Key dates of Alexander's internal policy 1. Death, chaos of succession to the throne and the myth of Fyodor Kuzmich. "Introduction to the Code of State Laws"

Topic: Domestic and foreign policy of Alexander I

University: VZFEI

Introduction

The 19th century in the history of Russia began with a new and last palace coup. Emperor Paul I was killed, and his eldest son Alexander (1777 - 1825), the beloved grandson of Catherine, who herself directed his upbringing, came to the throne. She invited the best teachers, including F. Ts. Laharpe, who was discharged from Switzerland, a highly educated man, an adherent of the ideas of the Enlightenment and a republican in his views. In the position of "chief educator" he was under Alexander for 11 years. Introducing his pupil to the concepts of "natural" equality of people, the advantage of the republican form of government, about the political and civil form of government, about the "common good" to which the ruler should strive, Laharpe carefully avoided the realities of feudal Russia. Most of all, he was engaged in the moral education of his student. Subsequently, Alexander I said that everything that he had "good", he was indebted to Laharpe.

But an even more effective school for the upbringing of the future emperor was the real conditions in which he had to be, the atmosphere of the hostile “big court” of Catherine II in St. Petersburg and the small one - father Pavel Petrovich in Gatchina.

Despite the fact that Alexander I emphasized the continuity between his reign and the reign of Catherine II, his reign was neither a return to the “golden age” of Catherine II, nor a complete rejection of the policy pursued by Paul, aimed at strengthening the autocratic power of the tsar. Demonstratively emphasizing his denial of the nature and methods of Pavlov's rule, he nevertheless perceived quite a few features of his reign, and in its main direction - to further bureaucratization and centralization of government as a measure of strengthening the autocratic power of the monarch. Such "Gatchina habits" as adherence to military drill and love for parades were well established in him.

However, Alexander I could not but reckon with the new "spirit of the times", primarily with the influence of the French revolution on the minds. Under the new conditions, he strove, without changing the main direction of the policy of Catherine II and Paul I to strengthen absolutism, to find ways to resolve pressing political problems that would correspond to the spirit of the times.

Already at the very beginning of his reign, Alexander I solemnly proclaimed that from now on, his policy would be based not on the personal will of the monarch, but on strict observance of the laws. At every opportunity, Alexander I liked to talk about the priority of legality, about his desire to "bring clarity and order" into the system of government and put the relationship between the authorities and subjects on a "legal basis." The legacy was promised legal guarantees against arbitrariness. All these phenomena of Alexander had a great public resonance, because they answered the main idea of \u200b\u200brepresentatives of all directions of social thought of that time.

Domestic policy 1801 - 1812

Alexander 1 ascended the throne on March 12, 1801 at the age of 23. He had a good education. As heir to the throne, Alexander made a bit of opposition to his father. He said that he dreamed of giving the people a constitution, to arrange their life.

The shadow of his murdered father haunted Alexander until the end of his days, although soon after accession, he expelled the participants in the conspiracy from the capital. In the early years of his reign, Alexander relied on a small circle of friends that had formed around him even before accession to the throne. P.A. Stroganov, A. Czartoryskiy, N.N. Novosiltsev, V.P. Kochubey still went to tea with Alexander, and at the same time discussed state affairs. This circle began to be called the Secret Committee. Its members, led by Alexander, were young, well-intentioned, but very inexperienced. And yet the first years of the reign of Alexander I left the best memories of his contemporaries, “The days of the Alexandrovs were a wonderful beginning” - this is how A.S. Pushkin. Has come short period of enlightened absolutism. "Universities, lyceums, and grammar schools were opened.

The ideas of the Enlightenment had a certain influence on him. Alexander strove to modernize socio-economic and political institutions (he had, in particular, a program for solving the peasant question by gradually eliminating serfdom), hoping thereby to save the country from internal upheavals. The accession of Alexander I was marked by a series of measures that canceled those orders of Paul I, which aroused the discontent of the nobility. The officers dismissed by Paul I returned to the army, political prisoners were released, free entry and exit from the country was allowed, the "Secret Expedition" was destroyed, etc.

The first years of the reign of Alexander I were characterized by a sharp struggle at the top around the projects of various reforms of a socio-economic and political nature. There were various groups in the ruling circles, each of which had its own recipes for solving the problems facing the country.

By organizing the Committee, the emperor tried not only to assemble his "team", but also to create a headquarters that was supposed to develop projects of reforms in Russia. The Committee's plans were quite extensive: from a complete reorganization of state administration, the gradual abolition of serfdom to the introduction of a constitution in Russia. At the same time, the constitution meant the creation of a representative institution, the proclamation of democratic freedoms, the limitation of autocratic power by law.

Over a year and a half of its work, the Committee outlined the main directions for future changes, focusing on two main problems: limiting serfdom and changing the form of government. However, the practical results of the activities of the "young friends" were insignificant. The dignitaries of Catherine's reign ("Catherine's old men") sought to strengthen the influence of the noble-bureaucratic leaders on the administration of the empire. To this end, they advocated expanding the functions of the Senate, in particular - for giving him the opportunity to influence the legislative process. "Catherine's old men" were opposed to any changes in relations between peasants and landowners.

The participants in the palace coup, led by the former favorite of Catherine II, P.A. Zubov. They sought to transform the Senate into a representative body of the nobility, endowing it with legislative powers, in order to put the tsar's legislative activity under the control of the higher nobility. This grouping admitted the possibility of a certain limitation of landlord power over the peasants, and in the future was ready for the gradual elimination of serfdom. Finally, among the higher bureaucracy, there were many opponents of any change at all. They saw the preservation of the existing order as the most reliable guarantee of social stability.

The bulk of the nobility was also very conservative. She strove to preserve her privileges and, above all, the unlimited power of the landowners over the peasants. The lull that came in the countryside after the suppression of a powerful wave of peasant uprisings in 1796-1797 strengthened the confidence of the overwhelming majority of the nobility in the inviolability of the existing system. Broad strata of landowners reacted negatively to any attempts to limit the emperor's freedom of expression. In this regard, the reformist plans hatched by various representatives of the ruling circles did not meet with sympathy among the nobility. The layer of enlightened nobles, in whom Alexander I saw the support of his reformist undertakings, was too thin. Any actions of the tsar, affecting the landlord privileges, threatened with a new palace coup. In the socio-economic sphere, the tsar was able to carry out only some modest transformations, which in no way affected the serf system and represented an insignificant concession to the wealthy strata of the city and countryside. On December 12, 1801, merchants, petty bourgeois and state peasants were given the opportunity to acquire ownership of unpopulated land (previously, ownership of land, inhabited or uninhabited, was a monopoly right of the nobility).

Transformation in the central government

The first half of Alexander's reign was marked by important changes in internal institutions. A noticeable step towards improving the state management structure was the Manifesto of September 8, 1802 on the establishment of ministries. Most historians agree that this is the most important, if not the only real, transformative measure undertaken by Alexander in the early years of his reign. By the beginning of the 19th century. the administrative system of the state was in a state of obvious collapse. The collegial form of central management introduced by Peter I clearly did not justify itself. In the collegiums, a circular irresponsibility reigned, covering up bribery and embezzlement. Local authorities, taking advantage of the weakness of the central government, committed lawlessness.

The increasing complexity of the tasks facing the autocracy, as social progress changed the life of the country, required an increase in flexibility and efficiency in the work of the bureaucratic machine. The collegiate management system with its slow office work did not meet the requirements of the time. The publication of this Manifesto paved the way for replacing the collegia with ministries in which all power was concentrated in the hands of one person - a minister appointed by the king and responsible for his actions only to the monarch. The colleges themselves were not initially liquidated. They became part of the relevant ministries and continued to deal with current issues of public administration.

Simultaneously with the establishment of ministries on September 8, 1802, the rights of the Senate were expanded by a special decree of the emperor. He was declared a "keeper of laws", the highest court, a body overseeing the administration (with the right to control the activities of ministers). However, in reality, the indicated functions of the Senate turned out to be illusory, and the right to present to the emperor his opinion on decrees (some semblance of legislative initiative), as well as the responsibility of ministers to the Senate, were imaginary.

At first, Alexander I hoped to restore order and strengthen the state by introducing a ministerial system of central government based on the principle of one-man management. In 1802, instead of the previous 12 collegia, 8 ministries were created: military, naval, foreign affairs, internal affairs, commerce, finance, public education and justice. This measure has strengthened central management. But there was no decisive victory in the fight against abuse. Old vices have settled in the new ministries. Growing up, they rose to the upper levels of state power. Alexander knew the senators who took bribes. The desire to expose them fought in him with fear of diminishing the prestige of the Senate. It became obvious that mere rearrangements in the bureaucratic machine could not solve the problem of creating a system of state power that would actively promote the development of the country's productive forces, and would not devour its resources. A fundamentally new approach to solving the problem was required.

The reform activities of Alexander I were distinguished by compromise and inconsistency, which caused a negative reaction from both the left and the right. Alexander I managed to find a person who could rightfully claim the role of a reformer. It was Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky. In 1809, on the instructions of Alexander, he drew up a project of radical transformations. Speransky laid the foundation for the state structure on the principle of separation of powers - legislative, executive and judicial. Each of them, starting from the lowest levels, had to operate within the strictly defined framework of the law. Representative assemblies of several levels were created, headed by the State Duma, an all-Russian representative body. The Duma was supposed to give opinions on bills submitted for its consideration and hear reports from ministers.

All powers - legislative, executive and judicial - were united in the Council of State, whose members were appointed by the king. The opinion of the Council of State, approved by the king, became law. If a disagreement arose in the Council of State, the king, by his choice, approved the opinion of the majority or minority. Not a single law could come into effect without discussion in the State Duma and the State Council.

The real legislative power according to Speransky's project remained in the hands of the tsar. But Speransky emphasized that the judgments of the Duma must be free, they must express "the opinion of the people." This was his fundamentally new approach: he wanted to put the actions of the authorities in the center and in the localities under the control of public opinion. For the silence of the people opens the way to the irresponsibility of the authorities.

According to Speransky's project, all citizens of Russia who owned land or capital, including state peasants, enjoyed electoral rights. Artisans, domestic servants and serfs did not participate in the elections, but enjoyed the most important civil rights. Speransky formulated the main one as follows: "No one can be punished without a court sentence." This was to limit the power of the landowners over the serfs. The project began in 1810, when the State Council was established. But then things came to a halt: Alexander I more and more entered into the taste of autocratic rule.

Speransky's transformative projects became the object of a sharp struggle at the top. The conservative part of the nobility and bureaucracy opposed Speransky's reformist plans, seeing in them an undermining of the age-old foundations of the empire. The corresponding point of view in its expanded form was set forth by the outstanding Russian historian N.M. Karamzin in his "Note on Ancient and New Russia" (1811), which was addressed to Alexander I. Considering autocracy as a necessary condition for the country's well-being, Karamzin categorically condemned any attempts to limit the supreme power. Ultimately, Speransky failed to realize his plans as a whole. Alexander I, remembering the fate of his father, could not ignore the decisive rejection of the reformist undertakings of his adviser by the bulk of the nobility and the higher bureaucracy. True, in 1810 the State Council was formed as a legislative body under the emperor. In 1811, the General Institution of Ministries, prepared by Speransky, came into force. This extensive legislative act determined the basic principles of the organizational structure of ministries, the procedure for their activities. This law was, on the whole, completed the ministerial reform begun in 1802 (most of the collegia had ceased to exist by 1811).

The peasant question

By decree on February 12, 1801, all non-nobles, with the exception of serfs: merchants, burghers, state peasants, received permission to buy unpopulated vacant land. Thus, the nobility's monopoly on land was broken, and the opportunities for entrepreneurship were somewhat expanded. February 20, 1803 on the initiative of S.P. Rumyantsev (son of Catherine's Field Marshal PA Rumyantsev), a decree of the emperor "On free farmers" appeared, which served as a pretext for accusing Alexander I of hypocrisy. Indeed, the permission to release the peasants free (with the obligatory allotment of land) on conditions determined by a free agreement (that is, for a ransom), received by the landowners under this decree, did not affect the serf system. The peasants who received their freedom on the basis of the decree began to be called "free farmers". This act had more moral than real significance: by the end of the reign, there were only 47 thousand in the "free farmers". However, if we assume that this decree was not so much a naive appeal to the good feelings of the landowners as a test of their readiness for radical changes, then such a step seemed quite reasonable and necessary. In 1803, the Secret Committee was disbanded due to rejection of its projects by the nobility and the emperor's unwillingness to take radical action.

In the Secret Committee, a proposal was made to ban the sale of serfs without land. Human trafficking was carried out in Russia in overt, cynical forms. Advertisements for the sale of serfs were printed in newspapers. At the Makaryevskaya fair, they were sold along with other goods, families were separated. Sometimes a Russian peasant, bought at a fair, went to distant eastern countries, where until the end of his days he lived in the position of a foreign slave. Alexander I wanted to suppress such shameful phenomena, but the proposal to prohibit the sale of peasants without land met with stubborn resistance from the highest dignitaries. They believed that this undermined serfdom. Not showing persistence, the young emperor retreated. It was forbidden only to publish ads for the sale of people.

The industrial development of the country in those years was hampered by serfdom, since entrepreneurial activity was limited to landlord ownership of land and peasants, and the forced labor of serfs at industrial enterprises was unproductive, hindered technical progress. So, at first serfdom was abolished in Estonia, Livonia and Courland, and in 1817-1819. in conditions of secrecy, work is underway on a general plan for the elimination of serfdom. One of the documents on the emancipation of the peasants was developed under the leadership of A.A. Arakcheeva. His name has always been associated with a policy of extreme reaction.

Alexander I understood the need for change. In private conversations, he said that the peasants must be freed. After reading the anti-serfdom poem by A.S. Pushkin's "Village", the tsar ordered to thank the poet for the good feelings that it inspires. But those were words. Things turned out to be different.

In 1816, on the initiative of the Estland nobles, Alexander signed a decree on the liberation of the peasants of the province from serfdom. The peasants received personal freedom, but lost their right to land and thus found themselves completely dependent on the landlords. Nevertheless, in 1816-1819. on the instructions of the emperor, Arakcheev's office and the Ministry of Finance secretly prepared projects for the liberation of all serfs, moreover, the projects were quite radical, in some ways ahead of the Regulations of February 19, 1861. Arakcheev proposed to free the peasants by buying them out from the landowner with the subsequent allotment of land at the expense of the treasury ... According to Finance Minister Guryev, relations between peasants and landowners should have been built on a contractual basis, and various forms of land ownership should have been introduced gradually. Both projects were approved by the emperor, but neither of them was implemented. Rumors about the impending fall of serfdom began to circulate actively throughout Russia and caused a negative reaction from the landowners.

Each peasant who went free had to receive a land allotment of at least 2 dess. (in essence, it was a beggar's allotment). At this rate, serfdom should have finally disappeared no earlier than 200 years later. Nevertheless, plans for political reform and the abolition of serfdom remained unfulfilled. In 1816-1819. only the Baltic peasants received personal freedom. It was not possible to push the landowners of Little Russia to such an initiative.

At the same time, the landowners retained all the land in full ownership. For the lease of landlord's land, the peasants were still required to perform corvee dues. Numerous constraints (for example, restricting the right to change their place of residence) significantly curtailed the personal freedom of peasants. The landowner could subject "free" farm laborers to corporal punishment. Thus, numerous remnants of the former feudal relations remained in the Baltic states.

However, the Minister of Finance said that the treasury would not find 5 million rubles for this purpose. annually. Then, in 1818, a secret committee was formed to develop a new plan. The members of the committee managed to develop a project that did not require any expenses from the treasury, but was calculated for an equally indefinite period. The king got acquainted with the project and locked it in his writing desk. And that was the end of it.

Foreign policy 1801-1812

Alexander I, like his predecessors, pursued an active foreign policy. The rapprochement between Russia and Georgia continued, which began in the second half of the 18th century. It was based on a common interest in the struggle against Turkey and Iran, which tried to subjugate the peoples of the Transcaucasus. In 1801, when the situation in Georgia became extremely complicated, the Georgian Tsar George XII renounced power in favor of the Russian Tsar. In 1804, the war between Russia and Iran began, which lasted until 1813. Under a peace treaty, Iran recognized the annexation of Dagestan and Northern Azerbaijan to Russia. Russian troops provided the peoples of Transcaucasia with protection from aggression from their southern neighbors and from the raids of mountain tribes. The long-awaited peace has come to Transcaucasia.

The palace coup on March 11, 1801 led to changes in the foreign policy of tsarism. Alexander I immediately took steps to resolve the conflict with England, which caused discontent among wide circles of the Russian nobility. He canceled the campaign of the Don Cossacks to India organized by Paul I. In June 1801, a naval convention was concluded between Russia and England, ending the conflict. The renunciation of enmity with England did not mean, however, a line to break with France. Negotiations with her continued and in October 1801 she assured. More than 20 thousand Austrians with 59 guns surrendered. Kutuzov, however, managed to get the Russian troops out of the blow, which after the defeat of the main forces of the Austrians were in a very difficult situation. The battle of Austerlitz, which took place on November 20 (December 2), 1805, was, however, lost by the Allies with heavy losses. They lost about 27 thousand people and 155 guns. Napoleon lost over 12 thousand people. The third coalition actually ceased to exist after Austria made peace with Napoleon in December 1805.

The struggle with France soon entered a new phase. In the fall of 1806, the fourth anti-French coalition was formed, uniting Russia, England, Prussia and Sweden. The main force of the coalition was the armies of Russia and Prussia. The allies acted inconsistently, and in 1806-1807. Napoleon utterly defeated the Prussian army with a lightning-fast blow, occupied Berlin and occupied most of the territory of Prussia. The theater of military operations approached the western borders of Russia. Winter campaign 1806-1807 turned out to be very difficult for the French. In the bloody general battle at Preussisch-Eylau on January 27 (February 8) 1807, Napoleon failed to encircle and defeat the Russian army. Nevertheless, at the Battle of Friedland in June 1807, Napoleon was victorious. This circumstance, as well as the apparent deterioration of Russian-English relations, forced Alexander I to begin negotiations with Napoleon. On July 7, 1807, a peace treaty between Russia and France and an allied treaty directed against England were signed in Tilsit. Alexander I had to recognize the redrawing of the map of Europe carried out by Napoleon. The tsar, however, managed to persuade Napoleon to keep Prussia as an independent state, albeit within extremely curtailed borders. From the Polish lands taken from Prussia, Napoleon formed the Duchy of Warsaw. Having become an ally of France, Russia undertook the obligation to join the continental blockade of England declared by Napoleon. After that, the Turkish government, incited by French diplomacy, closed the Bosphorus to Russian ships. In 1806, a protracted Russian-Turkish war began. Moldavia, Wallachia and Bulgaria became the theater of military operations.

Russia did not suffer territorial losses, but was forced to join the continental blockade, i.e. break off trade relations with England. This was demanded by Napoleon from all the governments of the European powers with which he entered into agreements. In this way he hoped to upset the English economy. By the end of the first decade of the 19th century. almost all of continental Europe was under the control of the French emperor. Sweden refused to end trade with England and break the alliance with her. There was a threat of an attack on St. Petersburg. This circumstance, as well as pressure from Napoleon, forced Alexander I to go to war with Sweden. She sought to take revenge for the defeats she suffered in the wars with Russia in the 18th century. Military operations lasted from February 1808 to March 1809 Sweden was defeated and was forced to cede Finland to Russia. Alexander I granted autonomy to Finland (she did not use it under the rule of the Swedish king). In addition, Vyborg, which had been in the possession of Russia since the time of Peter the Great, was included in Finland. The Grand Duchy of Finland became a separate part of the Russian Empire. It minted its own coin and had a customs border with Russia.

The continental blockade was unprofitable for Russia. Russian grain merchants suffered losses; export taxes did not go to the treasury. The severing of trade ties with England as a result of Russia's accession to the continental blockade hit the interests of Russian landowners and merchants hard, and led to the breakdown of the country's financial system. Alexander I evaded strict observance of the conditions of the blockade, which irritated Napoleon. In the end, bypassing the agreement with Napoleon, trade with England began to be carried out on American ships, and a customs war broke out between Russia and France. The proud Alexander I was burdened by the Tilsit world imposed on him and rejected Napoleon's attempts to dictate his will to him. Napoleon saw that Russia did not submit. Its crushing with the subsequent dismemberment into several semi-dependent states was supposed, according to the plan of the French strategists, to complete the conquest of continental Europe and open up tempting prospects for a campaign in India.

Relations with France deteriorated rapidly. At the same time, a significant part of the Russian army was involved in the south, where the war with Turkey continued. In 1811, Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov (1745-1813) was appointed commander of the army here. He managed to win a number of victories. Then, displaying outstanding diplomatic skill, Kutuzov persuaded the Turkish representatives to sign a peace treaty. The border with Turkey was established along the river. Prut, Bessarabia ceded to Russia. Serbia, which was under Turkish rule, received autonomy. This marked the beginning of its complete independence. In May 1812, less than a month before the invasion of Russia by the French army, the military conflict with Turkey was settled.

Domestic policy 1812-1825

The second period of the reign of Alexander I (1815-1825) is characterized by most historians as conservative in comparison with the first - liberal. The strengthening of conservative tendencies and the formation of a tough police regime are associated with the activities of the all-powerful A.A. Arakcheeva. However, it was at this time that a number of liberal transformations were carried out, which does not allow one to unequivocally assess the second half of the reign of Alexander I as conservative. The emperor did not abandon his attempts to solve the peasant question and implement his constitutional ideas.

The period of the reign of Alexander I, which came after the war of 1812 and the defeat of Napoleonic France, was traditionally viewed by both contemporaries and in scientific literature as a period of dull reaction. He was opposed to the first, liberal, half of the reign of Alexander I. Indeed, in the years 1815-1825. in the internal policy of the autocracy, conservative, protective principles are sharply strengthened. A tough police regime is being established in Russia, associated with the name of A.A. Arakcheev, who played an important role in the government. However, Arakcheev, with all his influence, in principle was only the executor of the will of the monarch.

Alexander I did not immediately abandon the liberal undertakings characteristic of the first half of his reign. In November 1815, the emperor approved the constitution for the part of Poland (Kingdom of Poland) annexed to Russia, according to the decisions of the Vienna Congress. The Kingdom of Poland received a fairly broad autonomy. The power of the Russian monarch in Poland was limited to a certain extent to the local representative body with legislative functions - the Seimas consisted of two chambers - the Senate and the Ambassador Chamber. Alexander I considered the granting of the Constitution to the Kingdom of Poland as the first step towards the introduction of a representative form of government in the Russian Empire.

After the Napoleonic wars, the advanced part of Russian society expected that new times would begin in the history of Russia. Soldiers and officers, having become acquainted with the freer life of European peoples, perceived the sad Russian reality in a new light. Serf peasants who had been in the militia, who had experienced all the hardships of a marching life, who looked death in the eyes, were convinced with severe disappointment that they did not even deserve freedom.

An appropriate hint was made by him in March 1818 in a speech delivered at the opening of the Polish Seim, the emperor announced his intention to give a constitutional order to all of Russia. This speech was enthusiastically received by all advanced Russian people. The work on the project was carried out under the direct supervision of Prince P.A. Vyazemsky, poet and statesman. The Polish constitution was taken as a model. Speransky's project was also used. By 1821, work on the "State Charter of the Russian Empire" was completed. Of great importance was the proclamation of guarantees of the inviolability of the person in the "Charter". No one could be arrested without charge. No one could be punished otherwise than by court. Freedom of the press was proclaimed. If the "Charter" were put into effect, Russia would have embarked on the path to a representative system and civil liberties. In 1820-1821. there were revolutions in Spain and Italy, the war of independence began in Greece. These events frightened the king in earnest. After a little hesitation, he did what he had done many times. The draft "Charter" was put in the back drawer of the desk and forgotten. Alexander's reign was drawing to a close. Words never turned into deeds. On behalf of Alexander I, one of the former members of the Secret Committee (N.N. Novosiltsev) began work on a draft constitution for Russia. The document prepared by him (State Charter of the Russian Empire) introduced the federal principle of state structure; legislative power was divided between the emperor and the bicameral parliament - the Sejm, which consisted (as in Poland) of the Senate and the Ambassadorial Chamber. Senators were appointed by the king, and members of the lower house were also partly appointed, and partly elected on the basis of multi-stage elections. Russia received a federal structure, dividing into 12 governorships, each of which created its own representative body. The charter granted the citizens of the Russian Empire freedom of speech, religion, press, and guaranteed personal inviolability. Nothing was said about serfdom in this document. By 1821 - 1822 the refusal of Alexander I from any transformations became an accomplished fact. The advocates of change constituted an insignificant minority in the ruling circles. The tsar himself, convinced of the impossibility of carrying out any serious reforms under these conditions, in his views evolved more and more to the right. It was a painful process that ended for Alexander I in a severe mental crisis. Having abandoned reforms, the king set out to strengthen the foundations of the existing system. The internal political course of the autocracy from 1822-1823 characterized by a transition to overt reaction. However, since 1815 the practice of state administration in many essential respects sharply contrasted with the conceived and partially implemented liberal initiatives of the monarch. An increasingly tangible factor in Russian reality was the onset of reaction along all lines.

Military settlements

Moreover, the policy of Alexander I began to change not for the better. The tsar had long been worried that the system of recruiting into the army ("recruitment") did not allow to dramatically increase the size of the army in wartime and reduce it in peacetime. Pavel also planned the organization of military settlements. The fact is that this idea was based on progressive and humane intentions. In addition to the self-sufficiency of the army, which, of course, was important, the emperor tried with the help of military settlements to reduce the number of serfs in the western and central provinces. Buying land and peasants from the landlords ruined by the war, the government narrowed the boundaries of the spread of serfdom, because the military settlers were to become, in fact, state peasants.

Alexander took this idea through Arakcheev. Minister of War Barclay de Tolly was against this idea, but at the direction of the king, the first experiments were undertaken before 1812. In 1815 Alexander returned to the idea of \u200b\u200bmilitary settlements. It became his obsession. A strip of military settlements began from Chudov, the main part of which was deployed in the Novgorod province. Their arrangement was entrusted to Arakcheev. Military units were introduced into the villages, and all residents were transferred to martial law. In reality, the military settlements have caused indignation and riots. One village, which did not want to accept soldiers, was blockaded, and famine forced the peasants to surrender. The life of the villagers was a real hard labor. Their children from the age of 12 were taken away from their parents and transferred to the category of cantonists (soldiers' children), and from the age of 18 they were considered to be in active military service. The whole life of the military settlers was subject to a tough barrack order and was strictly regulated. In the settlements arbitrariness of the authorities reigned, there was a system of inhuman punishments. All adult peasants, up to 45 years old, were dressed in military uniforms and shaved. Peasant huts were demolished, in their place were built identical houses, designed for four families who were supposed to run a common household. The entire life of the military settlers was meticulously painted. Deviations from the schedule were severely punished, which consisted of whole carts of gauntlets. The main occupation was military exercises. They had no right to go to work, engage in trade or fishing. Military settlers experienced double hardships - soldier's and peasant's life. All agricultural work was carried out only by order of the commander. And since the officers were primarily interested in shagistika and they knew little about agriculture, it happened that the bread crumbled on the vine, and the hay rotted in the rain. Crafts and trade could be done only with the permission of the authorities. As a result, all trade in the area of \u200b\u200bmilitary settlements ceased. The well-to-do peasants, who were more independent, experienced especially great oppression. Arakcheev believed that "there is nothing more dangerous than a rich peasant." Even a military villager could marry only with the permission of his superiors. Contemporaries watched tragicomic scenes, when boys and girls lined up in two lines and the commander appointed a bride for each guy.

In the military settlements, uprisings took place several times (the largest - in 1831 in the region of Staraya Russa). Nevertheless, the system of military settlements, based on the most gross trampling on the human person, existed until 1857. By the end of the reign of Alexander I, 375 thousand state peasants became military settlers, which made up about a third of the Russian army under the command of Arakcheev. Military settlements were organized in St. Petersburg, Novgorod, Mogilev, Kherson, Yekaterinoslav and other provinces. In fact, the settlers were enslaved twice - as peasants and as soldiers. Their lives were governed by army regulations. Minor misconduct was followed by severe punishment. The military settlements did not meet the hopes that the ruling circles pinned on them. However, Alexander I, convinced of the expediency of "settling" the army, with perseverance worthy of better use, defended the course taken, once declaring that military settlements “will be, no matter what, even if the road from St. Petersburg to Chudova ".

Foreign policy 1812-1825

The victory over Napoleon greatly strengthened Russia's international position. Alexander I was the most powerful monarch of Europe, and Russia's influence on the affairs of the continent was greater than ever. Protective tendencies were clearly manifested in the policy of the autocracy and in the international arena. Founded in 1815, the Holy Alliance was supposed to unite all the conservative forces of Europe in the name of the triumph of legitimist principles and the fight against the revolutionary movement. The members of the Union sought to oppose the ideas of the revolution with the principles of Christian morality. However, the European monarchs did not at all intend to limit the struggle against the revolution, which threatened the absolutist order, only to the spiritual sphere. The further, the more the Holy Alliance took the path of direct intervention against those countries in which the legitimate dynasties were in danger.

In 1818, the Aachen Congress of the Holy Alliance took place. The secret protocol, which was signed by the plenipotentiaries of Russia, England, Austria and Prussia, confirmed the obligations of these countries to take measures that would help "prevent the disastrous consequences of a new revolutionary upheaval" if such would again threaten France.

In 1820, the revolution began in Spain. In the same year, a popular uprising broke out in the Kingdom of Naples. In this atmosphere, in 1820, the next congress of the Holy Alliance opened in Troppau. Alexander I arrived in Troppau hoping to get from his partners decisive measures aimed at combating the revolutionary movement. The congress adopted a resolution proclaiming the "right to interfere" in the internal affairs of the countries involved in the revolution. Congress participants instructed Austria to send troops to Naples to restore order. The work of the congress itself was moved from Troppau to Laibach, located closer to the Italian border. In March 1821, the Austrian army suppressed the revolution in the Kingdom of Naples. Another revolutionary hotbed arose in Piedmont. Alexander I expressed his readiness to move troops there from Russia to "pacify" the rebels. However, the king's help was not needed. In April 1821 Austrian troops suppressed the Piedmont Revolution. In accordance with the decisions of the Verona Congress, an intervention was carried out in revolutionary Spain. The principles of legitimacy prevailed in the Iberian Peninsula with the support of French bayonets. However, the troops of Russia, Austria, Prussia were also put on alert.

The Holy Alliance was conceived by Alexander I not only as a union of European monarchs to fight the revolution. The king viewed it as an alliance of Christian sovereigns to protect the Christian peoples of the Balkan Peninsula from the yoke of Muslim Turkey. However, the partners of Russia, fearing the strengthening of its positions in this region, were not at all going to act in a united formation with the tsar in those cases when it came to Eastern affairs. Meanwhile, in 1812, a liberation movement against the Turkish yoke began in Greece. Alexander I initially refused any support to the rebels. Austrian Chancellor K. Metternich, fearing the establishment in Greece (in case of its liberation from Ottoman rule with the help of Russia) of Russian influence, skillfully played on the legitimist feelings of the tsar, presenting the Greeks as rebels who opposed their legitimate sovereign, the Turkish sultan. Public opinion in Russia, however, reacted negatively to the position taken by the monarch. The atrocities of the Turks in Greece aroused the indignation of the advanced part of the nobility. On the other hand, many top dignitaries also advocated helping the rebels, guided by the need to ensure the security of the southern borders of the country, to assert Russia's influence in the Balkans, and considering it unacceptable to leave their fellow believers - Orthodox Greeks - to the mercy of fate. In addition, the Turkish government, having closed the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles for Russian exports under the pretext of combating Greek smuggling, dealt a heavy blow to the economic interests of very broad noble circles. Alexander I could not ignore all this. Finally, in the summer of 1821, he ordered the Russian ambassador to leave Constantinople, and diplomatic relations between Russia and Turkey were interrupted.

Alexander I, however, because of Greece, was not going to start a war with the Ottoman Empire. At the Verona Congress, the tsar signed a declaration together with other members of the Holy Alliance, in which the Greek uprising was condemned as revolutionary. Meanwhile, England, seeking to undermine the authority of Russia in the Balkans, came out in defense of the Greek fighters for independence and in 1824 even granted them a loan. The policy of the autocracy is clearly at a dead end. The prospect of involving Greece in the orbit of influence of the British Empire was turning into reality. Attempts by tsarist diplomacy to resolve the Greek question, acting jointly with partners in the Holy Alliance, were unsuccessful. In this situation, Russia had to finally take an independent position in relation to the Greek uprising. In August 1825 the Russian ambassadors in Vienna and London were instructed to make appropriate statements to the governments under which they were accredited. The Eastern crisis, which broke out with the start of the Greek uprising, entered a new phase. It fell to the new emperor Nicholas I to resolve the most difficult problems caused by the events in the Balkans.

Conclusion

Alexander I ruled in the era of the struggle of the outdated, but still retaining a margin of safety, the feudal and emerging bourgeois system. This is the reason for his desire for liberal reforms, which never reached the end. The desire to establish a new order ran into non-eradicated customs and traditions. As a result, there was a turning point in the emperor's policy towards reactionary actions.

The merits of Alexander I in foreign policy relations are indisputable. It's amazing how it was possible in a short period of time to bring the country out of the isolation he "inherited" from his father. And not just to withdraw, but to achieve that the leading European powers began to reckon with the empire and even fear its rise over Europe.

Now some historians believe that the personality of the emperor was deliberately praised in the "commissioned" works of his contemporaries. In addition, Alexander was surrounded by really outstanding people (M.M.Speransky, M.I.Kutuzov, N.M. Karamzin, etc.), who could set off any person with themselves. But it is unlikely that private letters, memoirs were also written "to order." Alexander I is a truly outstanding politician and diplomat. And time is to blame for the fact that his projects remained only projects. Perhaps, if such a person had appeared in another era, everything would have been different.

Nevertheless, it was from the era of Alexander I that society began to prepare for changes and a new way of life. Of course, there was no unity of opinion in society: it was at this time that the Decembrist movement was born, which, to a certain extent, can be considered the result of the policy of Alexander I.

The economy of Russia developed slowly and lagged behind many states, due to the preservation of the feudal-serf system. The hostilities, in which the country took an active part, also had a negative effect.

Undoubtedly, the turn towards reaction had a negative impact on the overall impression of Alexander's rule. On the other hand, Alexander I, convinced that he could not carry out liberal reforms, was forced to re-consolidate the old order.

List of used literature

Russian history. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko et al. - M .: ACT Publishing House, 2001.
Friends! You have a unique opportunity to help students like you! If our site helped you find the job you need, then you certainly understand how the job you added can make the work of others easier.

If the Test paper, in your opinion, is of poor quality, or you have already met this work, let us know.

Alexander 1 is known to many. Of course, this is the same Russian emperor who at one time managed to defeat Napoleon. However, many prefer to stop at this, not knowing how much this person brought for the country. His skillful diplomacy and cunning, his concern for the Motherland can serve as a real example for modern Russian politicians.

Third anti-French coalition

Seething revolutions, France in the late eighteenth century was the enemy of almost everyone. The monarchs were afraid that the republican infection would not visit their homes, and therefore they waged many wars against the carrier state.

Alexander's father, Pavel, successfully participated in the first two coalitions against France. However, for his son, the beginning of the path in foreign policy began with a grandiose failure.

While Napoleon was persistently gaining power and transforming his state into a mighty empire, the Third Anti-French Coalition from Russia, England and Austria gathered. She had to prevent the plans of the Corsican from coming true.

Unfortunately, the Austrians, despite the support of the Russian army, began to lose quickly. Without looking at Kutuzov's demand not to give a decisive battle, Alexander 1 met Napoleon's army at Austerlitz, which ended in a grandiose victory for the French emperor and the strengthening of France as a potential world ruler.

In short, the foreign policy of Alexander I after this incident has changed a lot.

Union of enemies

The wise Alexander 1 saw in Bonaparte something that many did not notice - the absence in this man of the very thought of losing. It was clear that now this Corsican with eyes burning with thirst for conquest could not be defeated. You have to wait.

The direction of foreign policy changed dramatically. He broke off relations with Great Britain and personally met Napoleon on rafts in the middle of the river near the town of Tilsit.

It seemed that the agreement concluded there created extremely unsatisfactory conditions for the existence of the Russian Empire (recognition of all the conquests of Bonaparte, rejection of a number of regions conquered from Turkey). However, in reality it was a more than profitable world. There are at least two reasons for this agreement.

Alexander I got the opportunity to focus on domestic politics, which also needed his presence.
In fact, such an agreement gave Russia peace of mind and untied its hands in everything connected with the eastern part of the world. If everything went according to plans, there should have been two superpowers in the world - the Western Empire with Napoleon at its head and the Eastern Empire with Alexander 1.

It is worth digressing from diplomacy and figuring out what was the internal policy of Alexander I (briefly, to understand further events).

Politics inside

The reign of his son Paul 1 changed Russia forever. What's new brought Alexandra 1? This can be summarized in four main directions.

For the first time, the Russian emperor decided to discuss the issue of abolishing serfdom - one of the pillars of the Russian legal system. He even ordered the preparation of three projects. However, none of them have been implemented. But the very fact of working with this topic shows colossal changes in the moral character of the country.
Deep reforms of the government were carried out. This concerned the change of the State Council, its final strengthening as the chief adviser to the emperor. In addition, many privileges were bestowed, and a single set of responsibilities for the Senate was established.
But the most important is by far the ministerial reform, which has created eight ministries. Their heads were obliged to report to the emperor and bear full responsibility for the subject branch.
Education reform, thanks to which literacy has become available even to the lowest stratum of the population. Primary schools became free, and the secondary-higher education hierarchy was finally fully operational.

The assessment of the internal policy of Alexander I can be given objectively only on the basis of further events. Because all his reforms played a decisive role.

Calling Bonaparte

Probably everyone knows what years are. Usually, when the foreign policy of Alexander I is briefly described, they stop only at it. Let us note only the main facts of this event.

So, it all started with the treacherous French attack on Russia. It was really unexpected, because before that, as already mentioned, an agreement that was beneficial to the French had been signed. The reason for the invasion was Russia's refusal to actively support the blockade of Great Britain. Bonaparte saw in this betrayal and unwillingness to cooperate.

What happened afterwards must be called the greatest mistake of the French emperor. After all, he did not know that Alexander 1 and Russia were not going to simply surrender, like many states before that. Kutuzov's strategic talent, to which the Russian ruler now listened, outplayed Napoleon's tactics.

Very soon the Russian troops were in Paris.

Other wars

One should not think that France was the only one on which Alexander 1's foreign policy was based. It is worth briefly recalling his other conquests.

One of the achievements of Alexander I is the conflict between the Russians and the Swedes, which turned into a complete defeat for the latter. Thanks to the cunning and courage of Alexander I, who ordered the transfer of troops across the frozen Gulf of Bothnia, the Russian Empire acquired the entire territory of Finland. In addition, Sweden, at that time the only big player on the European field who tried to stay away from the France-England conflict, had to boycott Great Britain.

Alexander 1 successfully helped the Serbs to acquire autonomy and successfully completed the Russian-Turkish campaign, which was one of the most important stages of the long confrontation with Russia. And of course, one cannot but recall the war with the Persians, which made Alexander 1 a full-fledged Asian player.

Outcome

This is the foreign policy of Alexander I (summarized).

The Russian emperor annexed many territories to the state: Transnistria (during the war with Turkey), Dagestan and Azerbaijan (due to the confrontation with the Persians), Finland (thanks to the campaign against Sweden). He significantly raised the world authority of Russia and made the whole world finally fully reckon with its homeland.

But, of course, no matter how briefly the foreign policy of Alexander I would not be stated, his main achievement would be his victory over Napoleon. Who knows what the world would be like now if Russia had been conquered then.

Since the relationship between the father and the grandmother did not work out, the empress took the grandson from his parents. Catherine II immediately inflamed with great love for her grandson and decided what she would make of the newborn an ideal emperor.

Alexander was raised by the Swiss Laharpe, who was considered by many to be a staunch republican. The prince received a good education in the Western style.

Alexander believed in the possibility of creating an ideal, humane society, he sympathized with the French revolution, pitied the Poles deprived of statehood, and was skeptical of the Russian autocracy. Time, however, dispelled his belief in such ideals ...

Alexander I became the emperor of Russia after the death of Paul I, as a result of a palace coup. The events that took place on the night of 11-12 March 1801 affected the life of Alexander Pavlovich. He was very worried about the death of his father, and guilt haunted him all his life.

Domestic policy of Alexander I

The emperor saw the mistakes his father made during his reign. The main reason for the conspiracy against Paul I is the abolition of the privileges of the nobility, which were introduced by Catherine II. The first thing he did was to restore these rights.

Domestic policy had a strictly liberal connotation. He announced an amnesty for people who were repressed during his father's reign, allowed them to travel abroad freely, reduced censorship and returned them to the foreign press.

He carried out a large-scale reform of public administration in Russia. In 1801, the Indispensable Council was created - a body that had the right to discuss and revoke the emperor's decrees. The indispensable council had the status of a legislative body.

Instead of collegia, ministries were created, at the head of which responsible persons were placed. This is how the Cabinet of Ministers was formed, which became the most important administrative body of the Russian Empire. During the reign of Alexander I, undertakings played an important role. He was a talented man with great ideas in his head.

Alexander I distributed all kinds of privileges to the nobility, but the emperor understood the seriousness of the peasant question. Many titanic efforts were made to alleviate the situation of the Russian peasantry.

In 1801, a decree was adopted, according to which merchants and bourgeoisie could buy free land and organize economic activities on them, using hired labor. This decree destroyed the monopoly of the nobility on land ownership.

In 1803, a decree was issued, which went down in history as - "Decree on free farmers". Its essence was that now, the landowner could make the serf free for a ransom. But such a deal is only possible with the consent of both parties.

Free peasants had the right to property. Throughout the reign of Alexander I, there was continuous work aimed at solving the most important internal political issue - the peasant one. Various projects were developed to give freedom to the peasantry, but they remained only on paper.

There was also a reform of education. The Russian Emperor understood that the country needed new highly qualified personnel. Now educational institutions were divided into four successive stages.

The territory of the Empire was divided into educational districts, headed by local universities. The University provided local schools and gymnasiums with personnel and educational programs. 5 new universities, many gymnasiums and colleges were opened in Russia.

Foreign policy of Alexander I

His foreign policy is, first of all, "recognizable" from the Napoleonic wars. Russia was at war with France, most of the reign of Alexander Pavlovich. In 1805, a major battle between the Russian and French armies took place. The Russian army was defeated.

Peace was signed in 1806, but Alexander I refused to ratify the treaty. In 1807, the Russian troops were defeated at Fridland, after which the emperor had to conclude the Peace of Tilsit.

Napoleon sincerely regarded the Russian Empire as his only ally in Europe. Alexander I and Bonaparte seriously discussed the possibility of joint military action against India and Turkey.

France recognized the rights of the Russian Empire to Finland, and Russia, the rights of France to Spain. But for a number of reasons, Russia and France could not be allies. The interests of the countries collided in the Balkans.

Also, the stumbling block between the two powers was the existence of the Duchy of Warsaw, which prevented Russia from conducting profitable trade. In 1810, Napoleon asked for the hand of Alexander Pavlovich's sister, Anna, but was refused.

In 1812, the Patriotic War began. After the expulsion of Napoleon from Russia, the foreign campaigns of the Russian army began. During the events of the Napoleonic wars, many worthy people inscribed their names in gold letters in the history of Russia:, Davydov, ...

Alexander I died on November 19, 1825 in Taganrog. The emperor died of typhoid fever. The unexpected departure of the emperor from life, gave rise to many rumors. There was a legend among the people that a completely different person was buried instead of Alexander I, and the emperor himself began to wander around the country and, having reached Siberia, settled in this area, leading the lifestyle of an old hermit.

Summing up, we can say that the reign of Alexander I can be characterized in positive terms. He was one of the first to talk about the importance of limiting autocratic power, the introduction of a Duma and a constitution. Under him, voices calling for the abolition of serfdom began to sound louder, and a great deal of work was done in this regard.

During the reign of Alexander I (1801 - 1825), Russia was able to successfully defend itself against an external enemy that conquered all of Europe. became the personification of the unity of the Russian people, in the face of external danger. The successful defense of the borders of the Russian Empire is undoubtedly a great merit of Alexander I.

Ascending the throne, this king declared: “With me everything will be like with my grandmother” (that is). As a monarch, he did not reach the level of his grandmother, but the similarities of the reigns are still visible. Like Catherine, Alexander I spoke a lot of liberal words and did a lot of despotic, serfdom deeds.

Domestic policy (grandmother's heir)

At the beginning of his reign, Alexander 1 spoke a lot about the need for reforms in Russia. But for each of his innovations, there was a countermeasure.

Alexander expanded the rights of merchants and endowed them with various privileges - the right to appear at court, wear class rank, etc. But at the same time, immediately after accession to the throne, he resumed the deed of grant to the nobility of 1785, which turned the nobility into a privileged class with virtually no responsibilities.

The tsar repeatedly declared his desire to expand the rights of the peasants, and in 1803 he signed a decree on free farmers, which allowed peasants to redeem themselves from the land by agreement with the landlords. But over 20 years this right was exercised by ... as many as 47 thousand people (0.5% of the peasant population), and after the war of 1812, military settlements arose in the country, representing an unprecedented level of peasant lack of freedom.
The tsar brought liberals closer to him (such as Rumyantsev or), but Arakcheev, who became a symbol of the soldier's suppression of any dissent, was a person close to him.

We must pay tribute to the tsar - Alexander I centralized and streamlined the government of the country, creating in 1810 the State Council (something like a cabinet of ministers), accumulating all information on the state and making proposals for solving existing problems. He was also the patron saint of education - during his reign such educational institutions as the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, Kharkov and Kazan universities were opened, and other educational institutions improved their class and increased the number of departments and faculties. The treasury provided assistance to educational institutions, and even financed the trips of students and teachers abroad.

Foreign policy (winner of Napoleon)

Of the achievements of Alexander's foreign policy, this fact is best known. True, only the second campaign against the emperor of the French became successful for Russia, and the war of 1805-1807 ended in the rather humiliating Peace of Tilsit. But a fact: the foreign policy of Alexander I was consistent with the domestic one. He showed himself to be a consistent monarchist, wishing to increase his possessions, to strengthen the authority of the monarch's power as such and his own among colleagues in particular. Under him, Russia has grown geographically, and its international authority has grown.

Alexander 1 waged successful wars, Sweden (1808-1809),. This is not to mention the subsequent defeat of France.
Under him, Finland, Bessarabia, Georgia, Abkhazia, Dagestan, Transcaucasia were annexed to Russia. Only part of these lands were annexed by military means; Georgia, for example, became part of the empire under an international treaty.
Alexander I initiated the creation of the Holy Alliance - the unification of monarchies for the sake of preserving the monarchies and combating revolutionary teachings. Russia then played the role of a kind of "flagship of the counter-revolution" for a long time.
The emperor attached great importance to foreign trade. In particular, under him England became an important trading partner of Russia.
Alexander did not want the strengthening of German influence in Europe, and to some extent he managed to prevent him, pushing during

The article tells briefly about the domestic and foreign policy of Aleksandr I. During the reign of Alexander the First, one of the central events of Russian history took place - the Patriotic War of 1812, which greatly influenced the further development of Russia.

Patriotic War of 1812
Video

Domestic and foreign policy of Alexander I until 1812

Patriotic War of 1812

Russia's failure to comply with the conditions of the continental blockade eventually led to the invasion of Napoleon's army. Without going into the detailed course of hostilities, we note that the main factors of victory were the patriotic impulse of the Russian army, Kutuzov's successful tactics, which consisted in exhausting the enemy and Napoleon's serious miscalculations regarding the company's plan.
The surrender of Moscow for the purpose of preserving the army was incomprehensible to Napoleon, and crossed out his experience of waging wars in Europe. The battle of Borodino became a turning point. Russian historians claim that the victory was won by Russia, while French historians express the opposite opinion. However, the losses on both sides were enormous. Napoleon realizes that the continuation of the campaign is futile and begins a retreat, gradually turning into a flight.
The foreign campaign of the Russian army ends in Paris and heralds the glory of Russian arms. Russia acts as an all-European leader. To this end, Alexander I founded in 1815 the "Holy Union" (Russia, Austria, Prussia), which was to become the guarantor of European peace.

Domestic and foreign policy of Alexander I after 1815

The war with Napoleon and the subsequent political processes had an impact on the reformist sentiments of Alexander I. The romantic, faced with reality, is disillusioned with his former ideals. The reactionary element begins to show itself in the actions of the emperor.
For some time, Alexander I was still trying to continue the reforms. In 1815 he adopted the Polish constitution. In subsequent years, he was liberated from serfdom without allotting land to the peasants of the Baltic provinces.
However, since 1820, the emperor completely curtailed the reforming activity. Its internal policy is to preserve and preserve the existing system. Censorship intensified, and a ban on "free-thinking" was announced. A kind of second enslavement of the peasants is the creation of military settlements. By the end of his reign, Alexander I retired altogether, leaving control to the state elite.
There are no major shifts in foreign policy. Alexander I is concerned only with the preservation of European and his own monarchy against the revolutionary movement.

Results and significance of the domestic and foreign policy of Alexander I

By conventionally dividing the reign of Alexander I into two periods, which are separated by the war with Napoleon, the following conclusions can be drawn. In the first period, the emperor was disposed to reforms, carried out some of them, but his main merit was the reform of the state apparatus.
The war of 1812 was a triumph for the Russian army, but at the same time led to a tightening of domestic policy and the curtailment of reforms.
Formed by Alexander I, the Sacred Union, which was supposed to become the guarantor of peace, acquired the status of a European gendarme punishing any manifestation of freedom.