrat in the conditions of the crisis of autocracy in the late 19th - early 20th centuries, analysis of the political views of the emperor and his state activities.

Tasks:

- to analyze the conditions that contributed to the formation of the political views of the heir to the throne (1881 -1894);

See: Bogdanov SV. National and foreign experience in the formation and functioning of the State Duma and the State Council at the beginning of the XX century / abstract of thesis ... Ph.D. M., 2003.29s. 10 See: M.A. Babkin The overthrow of the monarchy in Russia in 1917 and the Orthodox Church / abstract dis. ... Ph.D. M., 2003.24s.

to consider the influence of the political views of the emperor on his state activities;

explore the relationship of the emperor with leading statesmen;

to reveal the political position of Nicholas II during the First Russian Revolution;

trace the main stages of the formation of the political views of the last Russian monarch;

Show the mistakes and miscalculations of the monarch during the crisis
autocracy in the late XIX - early XX century.

Object of study - political views and state activities of Emperor Nicholas II.

Subject of study - evolution of political views of the last Russian emperor.

Chronological framework studies cover the period from 1881 to February 1917, that is, the period of the reign of Nicholas II. In addition to this period, the study fragmentarily includes the reign of Emperor Alexander III as the period of the formation of the political views of the heir to the throne. As part of the study, we have identified four stages in the evolution of the political views of the last Russian monarch. The first - 1881 - 1894, that is, the period when Nicholas II became the heir to the throne; the second - 1894 - 1905 - these are the first years of the reign of the young emperor before the start of the First Russian Revolution; the third - 1905 - 1914, when the monarch was required to make important political decisions to resolve crisis situations in the country; the fourth - 1914 - February 1917, the last years of the emperor's reign and the years of Russia's participation in the First World War.

Chronologically, the study is limited to the events of February 1917 related to the abdication of Nicholas II.

The territorial framework of the study. Proceeding from the fact that Nicholas II was the autocrat of Russia, then the territorial framework of the study can be considered the Russian Empire within its then borders.

Methodological basis of the research became the principles of historicism, objectivity, a systematic and concrete approach to the study of the political views of Nicholas II, which presuppose a critical attitude to sources, making judgments based on a comprehensive understanding of the aggregate of facts, as well as showing the phenomenon in development and in the context of the historical situation. Used such methods of historical analysis as comparative - historical, retrospective, chronological, quantitative.

When studying the evolution of political views and activities of Emperor Nicholas II, they are considered in interaction and

the influence of the socio - economic and political conditions of the Russian Empire (formational approach) and the influence of the human, personal factor (anthropological approach) on the formation of political views of Nicholas II.

Characteristics of sources.

All sources used in the study can be divided into four groups: 1) official documentary materials; 2) diaries and memoirs; 3) epistolary sources; 4) journalism. The main sources in the work were memoirs and epistolary materials, published and archival, many of which have not yet been used in research literature, but to one degree or another characterize the political activities of Nicholas II. The most significant and main body of sources are archival materials. The author used documents from the State Archives Russian Federation(GARF), where the "Emperor Nicholas II" fund is kept. 27 funds were studied, including more than 130 cases. The sources located there are divided into two types. The first includes documents from the collections of members of the imperial family. Of particular scientific interest for our dissertation research is the personal fund of the last Russian monarch.

Documents from the personal fund of the last monarch No. 601, which are now in the State Archives of the Russian Federation, are divided into 12 sections according to specific and thematic characteristics. This greatly facilitates the research process and the search for the desired document. In most of the headings of the fund, materials are systematized chronologically, manuscripts and letters alphabetically by the names of the authors. Romanovs, foreign emperors, kings and members of their families are included in the alphabet by name, others are princes, dukes, etc. - by surnames (names of holdings).

Thus, the huge in scale and significance fund No. 601 "Emperor Nicholas II" continues to play its historical role and keeps the secrets of the past, some of which are no longer secrets, while others have yet to be solved by researchers. Nowhere else is there such a volume of reliable material about the life of the last monarch. For a more objective picture of the historical events of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, we used materials not only from the fund of Emperor Nikolai Romanov, but also from members of his family - fund no. 640 "Empress Alexandra Feodorovna", fund no. 682 "Tsarevich Alexei Nikolaevich", fund no. 642 "Empress Maria Feodorovna", fund No. 651 "Tatiana Nikolaevna Romanova", fund No. 673 "Olga Nikolaevna Romanova", fund No. 668 "Mikhail Alexandrovich, son of Alexander III", etc.

The second type of archival documents of the GARF is

materials from the funds of the emperor's associates: G.E. Rasputin (fund no. 612), M.V. Rodzianko (fund no. 605), G.A. Gapon (fund no. 478), A.A. Vyrubova (fund no. 623), A.E. Derevenko (fund no. 705), M.F. Kshesinskaya (fund no. 616), V.E. Lvov (fund no. 982), A.A. Mosolov (fund no. 1001), D.D. Protopopov (fund No. 585), P.D-Svyatopolk-Mirsky (fund No. 1729), D.F. Trepov (fund number 595) and others, which contain reviews and testimonies of contemporaries about the political views of the monarch.

The second group of sources includes diaries and memoirs. Diaries, in our opinion, are more reliable sources than memoirs. From this type of sources, the diaries of Nicholas II Romanov ", General A. N. Kuropatknna, Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich, General A. A. Kireev, A. A. Polovtsev, V. N. Lamsdorf, A. S. Suvorin, Generals D. A. Milyutin and V. A. Sukhomlinov and others.

The diary of Nicholas II is of particular interest for our study. It contains the daily records of the emperor. The diary characterizes the author's intelligence extremely vividly. It reflects only external events: weather, daily routine, guests, hunting results, etc. He was extremely pedantic: he recorded all the little things - how many miles he walked, how long he walked, who came to visit, what was the weather on the street, etc. the political events themselves are just a dry statement of facts. Much attention is paid to family life. The diary often mentioned meetings with ministers and other high-ranking officials, but the content of these meetings was not set forth, just as the emperor's reasoning about domestic politics was not set forth, even during the periods of the crisis of the monarchy and the First Russian Revolution of 1905-1907. Therefore, the diary of Emperor Nicholas II does not reveal the evolution of his political views. Its only merit is its historical accuracy.

The diary of the Minister of War A.N. Kuro-patkina 12. This document forms an idea of the political views of the emperor. The diary mentions the Tsar's instructions to the Minister of War and contains some criticism of the Emperor.

The period of the formation of the views of the future emperor is highlighted in the diary of his uncle, the Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich, who respected his royal nephew, together

1 See: Diaries of Emperor Nicholas II / ed. K.F. Shazillo. M .: Orbita, 1991, 737s.

12 See: A.N. Kuropatkin. Diaries // Nicholas II: Memories. Diaries. - SPb .: Pushkin Foundation, 1994.S. 37 - 45.

10 however, he was perfectly aware that the latter, having become emperor, by his actions only compromised the imperial house and led Russia to ruin. A similar point of view was expressed in his memoirs by another uncle of Nicholas II, Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich 13.

In the 1920s and 30s. memoirs of A.I. Denikin, F. Vinberg, N.L. Zhevakhova, N.A. Sokolova, O. Traube, V.N. Kokovtsov and V.N. Voeikova. They first published unknown facts from the life of Nicholas II and his political activities, as well as various opinions were expressed regarding the evolution of the political views of the monarch from the point of view of his inner circle.

This group of sources is supplemented by "Memoirs" by CY. Witte, published in 1960 in 3 volumes. They give a very peculiar characterization of the last autocrat. Assessing the mental wretchedness of the emperor, XU. At the same time, Witte tried to soften his characterization, emphasizing the gallantry and upbringing of Nicholas II. In 1989, the memoirs of the monarchist V.V. Shulgin "Days" 14. The most important merit of this publication was the fact that the author himself was present at the signing of the abdication by Nicholas II.

Like Witte, in his memoirs, the former head of the office of the Ministry of the Imperial Court A. Mosolov 15. Far from embellishing the tsar, noting many of his weaknesses, the author of the memoirs remained a sincere monarchist, and not only on paper: in 1918 he tried to save the emperor's life.

All diaries and memories used in the dissertation research overlap in content with each other and directly or indirectly answer the questions posed in the work.

The third group of sources is epistolary. For the study of the evolution of the political views of Emperor Nicholas II, this type of sources becomes even more important than memoirs. The emperor's letters, in our opinion, are more sincere than the laconic diary entries; they were written under the fresh impression of the events that took place and in most cases are devoid of the apologetic orientation inherent in diaries. The letters of K.P. Pobedonostsev to Nicholas II. They reveal to us the secret sides of the reactionary policy of Alexander III and his son, and also testify to the role that the powerful figure of K.P. Defeat

13 See: Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich: Book of Memoirs / Pre-
disl. A. Vinogradova. Moscow: Sovremennik, 1991, 271s.

14 See: V.V. Shulgin. Days. 1920: scrapbook. M .: Sovremennik, 1989.559s.

15 See: A.A. Mosolov. At the court of the last emperor. Notes on
Chief of the Chancellery of the Ministry of the Court. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 1992, 262s.

Donostsev on the formation of the political views of the last Russian monarch. Great importance have publications of these letters 1923 16 and 1925 17. True, they contain more information about the politics of Alexander III than about his son. Most of the letters to K.P. Pobedonostsev to Nicholas II has not yet been published and is kept in the State Archive of the Russian Federation (f. 601).

Of great interest for our research is the correspondence of members of the imperial family, especially letters from the emperor to his mother Maria Feodorovna and his wife Alexandra Feodorovna. Nicholas II's letters to his mother have not yet been published in full; some editions contain only excerpts from them. They are in GARF 18 (f. 642). In 1923 - 1927. letters of the monarch to his royal wife were published 19.

The unofficial correspondence between Nicholas II and the German Emperor Wilhelm II, published in 1923, is no less important than the previous epistolary sources. It clearly shows that all proposals, especially in the early years of the Russian monarch's rule, came from the Kaiser. Nicholas II with great reluctance maintained this correspondence out of respect for an older relative. Partially the correspondence between Nicholas II and Wilhelm II was included in the collection World Wars of the 20th Century, published in 2002 20.

In 2002, the correspondence between the last Russian autocrat and his secret adviser A.A. Klopov 2 ". And in 2003, another collection was published with letters of the last emperor entitled" Diaries and documents from the personal archive of Nicholas II. " King George V and other European monarchs, as well as excerpts from

16 See: K.P. Pobedonostsev and His Correspondents: Letters and Notes / Pre
dislovie M.N. Pokrovsky. Moscow: Gosizdat, 1923.414s.

17 See: K.P. Pobedonostsev Letters from Pobedonostsev to Alexander III: from
attachment of letters to Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich and Niko
bark II. M .: Cengrarhiv, 1925.464s.

18 See: GARF. F. 642. Op. 1.D. 3724.

19 See: N.A. Romanov, A.F. Romanova. Correspondence between Nikolay and Alexandra
Romanovs. M .: Gosizdat, 1923 - 1927. In 5 volumes.

20 See: World Wars of the XX century. T.2. M .: International relations,
2002.245s.

21 See: Krylov V.M. Secret Adviser to the Emperor / Comp. V.M. Krylov and
St. Petersburg: Petersburg - XXI century, 2002.199 p.

22 See: Diaries and documents from the personal archive of Nikolai I: Vospomin
niya. Memoirs. Letters. Minsk: Harvest, 2003.368s.

12 correspondence between the emperor and the ministers - Maklakov, Dzhunkovsky, Goremykin, Sazonov, Shcheglovitov and others.

It should be noted that there are few letters used in our study, but they significantly supplemented it. These are letters from CY. Witte (GARF, F. 1729), P.A. Stolypin (GARF, F.1729), P.A. Valueva (GARF, F. 1729), I.N. Durnovo (GARF, F. 1729), D.F. Trepova (GARF, F. 595), A.F. Horses (GARF, F. 1001) and others.

The last group of historical sources is journalism. Basically, the sources of this group relate to the press. The State Archives of the Russian Federation contains some albums of newspaper clippings related to the reign of Emperor Nicholas II. In our research, we used an album of newspaper clippings about the course Russo-Japanese War 23, some of the articles from this album contain statements by the authors about the emperor's foreign policy, as well as the monarch's appeals to his people.

This work also uses publications of such periodicals as the reactionary newspaper “Moskovskie vedomosti”, published in Moscow by M.N. Katkov and was actually a government officialdom during his lifetime, "Government Bulletin", "Byloe", "Ural Worker", "Affairs and Days" and others. Of particular importance for the research are publications in the Red Archive. In the 1920s, this periodical published the most valuable sources on the history of the Russian Empire in the late 19th - early 20th centuries.

Thus, the source base for studying the evolution of the political views of Emperor Nicholas II is extensive and diverse, although not all of its periods are provided with sources equally. All collected documents and materials allow us to identify and analyze various issues of this topic and solve the tasks.

Scientific novelty of the research: Firstly, this dissertation is one of the first works in Russian historiography, which is specifically devoted to the evolution of the political views and state activities of the last Russian emperor. The main stages of the evolution of the political views of Emperor Nicholas II and his state activities are considered comprehensively and in chronological order.

Secondly, a significant complex of archival materials was analyzed and first introduced into scientific circulation, which made it possible to more objectively and comprehensively study some controversial, not fully resolved problems of this topic.

Thirdly, the periodization of the main stages in the evolution of the political views of Emperor Nicholas II is presented, as a result of which

See: GARF. F. 601. Op. 1.D.524.

13 a new understanding of the changes that took place in the political views of the monarch and their influence on his political decision-making was put forward.

Scientific and practical significance of the research lies in the possibility of its theoretical and applied application. The research results can be used in writing generalizing works on the history of Russia in the late 19th - early 20th centuries, in the preparation of lectures and special courses on historical, political, philosophical, legal problems Russian autocracy at the beginning of the XX century.

The following provisions are submitted to the defense:

The general reason for the crisis of autocracy in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was the failure of the ruling monarch's attempts to adapt to the developing new conditions without changing the nature of power.

The defense of the principles of autocracy became a cornerstone in the political position of the last Russian monarch.

The revolution of 1905 - 1907 forced the emperor to create a system of dualistic monarchy with a legislative Duma, while retaining the entire executive and a significant part of the legislative power for the crown, to grant some political freedoms granted by the Manifesto of October 17, 1905.

In our study, we identified four periods in the development of the political views of the emperor: 1). 1881 - 1894 - the period of formation of political views; 2). 1894 - 1905 - the first years of the reign of the young emperor; 3). 1905 - 1914 - this is the time of constant internal political struggle of the emperor to preserve the unshakable foundations of autocracy; 4). 1914 - 1917 - the last years of the reign of Nicholas II, which coincided with the participation of the Russian Empire in the First World War and the exacerbation of social contradictions within Russian society.

Approbation of work.

The main aspects of the dissertation research were presented in 15 scientific publications, including the journal recommended by the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation. Some provisions of the dissertation are reflected in lecture courses on Russian history, cultural studies and political science for students of non-humanitarian universities.

The research results were discussed at a meeting of the Department of Social and Humanitarian Sciences in the Voronezh branch of the Russian State University of Trade and Economics.

The structure of the thesis. The dissertation consists of an introduction, two chapters of four sections, a conclusion and a list of references and sources.

Conditions and factors in the formation of political views of Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov (1881-1894)

The most significant and main body of sources are archival materials. The author used documents from the State Archives of the Russian Federation (GARF), where the Emperor Nicholas II Foundation is kept. 27 funds were studied, including more than 130 cases. The sources located there are divided into two types. The first includes documents from the collections of members of the imperial family.

Of particular scientific interest for our dissertation research is the personal fund of the last Russian emperor.

This fund was formed at TsGADA in 1940 from the personal documents of the emperor, seized from various royal palaces in 1918-1922. In subsequent years, it was supplemented by smaller receipts. These materials were initially stored undescribed in the "Department of the fall of the old regime" in CAORA, and then, as the "Novoromanovsky" fund, were transferred to the TsGADA. Here the personal funds of tsars, queens, grand dukes and princesses, including the fund of Nicholas I. In 1941, the fund of the last Russian monarch, together with other "Romanov" funds, were transferred in TsGIAN in an undescribed state. And only after the end of the Great Patriotic War, these materials were described. Inventories were compiled for the types of documents.

The fund underwent scientific and technical processing and improvement in 1953. The storage units were re-systematized and one inventory was drawn up for the entire fund. The fund of Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov is still in this form. The fund contains 2513 items, dated from 1860 to 1991.

Today, interest in all members of the imperial house is especially vivid, but the family of Nicholas II causes special discussions among professional historians. One of the main reasons for this phenomenon was the wave of publications and broadcasts that swept over the modern media. Various versions of historical events are put forward and completely opposite assessments of events and people are given, often far from reality. In most cases, television broadcasts and newspaper publications are not supported by specific historical sources, distort real facts, and are subjective. It is possible, in our opinion, to resolve disagreements on controversial issues of the reign of Nicholas II, relying only on direct historical sources, specific documents that make up this fund.

The materials of the fund No. 601 contain mainly materials of personal origin, since the state papers sent by Nicholas II, in most cases, were assigned for storage in the department of manuscripts of the tsar's library. For these documents, the head of the library V. Shcheglov compiled a separate inventory. Now the documents of the manuscript department of the Tsarsko-Selsky Palace library constitute a separate fund - a collection and are kept in TsGIAM with the same inventory compiled by Shcheglov. Consequently, the completeness of the documents from the personal fund of Nicholas II can only be achieved in combination with the documents of the fund no. 543.

The first section includes the so-called personal documents of Nicholas II, his service records, materials related to his wedding with Alice - Princess of Hesse, to the awarding of him with foreign orders: diplomas for conferring the titles of honorary members of various societies and other organizations; addresses of various institutions, societies, assemblies, etc., on the occasion of the age of majority, on the occasion of the birth of the heir and for various other reasons. A separate subsection of the first section was made up of materials on the coronation of the emperor in 1896, since such an important historical event for the empire was documented - in the form of official documents, in periodicals and in the diaries of contemporaries.

The second section of the fund was made up of educational materials of the future autocrat of the period of his youth (1877 - 1888), representing his student notebooks, lecture notes, courses and specially written for him tutorials on political economy, economic policy, statistics, law, military affairs and more. This also includes learning programs, plans, schedules, statements of progress, educational compositions of the heir and Lanson's article "Education of Tsar Nicholas II."

The third section of the fund includes the diaries and notebooks of the emperor himself, which are of particular interest, since it is in this section that one can directly find the reflections and political assessments of Nikolai P. It should be noted that, due to the personal qualities of the author, they are rare and fragmentary. The next, fourth section, covers a large group of documents related to the political and state activities of the autocrat and his government. The first part of this section consists of materials on the affairs of the army and navy: combat reports and combat notes of military units, formations and naval commands - orders for military units, districts, materials on maneuvers, reviews, parades, of which a significant part of photographs and topographic maps. They have no great scientific value.

The first period of the reign of Nicholas II: the formation of a conservative policy (1894 -1905)

As for its influence on political views and the adoption of the most important political decisions of the emperor, according to V.I. Gurko, it consisted in the following: “In all specific, accessible to her understanding issues, the empress understood excellently, and her decisions were as businesslike as they were definite. All persons who had business relations with her single-handedly asserted that it was impossible to report any case to her without first studying it. She posed to her speakers a lot of specific and very businesslike questions concerning the very essence of the subject, and she went into all the details and in the conclusion gave as powerful as precise instructions. So said the persons who had dealings with her in various medical charitable and educational institutions, whom she was interested in, were also in charge of the handicraft business, which was in charge of the Handicraft Committee chaired by the empress ”110.

Alexandra Fyodorovna was full of initiative and yearned for a lively cause. Her thought was constantly working in the area of those issues to which she had concern, and she felt the rapture of power, which her royal spouse did not have ”11. Over time, as usually happens, the spouses became more and more similar to each other, more and more often their views coincided, including on politics. The preservation of the inviolability of the autocratic principle of government was a symbol of the faith of the royal couple, sincerely convinced of the divine origin of the royal power. Alexandra Feodorovna played a significant role in this, both in terms of the properties of her strong character, and as a neophyte of Orthodoxy, and due to the peculiarities of the position that she occupied in the royal family. In general, suspicion in relation to various even seeming inclinations against the absoluteness of the royal power was inherent in both of them. And not only democrats or liberals were meant here, but also relatives. Subsequently, they began to be called the "grand-ducal party", by the sarcastic analogy with political parties opposing the monarchs.

At the very beginning of the reign, the young tsar looked back at his mother, the dowager empress Maria Feodorovna, and the young empress was clearly unhappy with this. Probably because of this, hostile relations arose between Alexandra Feodorovna and numerous supporters of Maria Feodorovna. They were exacerbated by the fact that the daughter-in-law did not manage to achieve the popularity that the mother-in-law continued to enjoy. Therefore, the usual family problems of the relationship between the daughter-in-law and the mother-in-law, which often occur in many families due to women's struggle for leadership in the family and in the soul of a man, in this case have reached the level of state policy.

Often, both of these women advised the emperor of their political position, different from their rival, sometimes not even sharing it in reality, but only to prove to themselves and those around them their influence on “dear Nika”. “It’s not my fault that I’m shy,” said Alexandra Feodorovna, “I feel much better in the Temple, when no one sees me, there I’m with God and the people ... The Empress Maria Feodorovna is loved because the Empress knows how to evoke this love and freely he feels himself within the framework of court etiquette, but I do not know how to do this, and it’s hard for me to be around people when my heart is hard ”112. On the night of November 3, 1895, the first child, daughter Olga, was born in the imperial family. The happy father wrote in his diary: “November 3, Friday. Forever memorable day for me during which I have suffered a lot. At one o'clock in the morning, sweet Alyx began to have pains that did not allow her to sleep. She lay in bed all day in great agony, poor woman. I could not look at her with indifference. At about two o'clock in the morning, my dear mother arrived from Gatchina. The three of her and Ella were relentlessly with Alik. At 9 o'clock, we heard a children's squeak, and we all breathed freely! When we prayed, we named our God-sent daughter Olga. " Of course, from the point of view of politics, the Russian Empire needed an heir, but the happy parents were glad to have their firstborn - a daughter, hoping that soon they would have a boy as well.

The birth coincided with the end of mourning. On this occasion, a brilliant ball was held in the Winter Palace. The ball was attended by numerous relatives of the Romanovs. Some of them in the early years of their reign had a huge impact on the emperor, especially the Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich and Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich, who, according to the memoirs of contemporaries, were not distinguished by either natural intelligence or education. Diaries of Emperor Nikolai I.S. 87 Personal secretary of the minister of the imperial court, Count I.S. Vorontsov - Dashkova Vasily Silych Krivenko (1854 - 1928) in his manuscript "In the Ministry of the Imperial Court" noted: "The great dukes who sat quietly during the life of Alexander III now spoke freely and loudly. Vladimir Alexandrovich did not interfere in domestic policy, but in the field of external representation he put himself far ahead. Sergei Aleksandrovich became a particularly close advisor, a representative of the Moscow Conservative Party. Gradually, Nikolai Nikolayevich began to take control of the military affairs into his own hands, and later a new contender for power appeared - Sergei Mikhailovich, who managed to restore, if not the rank, then the traditions of General Feldzekhmeister. "

Partly through their fault, but directly through the fault of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, Governor General of Moscow, the tragic events of May 17, 1896 took place.

The Moscow authorities had been preparing for the coronation for nearly two years. In this field, the Moscow Governor General competed with the Minister of the Imperial Court, Count Vorontsov - Dashkov. Everyone was waiting for the outcome of the struggle between the tsar's uncle and the minister, rather than the coronation itself. The Moscow police had the hardest time from these troubles. No one knew for sure who to turn to and for what orders, the case was done, so to speak, without an owner, and therefore badly.

State activities and political views of Nicholas II in the context of the socio-political development of the Russian Empire (October 1905-1914)

Passions escalated especially during and after the congress of zemstvo leaders, which was held in St. Petersburg on November 7-9, 1904. The Minister of Internal Affairs of the congress allowed, but asked the participants to engage in discussion of practical issues of zemstvo life. However, in an atmosphere of social tension and sharp politicization of all social activities, it was almost impossible to achieve regulation.

Nevertheless, after discussing their specific questions, the delegates nevertheless moved on to discussing general political problems. They recognized it necessary to convene a popular representation, to carry out a political amnesty, to end administrative arbitrariness, to guarantee the inviolability of the person, and to establish religious tolerance. The matter did not go further than reasoning at the congress, but this event became unprecedented. For the first time, the tsar's subjects did not ask the monarch for private requests, but made demands of a political nature.

Revealing the class nature of the decisions of the Congress, aimed at preserving the socio - economic order by means of political reform, V.I. Lenin wrote: “Take the notorious resolution of the" secret "zemstvo congress on November 6-8. You will see in it pushed into the background and deliberately unclear, timid constitutional wishes. You will see references to people and society, much more often to society than to people. You will see a particularly detailed and most detailed indication of the reforms in the area of zemstvo and city institutions, that is, institutions representing the interests of landowners and capitalists. You will see a mention of reform in the life of the peasantry, its release from guardianship and the fencing of the correct form of the court. It is absolutely clear that before you are representatives of the propertied classes, seeking only concessions from the autocracy and not thinking of any change in the foundations of the economic system. " Nicholas II did not realize the need for political reform, so he remained deaf to the advice of zemstvo leaders. On November 9, 1904, the most radical of the resolutions was adopted - an appeal to the government to abolish the Enhanced Security Regulation introduced on August 14, 1881, to release the victims of the administrative repression and administrative arbitrariness established by it and applied by it, and to announce the pardon of political prisoners.

In order to dissociate himself from the congress, and even more from its decisions, Svyatopolk-Mirsky decided without publicity to present to the emperor a program of reforms that could have a chance of success, as intended to be proclaimed on behalf of the emperor. The compilation of this report was entrusted to the Assistant Head of the Main Directorate for Local Economy Affairs of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Council of Europe. Kryzhanovsky. The report included proposals to revise the provisions on protection, restrictions on administrative expulsion, to reduce prior censorship, and to prosecute press matters.

The decisions of the Zemsky Congress aroused considerable interest and became the topic of lively discussions in the press and in private meetings. At the beginning of December 1904, meetings of the highest officials of the empire were held in Tsarskoe Selo, where urgent measures for the transformation were discussed. internal order... The discussion focused on the program proposed by the Minister of the Interior. Particular attention of the participants was attracted by the clause on elected representatives in the State Council (before that, all members were appointed personally by the monarch). The majority of those present were against this. Ober - Prosecutor of the Holy Synod K.P. Pobedonostsev urged the tsar not to limit the autocracy, this position was supported by the Minister of Finance V.N. Kokovtsov, Chairman of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Justice. Witte and most of the others. Apparently, the emperor hesitated, but, nevertheless, in the end spoke in favor of maintaining the inviolability of power.

At the end of these meetings, a decree was published to the Senate, which contained provisions on the expansion of local self-government, on the revision of the provisions on the press, asserting the need to establish religious tolerance. Most importantly, there was no clause on elected representatives. The emperor did not live up to the expectations of the liberals, who hoped that an elective beginning would be stipulated there. Apparently, the monarch believed that the time for changes in Russia had not yet come.

“In December, in a conversation with the Moscow leader of the nobility, Prince P.N. Trubetskoy, Nicholas II said that “he asked himself the question of the constitution more than once” and came to the following conclusion: “Not for me - for Russia, I admitted that the constitution would now lead the country to such a position as Austria. With the low culture of the people, with our outskirts, the Jewish question, and so on. Autocracy alone can save Russia. Moreover, the peasant will not understand the constitution, but will understand only one thing, that the tsar's hands were tied, ”163 wrote A.N. Bokhanov. This is how the autocrat of the entire Russian land reasoned on the eve of 1905. On the eve of the fateful events of the first Russian revolution, the emperor did not feel, or maybe he simply did not want to recognize what was obvious. Russian society was in dire need of radical transformations. And only he - "the owner of the Russian land" could carry out these transformations correctly, competently. Every day, Nicholas II was more and more distant from reality, withdrawing into his own world.

During this period, he was more worried about family problems, especially since there really was a reason for excitement. From the day Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov ascended the throne, Russia for 10 years waited for the birth of a son in the royal family, the direct heir to the throne. As you know, from the beginning of the reign, the Grand Duke Georgy Alexandrovich was proclaimed heir, after whose death in 1899 questions arose about the order of succession to the throne. Firstly, about who will be proclaimed again (the names of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich and Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna were called), and, secondly, whether anyone should be proclaimed at all before the birth of a son in the royal family. As a result, the Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich was proclaimed heir to the throne.

On July 30, 1904, the long-awaited heir was finally born into the imperial family. The notebook about the birth of the Grand Duke said: "The heir, Tsarevich Alexei Nikolaevich, was born on Friday, July 30, 1904, at 1 o'clock, 15 minutes: weight - 4.600 kg, length 58 cm .." 164. Until that day, only girls were born. The first was Olga, who was born on November 3, 1895, on May 29, 1897 - Tatiana, in 1899 - Maria, the last - the beautiful Anastasia - on June 5, 1901. The heir was named Alexei, after the revered Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich "The Quietest".

The transformation of political views and state activities of Nicholas II during the First World War (1914-February 1917)

Former French ambassador to Russia Maurice Palaeologus wrote in his memoirs entitled Rasputin: “From his first appearance in the palace, Rasputin acquired an extraordinary influence on the tsar and tsarina. He converted them, blinded them, conquered them: it was some kind of charm. Not that he flattered them. Vice versa. From the very first day he began to treat them harshly, with bold and unconstrained familiarity, with trivial and colorful verbosity, in which the tsar and tsarina, fed up with flattery and worship, finally heard the "voice of the Russian land." He very soon became a friend of Madame Vyrubova, the tsarina's inseparable friend, and was initiated by her into all the royal family

Vyrubova herself did not deny Rasputin's influence either on her person or on the imperial couple. In her memoirs, she wrote: “All the books are full of Rasputin's influence on state affairs, and they claim that Rasputin was constantly with Their Majesties. Probably, if I began to refute it, then no one would believe. I will only draw attention to the fact that every step he took from the time Their Majesties met at the Grand Duchess Militsa Nikolaevna until his murder in the Yusupov house was recorded by the police. " associated many of his actions with the mystical principle.She, like the empress, sacredly believed in the divine conduct that the elder possessed.

But there are other versions of Rasputin's influence on the empress and emperor. Prince F.F. Yusupov, the husband of Irina Romanova, a distant relative of Nicholas II, who was directly involved in the murder of the elder, wrote in the first chapter of his memoirs entitled “The End of Rasputin”: “When Rasputin stood like a black shadow near the Throne, all of Russia was indignant. The best representatives of the highest clergy raised their voices in defense of the Church and the Motherland from the encroachments of this criminal rogue. Persons closest to the royal family pleaded with the Tsar and Empress to remove Rasputin. ”

But, as F.F. Yusupov, “it was all to no avail. His dark influence was strengthening more and more, and, along with this, dissatisfaction in the country grew more and more, penetrating even the most remote corners of Russia, where ordinary people sensed with a true instinct that something was wrong at the heights of power. And therefore, - wrote Yusupov, - when Rasputin was killed, his death was greeted with general jubilation.

Some contemporaries called the murder of Rasputin "the first shot of the revolution," the impetus and signal for a coup. But one of the participants in this murder, the same Yusupov, explained: “The revolution did not come because Rasputin was killed. She came much earlier. She was in Rasputin itself, who betrayed Russia with unconscious cynicism, she was in debauchery - in this tangle of dark intrigues, personal selfish calculations, hysterical madness and vain search for power. Rasputinism wrapped an impenetrable web of some kind of gray web around the Throne and cut off the Monarch from the people.

Having lost the opportunity to understand what was happening in Russia, the Russian Emperor could no longer distinguish friends from enemies. He rejected the support of those who could help him save the country and the Dynasty and relied on people who pushed both the Throne and Russia to destruction ”245.

Prince Yusupov, like many other representatives of the intelligentsia and the house of Romanov, had no doubt that a difficult reign fell to the lot of Emperor Nicholas II. “For many decades,” wrote Yusupov, “the destructive work of underground revolutionary forces, which had their own“ headquarters ”and large funds abroad, was carried out in Russia. The revolutionary terror intensified and subsided, but never stopped. State power in Russia was forced to take a defensive position. It was very difficult, almost impossible to wage this struggle without irritating the social forces of the country. Society was indignant at the so-called "repression" and considered it its duty to support the most extreme trends, not realizing their

Emperor Nicholas II refused any concessions. But, in our opinion, the task of preserving the unshakable foundations of autocracy did not correspond to the personal characteristics of the monarch. The people always willingly submit to the one in whom they feel the firmness and strength of power. The absence of this firmness in the character of the young sovereign was instinctively recognized by the whole of Russia. At the first opportunity, revolutionary organizations raised their heads, and the failure of the little-popular Japanese War gave impetus to wider circles to support open revolutionary uprisings.

In 1905, the first flurry of revolution swept across Russia. They managed to suppress it. But only external pacification was achieved, and revolutionary propaganda continued to slowly erode the authority of the tsarist government, which was promoted by all the forces of such a phenomenon as "Rasputinism."

It manifested itself in everything. The imperial couple listened to all the advice of Gregory. It should be noted that such a warm and trusting relationship was established between the elder and the empress that Rasputin, referring familiarly to the ruling persons, dared to instruct and advise them. An eloquent confirmation of this is Gregory's telegrams addressed to the imperial family: “With the Angel, I congratulate our great toiler, the mother of the Russian land. Who wiped away their wounds from her warriors' children with her tears and inspired them to rejoice. They fall into oblivion because of the unprecedented illness that happened to them; they forget because of your love for them ”247.

Rasputin gave special instructions to the emperor during the period of hostilities. A telegram dated August 17, 1915 said: "Nicholas the Wonderworker will bless the stronghold of the throne, your house is indestructible, your decision and firmness of spirit and faith in God is your victory."

And his worldview was determined even before accession to the throne; only almost no one knew them. Communication with the young king turned out to be an unexpected revelation for many.

Faith in God and in one's duty to the royal service were the basis of all the views and character of Emperor Nicholas II. He believed that the responsibility for the fate of Russia lies with him, that he is responsible for them before the throne of the Most High. Others may advise, others may interfere with Him, but the answer for Russia before God lies with him. From this followed the attitude to the limitation of power - which he considered shifting responsibility to others who were not called up, and to individual ministers who, in his opinion, claimed too much influence in the state. “They'll screw it up - but answer me,” this was, in a simplified form, the sovereign's reasoning.

Emperor Nicholas II had a lively mind, quickly grasping the essence of the issues reported to him - everyone who had with him business conversation, unanimously testify to this. He had an exceptional memory, in particular for faces. The sovereign also had a stubborn and indefatigable will in the implementation of his plans. He did not forget them, he constantly returned to them, and often in the end he achieved his goal.

A different opinion was widespread because Nicholas II had a velvet glove over his iron hand. His will was not like a thunderous blow, it was not manifested in explosions and violent collisions; it rather resembled the steady run of a stream from a mountain height to the ocean plain: it bends around obstacles, deviates to the side, but in the end, with invariable constancy, approaches its goal.

The ministers, with whom the Tsar had a chance to part, often said that "you cannot rely on him." But what did it mean? In carrying out plans approved by him essentially, Sovereign, according to the testimony of the same ministers, for example, Witte, knew how to show calm resilience in the most unfavorable environment. Only in relation to their personal careers, the ministers really could not "rely" on the Tsar: he always put matters above the people, and if he disagreed with the actions of his ministers, he dismissed them, regardless of their past merits. In doing so, he tried to "gild the pill"; resignation was usually accompanied by external signs of mercy and the appointment of high pensions. By his nature, he also did not like - and this, perhaps, was a certain drawback - to say to others things that were unpleasant for them. right in the face, especially when it came to people with whom he worked for a long time, to whom he was grateful for a lot in the past. But this was a question of form, not the essence of the matter; there was no "deceit," as his enemies claimed. Deceit presupposes intent, calculation; and what benefit could be for the tsar in the fact that the minister, after a gracious reception, learns in the evening about his resignation from the Highest Rescript? The gracious reception only emphasized the absence of personal disagreement, and the resignation indicated business discrepancy.

Before accession to the throne, Emperor Nicholas II had only one serious occasion to show his will and character. The Russian political system did not allow the manifestation of political differences in the royal family; it could not have happened under Emperor Alexander III that the heir publicly applauded a speech directed against his father's government (as did the German crown prince in the Reichstag in 1911). the heir to the crown prince showed his will only in a matter that personally concerned him. He fell in love with a little princess in his early youth. Alice of Gesse, the younger sister of the Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, the wife of his uncle, and for ten years he invariably kept her memory. Emperor Alexander III, Empress Maria Feodorovna were against this marriage. They did not want to marry a German princess; there were speculations about the marriage of the Russian heir to Princess Helena of Orleans, from the family of a pretender to the French throne. But the heir with quiet stubbornness rejected these plans and kept in his soul the image of Princess Alice. In the end, the parents relented, and in the spring of 1894 the engagement finally took place. In this struggle, which lasted several years, the heir turned out to be stronger in character.

Nicholas II and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna (Alisa of Hesse), 1896

Emperor Nicholas II - this is also recognized by his enemies - had a completely exceptional personal charm. He did not like celebrations, loud speeches; etiquette was a burden to him. He did not like everything ostentatious, artificial, all broadcast advertising (this could also be considered a disadvantage by some in our age!). In a close circle, in a one-on-one conversation, he knew how to charm his interlocutors, whether they were high dignitaries or workers in the workshop he visited. His large gray radiant eyes complemented his speech, looked straight into the soul. These natural qualities were further emphasized by careful upbringing. “In my life I have never met a person more educated than the current reigning Emperor Nicholas II,” wrote Count Witte at the time when he was essentially the Tsar's personal enemy.

Based on the book by S. S. Oldenburg "The Reign of Emperor NicholasII "