had given him ample reason. At about this time Napoleon had returned
from his fruitless campaign in Egypt, and at Marengo defeated the
Austrians, whereby the results of Souvorof's campaign were lost. Paul
was angry at Austria and Great Britain. Napoleon, shrewdly guessed the
czar's feelings, released the Russian prisoners, after equipping them
anew. Paul satisfied that Napoleon was an enemy of republican
institutions, conceived an intense admiration for his military genius,
and came to an understanding with him to overthrow British rule in
India. The czar at once commenced to prepare its execution. Two armies
were formed; one was to march on the Upper Indus by way of Khiva and
Bokhara, while the Cossacks under their hetman Denisof would go by
Orenburg. He was confident that the gigantic task could be
accomplished, and sent daily instructions to the hetman.
Napoleon had a far better idea of the difficulties, but he did not
consider the expedition as hopeless. But even if it failed, he would
be the winner, because England would be compelled to send most of her
navy to India, while Russia would be too fully occupied, to interfere
with his projects in Europe. The Cossacks started on their long
journey, by crossing the Volga on the floating ice when, on the 24th
of March, 1801, Paul was assassinated in his palace.
There was no doubt as to the guilty men, but Paul's son, Alexander,
who succeeded him, did not order an investigation. Pahlen, Panine, (p. 198)
Zoubof, and others, known as the "men of the 24th of March," were
removed from office, but that was their only punishment. Paul's mother
had alienated her grandchildren from the father, and Alexander always
showed greater affection for Catherine than for Paul. The greatest
sufferer was Napoleon, who saw his grand schemes go up in smoke.
Alexander reversed his father's policy, both at home and abroad. He
came to an understanding with England. Napoleon tried earnestly to
secure the new czar's friendship. He wanted a free hand in Europe and
in return offered the same privilege in Asia, but Alexander mistrusted
the First Consul. The murder of the Duke of Enghien, who, by
Napoleon's order, was kidnaped in a neutral territory and shot,--still
further alienated the czar.
After Napoleon's coronation as emperor, Alexander entered into an
alliance with England, whereby he would receive six million dollars
for every 100,000 men Russia placed in the field. The Emperor of
Austria and the King of Prussia joined, but the Austrians, whose
generals seemed unable to learn by experience, were defeated before
the Russian army could reach the Tyrol. Once again the Russians
covered themselves with glory by Koutouzof's masterly retreat to the
north, and Bagration's heroic self-sacrifice. At Olmutz, in the
presence of Alexander, the Russo-Austrian army, 80,000 strong, was
attacked by Napoleon with 70,000 men. The Austrians had induced the
czar to adopt their plan of battle, and it met with the usual result.
Alexander escaped, escorted by his physician, two Cossacks, and a
company of the Guards. (Dec. 2., 1805.) Twenty-four days later
Alexander concluded peace with France by the Treaty of Presburg. (p. 199)
The growing power of Napoleon induced Alexander to enter into a new
coalition with England, Prussia, and Sweden. Russia bore the brunt of
the war, after Prussia had been rendered harmless after the battles of
Jena and Auerstadt. The Russians withdrew from Prussian Poland; they
suddenly left their winter quarters and attacked the French. On the
8th of February, one of the bloodiest battles was fought at Eylau; the
French claimed the victory, but it was barren of results.
Napoleon dreaded Russia. He persuaded the Sultan of Turkey and the
Shah of Persia to declare war, so as to occupy Alexander elsewhere.
The czar, however, was loyal to his allies until, on the 14th of June,
his army was almost annihilated at Friedland. This loss compelled him
to enter into negotiations. On June 25, 1807, the two emperors met on
a raft at Tilsit. Napoleon was prepared to do almost anything that
would induce Alexander to cease interfering in Europe. An
offensive-defensive alliance was concluded, whereby Napoleon agreed
not to oppose the expulsion of the Turk or Russia's conquest of
Constantinople. The czar meant to carry out the treaty in letter and
in spirit, but he soon saw that Napoleon's ambition was limitless, and
that he was playing with his ally. This was evident by the proposed
partition of Turkey: nothing came of it. Still he accepted Napoleon's
invitation to a conference at Erfurt, where he was received by the
French Emperor amid a court composed of sovereigns and princes. A
convention was signed on the 12th of October, 1808, whereby Alexander
promised Napoleon a free hand, in return for the annexation by (p. 200)
Russia of Finland and the Turkish provinces on the Danube.
This led to a war with Great Britain, Sweden, and Austria, not
including Turkey and Persia. Russia acquired Finland, when Alexander,
after convoking the Diet, guaranteed its constitution, privileges, and
university. In 1809, war again broke out between Austria and France.
By the terms of the alliance, Russia had agreed to furnish troops, but
they showed that they did not relish fighting with the French. There
were two engagements; in one of these, the casualties were one Russian
killed and two wounded. By an oversight of Napoleon the Poles serving
under him were to cooperate with the Russians, and, far from doing so,
they often came to blows. The Russian general constantly sent
complaints to the czar. Napoleon made a great effort to appease
Alexander by assigning to Russia Eastern Gallicia with a population of
400,000. Alexander declined to be represented in the peace
negotiations at Vienna. Napoleon's creation of the Grand Dukedom of
Warsaw was a constant menace to Russia.
Meanwhile the Russians were uniformly victorious in Turkey; the czar
concluded peace only when it was evident that war with France was
unavoidable, and that Russia would need every man. It was on this
account that he gave easy terms to the hard-pressed Sultan. Russia
annexed Bessarabia, part of Roumania, Ismaïl, and Kilia on the Lower
Danube.
The time for the momentous struggle had arrived. Napoleon, the master
of Continental Europe, thought that he was more than a match for
serf-ridden Russia. He reckoned upon the echo which the words (p. 201)
liberty, equality, and fraternity, would awaken in the hearts of the
moujik, and forgot that they were abstract ideas which to the serf,
struggling for enough black bread to allay the cravings of hunger,
were so many empty sounds. He tried to arouse Europe's suspicions of
Russia's designs, not thinking that any yoke, even that of the
Tartars, would be a welcome relief to nations mourning for the
slaughter of their sons.
Napoleon left Paris for Dresden on the 9th of May, 1812; on the first
of June an army of 678,000 men, including 60,000 Poles, stood ready to
invade Russia. Alexander had only 150,000 men under Bagration and
Barclay de Tolly, 90,000 posted on the Niemen, and 60,000 on the
Vistula; but he issued a proclamation announcing a Holy War. "Rise all
of you!" he urged, "With the Cross in your hearts and arms in your
hands, no human force can prevail against you!"
Napoleon advanced clutching shadows. After his army left Wilna,
leaving dead desolation in its wake, the time soon came when retreat
was no longer possible. Russian patriotism clamored for battle and
Russian prudence had to give way to it. All of Koutouzof's remarkable
influence was required to restrain his men under the retreat which
foretold victory, because every step forward sealed Napoleon's doom.
The Corsican knew it but, with the superstition born in him, trusted
to his star. Finally he drew near Moscow, the Holy City, where Count
Rostopchine, the governor, was preparing the grand climax of the
drama, while pacifying Russian patriotism by a series of hardy falsehoods.
"I have resolved," he explained, "at every disagreeable piece of (p. 202)
news to raise doubts as to its truth; by this means, I shall weaken
the first impression, and before there is time to verify it, others
will come which will require investigation." The people implicitly
believed his most daring inventions. When he evacuated Moscow, he
ordered all prisons to be opened, and the guns in the arsenal to be
distributed among the people; he also had the pumps removed and
finally gave instructions to set fire to the stores of _vodka_ and the
boats loaded with alcohol.
Napoleon arrived at the Kremlin on the 14th of September. Short as was
his sojourn, it was with difficulty that he escaped through the flames
and found refuge in a park. Why did he waste thirty-five days in the
charred capital? Was it belief in his star, or was it despair at the
ruin of his prospects? On the 13th of October, the remnant of the
Grand Army started on its long journey over the desert it had left
behind, because all other roads were closed to it. The retreat has
been described by many writers; but what pen shall do justice to the
suffering caused by the unusually severe winter, the snow, the ice,
the hunger, and the thirst? And how many hearts were rent, when the
news came of the dead, the wounded, and the missing? Napoleon's
campaign in Russia was the most impressive sermon against war, but it
fell upon heedless ears.
After the Battle of the Berezina, Napoleon left the army and hurried
home. All his thoughts were on the effect of the disastrous
defeat,--not upon the hundred thousand desolate homes, but upon his
own fortunes. He arrived in Paris where he gathered 450,000 men,
many of them mere youths, to support him with their blood. But (p. 203)
Europe was weary of slaughter. Kings might tremble for their crowns,
it was the people, aroused to frenzy, that impelled them to action. On
Napoleon's heels, besides, there was a bloodhound whom nobler
instincts than mere self-preservation inspired to ceaseless pursuit.
Alexander I, at this time, earned and deserved the glorious surname of
The Well-beloved. Not a thought of self-glory or personal
aggrandizement sullied the relentless chase. Emperors and kings
dreading the awakened conscience of the people would have made peace,
and they could have done so with security for themselves, but
Alexander said, "No!" Under fire at the four days' battle of Leipzig,
he personally directed reënforcements where they were required. And
when, at last, the host of invaders stepped on the soil whose people
during twenty years had committed outrages in almost every known
country of Europe, they were noble words which the Autocrat addressed
to his troops whom he had brought so far away from home. "By invading
our empire," he says, "the enemy has done us much harm, and has
therefore been subjected to a terrible chastisement. The anger of God
has overthrown him. Do not let us imitate him. The merciful God does
not love cruel and inhuman men. Let us forget the evil he has wrought;
let us carry to our foes, not vengeance and hate, but friendship, and
a hand extended in peace."
These were not mere words; Alexander the Well-beloved was sincere. But
it was he who refused to receive Napoleon's envoy at Freiburg, and it
was he who, when Napoleon, fighting like a tiger at bay, was
defeating the separated armies, so that the British envoy urged to (p. 204)
come to terms with him, answered, "It would not be a peace but a
truce. I cannot come four hundred leagues to your assistance every
day. No peace, so long as Napoleon is on the throne!" By his direction
the united armies rolled like an avalanche upon Paris,--and Napoleon
gave up the struggle by abdicating.
Again it was Alexander the Well-beloved who intervened when other
powers would have overwhelmed the fallen colossus. It was Alexander
who procured for his enemy the sovereignty of the island of Elba, and
commissioned Count Schouvalof to escort him. "I confide to you a great
mission;" he said; "you will answer to me with your head for a single
hair which falls from the head of Napoleon."
At the Congress of Vienna assembled the statesmen to dispose of
nations and peoples, as their own ambition prompted. Alexander desired
to unite Poland to his crown, but separate from Russia; but was
opposed by Austria, Great Britain, and France, who entered into a
secret alliance against him. Had Napoleon waited two hundred days
instead of half that time, who knows that he might not yet have been
the arbiter of Europe? His descent united all factions, and Alexander
declared that he would pursue Napoleon "down to his last man and his
last ruble."
Once again armies were set in motion, and once again Napoleon resorted
to his well-known tactics of destroying his enemies one by one. He
failed at Waterloo. (June 17, 1815.) Again the allies re-entered
Paris, the Prussians first but closely followed by the czar and his
army.
"Justice, but no revenge!" proclaimed Alexander when Blücher would (p. 205)
have followed Napoleon's example of robbing a country of its works of
art. The czar stood the friend of France when Prussia demanded a
frontier which would render her safe from French invasion; but he said
frankly that he "wished to allow some danger to exist on that side, so
that Germany, having need of Russia, might remain dependent," He was
in favor of allowing the French to select their own government, but
was overruled. At last the allies came to an understanding, and Poland
was joined to the Russian Crown.
The Polish soldiers who had fought so bravely under Napoleon, placed
themselves at the czar's service, hoping and trusting that their
country would revive under a Russian king. Alexander's promises at
Vienna had been vague, but recent events had made a deep impression
upon him. In this frame of mind, he directed that Poland be restored.
This was announced on the 21st of June, at Warsaw amid the roar of
cannon. Constantine, Alexander's brother, was made King, and a
legislative body, composed of a senate and house of representatives,
was formed under a constitution which also guaranteed the freedom of
the press.
Thus Alexander returned to Russia. Soon after that he gave evidence
that strong emotions were required to subdue the inborn prejudice in
favor of autocracy. Russia, of necessity, had acquired an overwhelming
influence in Europe. This showed at the several Congresses, at
Aix-la-Chapelle in 1818, at Carlsbad in 1819, at Troppau in 1820, and
at Verona in 1822. The crowned heads of Europe appeared unable to
comprehend that the French revolution, with its orgies of blood (p. 206)
and tears, had produced an impassable abyss between the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. They wished to return to the conditions
prevailing before the revolution, which caused the success of that
upheaval; but the people, the masses, had quaffed of the cup of
liberty, and the taste lingered. The Holy Alliance with its unholy
aims might ordain what it pleased, the _people_ obstinately refused to
resume the place of beasts of burden for the benefit of the State.
Thus a spirit of unrest was perceptible, and when Alexander learned
that his "I, the czar, will it!" was not able to restore quiet, he
joined the other crowned heads in their struggle against more liberal
ideas. From that time his conduct changed.
There was evidence of this in the events occurring in the south. The
majority of the inhabitants of the Balkan provinces of Turkey belonged
to the Greek Church, and looked to Alexander for relief from the
oppressive Mahomedan yoke. The Servians took up arms, the people of
Greece did the same. On Easter day, 1821, the Patriarch of the Greek
Church at Constantinople was seized at the altar, and hung in his
vestment at the door of the church. Three metropolitans and eight
bishops were also murdered. The news caused deep indignation in
Russia, but Alexander moved not. He believed in the theory that no
people should be encouraged in rising against its ordained masters. In
Russia all liberal ideas were rigidly suppressed.
In 1825, Alexander left St. Petersburg for the south where he intended
to spend some time. He was full of gloomy forebodings and gave further
evidence of an unsound mind by having a mass for the dead sung in (p. 207)
his presence in broad daylight. While in the Crimea he was heard to
repeat: "They may say what they like of me, but I have lived and will
die a republican." He died on the 19th of November, 1825, while on his
journey.
He left no sons. His brother Constantine had renounced the crown when
he became King of Poland, and in 1823, Alexander had made his next
brother Nicholas his successor. Alexander's reign marked a new era for
Russia inasmuch as it was brought into closer contact with Europe, and
promised to change in thought and impulse, from an Asiatic into a
European nation. The necessity of securing the help of the masses
against Napoleon's invasion created newspapers, and writers of unusual
ability expressed their patriotic thoughts in prose and poetry. In
1814, the Imperial Library was opened to the public at St. Petersburg.
It contained at that time 242,000 volumes, and about 10,000
manuscripts.
In 1803, Captains Krusenstern and Lisianski made the first Russian
voyage around the world in the _Nadejda_ (the _Hope_), and the _Neva_.
It was on this occasion that Russia entered into relations with the
United States.
XXIII--AN EVENTFUL PERIOD. (p. 208)
Alexander's will came as a surprise upon Nicholas, but Constantine was
loyal to his promise and after a brief but generous contest, Nicholas
was crowned at Moscow. Twenty-three days had elapsed since Alexander's
death, long enough to show that the spirit of unrest had penetrated
into Russia. On the 26th of December there were some disturbances at
Moscow, but they were suppressed without great trouble. The secret
police hunted down the leaders, many of whom were known in art or
literature, but they suffered death. Nicholas, a man of colossal
stature, commanding appearance, iron will, passion for a military
life, of simple and correct habits, was a true champion of the right
divine of kings. He had neither sympathy nor patience with any
movement tending toward greater liberty for the people. Nevertheless
Nicholas was much more popular than Alexander had been, because he was
the type of the Russian czars, who had increased Russia's power and
territory.
Not many days after his coronation, Nicholas became involved in a
quarrel with the Shah of Persia. In vain did the shah call upon Great
Britain for help; the Persians were twice defeated in 1826, and the
Russians were on the road to Teheran when the shah preferred to (p. 209)
save his capital by ceding two provinces, and paying a heavy indemnity
in 1828. The following year, the Russian Minister at Teheran was
murdered, but Persia escaped with a humble apology.
Turkey, too, was made to feel Nicholas' heavy hand; urged by other
powers the sultan submitted to the loss of territory in Asia, which
had been in dispute, and permitted the free passage of Russian vessels
between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. (Convention of Akkerman,
Oct. 8, 1826.) The czar, after this, took up the Greek question, and
entered into an agreement with England and France. In vain did the
sultan offer the plea which had been successful with Alexander, that
the Greeks "violated the passive obedience owed by subjects to their
legitimate sovereigns." Nicholas wanted Turkey for himself, and
proposed to leave no stone unturned to secure possession of
Constantinople.
After the battle of Navarino, on the 20th of October, 1827, where the
allied forces destroyed the Turkish fleet. England withdrew,
suspicious of Nicholas' schemes; but France and Russia continued the
war until by the Peace of Adrianople, the sultan recognized the
independence of Greece,--and ceded to Russia four fortresses in Asia
and the islands in the delta of the Danube. Russia was thus in
possession of the whole southern slope of the Caucasus, besides
holding part of its northern front. The czar began war upon the tribes
dwelling in the mountains, but found that he had engaged in a very
difficult enterprise. A soldier-priest named Schamyl defied the power
of Russia for a quarter of a century. It cost Nicholas more in men (p. 210)
and money to subdue the liberty-loving mountaineer, than all the wars
he waged in Asia.
The year 1830, was one of great unrest in Europe. Nicholas was deeply
angered when his friend Charles X of France was expelled. The
revolution in Paris was the signal for a similar movement in the
capital of Poland. Owing to the independent expression of opinion in
the Diet, Alexander had adjourned that body indefinitely in 1822. At
the same time the liberty of the press was revoked and the police
assumed a power in defiance of the law. The Grand Duke Constantine was
really a friend of Poland, but he was eccentric and impetuous and
often unconsciously gave offense. In 1830, Nicholas came to Warsaw to
open the Diet, when its members made demands which he could not grant.
Both sides were angry when Nicholas returned to St. Petersburg.
As soon as the French tricolor was raised above the consulate at
Warsaw, the trouble commenced. Taken unprepared, Constantine withdrew
with his troops. Again the Poles were divided; the patriots advised
reconciliation with Russia, while hotheads demanded the abdication of
the Romanofs. The first party sent a deputation to St. Petersburg and
another to Paris and London, to secure mediation. The czar's answer
was decisive; he absolutely refused to "make concessions (to the
revolutionists), as the price of their crimes." Again, too, there was
discord among the leaders as they entered upon a life or death
struggle. Poland appealed to Europe. The people were sympathetic, but
the governments, rejoicing at seeing a revolutionary movement
suppressed, refused to interfere.
In February, 1831, a Russian army of 130,000 men invaded Poland. (p. 211)
The Poles showed a heroism which appealed to the people of Europe, but
more than sympathy was needed to arrest the irresistible Russian
advance upon Warsaw. Constantine and the Russian commander-in-chief
fell the victims of cholera, but an epidemic of discord struck Poland
and sealed its fate. On the 6th of September, Warsaw was invested. The
capital was forced to surrender. "Warsaw is at your feet," wrote the
commander-in-chief to the czar, who lost no time in trampling upon the
conquered. The constitution was abrogated, the Diet, a thing of the
past. Poland was no more. Where it had stood, was a Russian province.
Russian officials introduced Russian taxes, Russian coinage, and
Russian justice such as it was. The Poles saw samples of it when
thousands were arrested without process of law, and were sent to
prison or to Siberia, while other thousands lost their property by
confiscation. In White Russia and Lithuania the use of the Polish
language was prohibited and the Catholic Clergy were forced to "ask"
admittance to the bosom of the Greek Church. It must be admitted that
the Polish peasants benefited by the change. With a view of reducing
the influence of the nobles, the government issued regulations
protecting the laborer against the landowner.
The Polish revolution caused the reorganization of European policies.
Austria and Prussia, each in possession of territory that formerly
belonged to Poland, entered into friendly relations with Russia,
whereas England and France, where public opinion could not be ignored,
drew more closely together. Nicholas was posing as the arbiter of (p. 212)
Europe and the champion of kings. He assumed the right to command, but
would soon find his will contested.